Most toxic speeches
Mr. Speaker, what the member is suggesting is that the federal government not pay Ontario's bills.Yesterday, I asked the foreign affairs minister about the federal Liberals paying a private public relations firm $23,000 for Kathleen Wynne's recent trip to Israel. He said, The amount of money he speaks about is an amount of money that was available to anyone.... What a ridiculous answer. That money is not available to anyone unless their circle of friends includes the Prime Minister, Gerald Butts, and Katie Telford.Canadian taxpayers want to know why the federal Liberals paid for Kathleen Wynne's public relations bills.
Mr. Speaker, the government clearly does not want to confirm that it is going to continue having that mandate.Farmers in my riding depend on the ethanol and biodiesel production for their livelihoods, but the Ecofiscal Commission wants to throw them under the bus. This will kill farms and jobs, give us a weaker economy, and a dirtier environment.Why will the Liberals not stand up for farmers and our environment, and maintain the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Mr. Speaker, selling access to government ministers to secure cash for the Liberal Party is the definition of a breach of trust. For days now, the minister of fishy fundraisers has been telling us not to worry, that when ministers attend these exclusive $1,500 events, government business is not discussed. Canadians are tired of this line and deserve better. Can the Liberals tells us, if it is not government business, what the heck were they talking about during these dinners? Hors d'oeuvres?
Mr. Speaker, the federal government's management of the icebreaker fleet is a complete fiasco. What is more, rather than purchasing the Aiviq for a price taxpayers can afford, the Liberal government is dragging its feet.If the St. Lawrence seaway were shut down even for just a few days because of a lack of equipment to deal with winter weather conditions, it would be an economic disaster. As the member for the port city of Trois-Rivières, I know what I am talking about.Why is the government refusing to buy the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, I guess my colleague was sleeping when I just spoke, so I will repeat myself.This is a service available to any province, and we do not look at the political affiliation of the province. That is ridiculous as a statement. He would be unable to substantiate it.Did he not hear me describe 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario; stronger links with Israel? If he has a problem with that, I want to know why.
Mr. Speaker, for weeks now, we have demanded that the Liberals stop peddling cabinet access to their friends and lobbyists.Fresh off his trip to visit old family friends in Cuba, we learned that the Prime Minister was cosying up to Chinese Communist Party officials who attended a cash for access fundraiser in May. These same officials then made a large payment to the Trudeau Foundation.Has this Prime Minister no shame? I know he admires dictatorships from Havana to Beijing, but this goes too far. Will he stop selling influence to foreign powers?
Mr. Speaker, that is a load of blah, blah, blah.Now we know why the Liberal government was never serious about renewing the softwood lumber agreement. How do we know? The opening salvo of a new trade war with the United States was fired today.The Minister of International Trade had 387 days to defend Canada's forestry workers, but she failed. Now thousands of families in the regions are worried about being caught in the crossfire of this trade war.The Prime Minister's seduction strategy is not working. When will the government start fighting for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, 240 federal public servants have been forbidden to publicly discuss details of the Liberals politically motivated, sole-sourced Super Hornet purchase, a deal that will cost thousands of jobs and waste billions of taxpayers' dollars.In fact, this gag order forbids them from discussing the project for the rest of their lives, a move condemned as heavy handed by two former federal procurement chiefs.Why are the Liberals muzzling public servants, and what are they trying to hide from Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, again, we are not talking about Elections Canada rules. We have no problem with political parties doing fundraising according to Elections Canada rules. We are talking about the Prime Minister's own guidelines and the Prime Minister admitting that he was conducting government business at a Liberal fundraiser. Not only is this breaking his own ethical guidelines, this is coming very close to breaking other laws. Again, when will the Liberals admit that they have broken their own guidelines, they are doing the wrong thing, the immoral thing, in doing what could possibly be seen as corrupt, by doing government business at Liberal fundraisers?
They seem to find this funny, Mr. Speaker. What Canadians did not find funny was her government's inability to focus on economic growth, on cutting taxes for the middle class, on creating jobs in every region of the country. That is the word we gave to Canadians, and that is what governs our government's actions every single day.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about how vigorously the government is going to defend it. The Liberals budgeted a measly $30 million. They just gave $25 million to a foreign organization with direct and indirect links to Hamas, a jihadist terrorist group. How vigorously is the government going to defend Canadian jobs?Softwood lumber war number five is mere hours away. This means mill closures and job losses for Canadians from coast to coast to coast.The minister has mismanaged this file from day one. When is the government going to stand up for hard-working forestry families from coast to coast to coast?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in response to a question about the Liberals spending over $23,000 on an external public relations consultant for Kathleen Wynne, for her trip to Israel, the foreign affairs minister said these services are available to anyone.Seriously, anyone can get a free $23,000 PR guy funded by the Liberals? No wonder they have no hope of balancing this budget.Why will the minister not simply admit that Kathleen Wynne got the money because she is a Liberal?
Mr. Speaker, Canada is facing a crisis in the over-prescription of opioids and with illicit fentanyl and now a wave of street drugs 100 times stronger.The health minister claims to be using every lever at her disposal, but the only action we have seen from the Liberals was an exclusive conference in Ottawa. The doors were closed to addiction doctors and any expert who may have had a different opinion than the Liberals. If the minster takes the opioid crisis seriously, why is she not meeting with addiction doctors and those on the front line who work every single day with this tragic crisis?
Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber trade war is reigniting and Quebec has reason to be concerned.In a joint press release with Barack Obama in June, the Prime Minister did not say a word about exempting Quebec from any protectionist agreement. Worse yet, he is okay with a future agreement covering remanufacturers. That is even worse than the bad Conservative agreement that cost us 23,000 jobs in Quebec.Instead of selling out all the sectors of our industry, will the Prime Minister stand up and defend Quebec's forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, I have my doubts about what my colleague just said. I could go on with the long list of ministers who take donors hostage. Worse still is the fact that the Prime Minister himself is involved in this sketchy kind of fundraising, the very same Prime Minister who told his ministers not to get involved in this kind of thing. They should really walk the talk. This is serious. This government has no ethics and could not care less about rules.Will the Liberals stop holding these sketchy fundraising events?
Mr. Speaker, the fisheries minister had a hard time keeping a straight face in saying that. It is pretty obvious.When it comes to fundraising for the government, following the law is simply not good enough. Let me read something: the performance of your official duties and the arrangement of your private affairs should bear the closest public scrutiny. This is an obligation that is not fully discharged by simply acting within the law.Who said that? It was the Liberal Prime Minister. Again I ask, why does the Prime Minister have such a hard time keeping his word? Why does he say one thing and do something completely different?
Mr. Speaker, my friend's exaggerated preamble does not necessarily turn those assertions into facts. What I can assure the House is that unlike the Conservative Party, we will not appoint people like Mike Duffy and Irving Gerstein and Pamela Wallin to the Senate to raise money on the taxpayers' dime for the Conservative Party. That is why, if we want to talk about immoral and inappropriate behaviour, they are on that side of the House.
Mr. Speaker, it is high time that the federal government got to work. The tax refund we have been waiting on so we can fund housing projects for the homeless in Montreal is two months overdue. Eleven projects that would create 235 new social housing units for the homeless are on hold because the federal government refuses to release the $2 million it promised.Will the minister guarantee that all projects will be carried out on time?
Mr. Speaker, the disconnect between what the Prime Minister says and what he actually does is growing day by day. First he broke his word to cut taxes for small businesses. Then he broke his commitment to only having a small deficit. We know the deficit is absolutely ballooning. Now he is breaking his own promise to be open, accountable, and ethical. The Prime Minister is very good at putting on a big show and saying all the right things, but then doing something completely different. Why will the Prime Minister not keep his word?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for raising this question.We, too, were disappointed that the plaintiffs decided to file motions again. There had been a very good offer by the chief commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission for us to get the lawyers out of this, and be able to speak in a facilitated discussion to get going on the reforms that are really necessary.I look forward to working with the member and with all first nations to get this kind of reform. That is the real discrimination, of way too many indigenous children in care and being looked after by non-indigenous families.
Mr. Speaker, as I said in earlier responses, this is sensitive information. This is critical information. This is information that we simply do not want to have in the wrong hands. Therefore, non-disclosure is a sine qua non for those who are handling that information. We have asked those who are handling that information to sign non-disclosure agreements, which extend past their employment with the crown, and
Mr. Speaker, if my colleague wants to talk about lack of ethics and sketchy fundraising activities, maybe he should think about what his government did when it appointed people like Mike Duffy, Irving Gerstein, and Pamela Wallin to the Senate specifically to do fundraising for the Conservative Party at taxpayers' expense. That is something our government will never do.
Mr. Speaker, the decision to purchase 18 interim Super Hornets does not make any sense. The commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the Canadian commander of Norad, and the chief of the defence staff have all confirmed that there is no capability gap. What is more, we have now learned that 234 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants have been muzzled for life. They are not allowed to talk about the aircraft procurement file. According to Alan Williams, former assistant deputy minister responsible for equipment, this is unprecedented. There is something fishy about this file. The government is hiding something.How much will it cost to acquire the Super Hornets?
Mr. Speaker, real leadership would be fixing it now.One hundred and thirty first nations, the Province of British Columbia, and the Union of BC Municipalities all said no to the northern gateway pipeline. A Federal Court overturned the Conservative approval and the Liberals made multiple promises to stop it. It sounds like an easy promise to keep, even for the Liberals.However, they are waffling on other promises to protect our coasts.Would the Liberals commit today to introduce legislation to permanently ban crude oil tankers on B.C.'s north coast, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, for two weeks now, the NDP has been asking the Liberals to fix their flawed CPP expansion bill, Bill C-26.After refusing to address it last night, Liberal MPs once again prevented us from fixing it.The Liberals also refused to answer why the dropout provisions were not included in the first place. Did the minister not realize the impact this would have on women and people living with disabilities?If the Liberal government truly recognizes this problem, then why is it forcing through a flawed bill?
Mr. Speaker, this week Cindy Blackstock, AFN, Chiefs of Ontario, and Nishnawbe Aski Nation all filed motions of non-compliance against the government, after already issuing two previous compliance orders.When the Liberals supported our motion, indigenous families hoped things would change, but two days later the government was back in court fighting first nations children. When will the government do what it promised and work with first nations peoples and not against them?
Mr. Speaker, what he is not saying is when the cheque was written.This government is trying to defend the indefensible. It is hiding behind a law written for all parliamentarians to claim that it is obeying the law. We are all familiar with the saying that just because it is legal does not mean it is ethical.The Minister of Justice invited lawyers to a cocktail party. If they are ambitious they will attend, because when she appoints judges she will think of the Liberal Party's friends.Will this government respect the House and stop the intimidation with its political fundraising?
Mr. Speaker, my constituents and forestry workers deserve to know what their future will be now that the United States trade representative is planning to launch trade action against Canada. Albertans cannot afford another drastic hit. There is no time to waste, too many jobs are at stake.Why will the minister not do her job, and ensure stability and predictability for forestry workers, or does she just not care about Albertans' livelihood?
Mr. Speaker, last night I had a telephone town hall with the residents of my riding of Essex. In Essex there is a crisis, with one in 11 seniors living in poverty. Some of them are living on one meal a day and are having to choose between paying for their prescription drugs, hydro bills, or food. Our seniors worked hard to build the society we all enjoy today. Now our country owes them a debt of responsibility. The Liberal government needs to do more for our seniors. They deserve to be able to age with dignity. What is the government doing to lift seniors out of poverty?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member that it was the previous government, his party, that let the treaty expire and failed to reinitiate negotiations with our American partners.We are prepared for any eventuality on this file. We understand that there may be a complaint lodged in front of the department of commerce by the American industry. We will defend at every step of the way in front of tribunals our Canadian workers, our Canadian forestry industry. We have never lost. We are confident moving forward. In the meantime, we will continue to negotiate a good settlement for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the environment minister announced that she will force the Ottawa Hospital to build at Tunney's, a location the hospital twice studied and rejected. Reaction has been fast and furious. Former mayor Jim Durrell said it is appalling...a terrible decision. Councillor Hubley said that traffic will be a huge problem. The Ottawa Citizen's Kelly Egan said, The Ottawa Hospital should reject the Tunney's offer.Why will the environment minister not get out of the way and let the hospital decide for itself where it will build?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite is well aware that Canada has some of the strictest political financing regulations in the world. The same rules apply to all parliamentarians, and our government is very committed to following them. We are perfectly aware that any contribution of more than $200 is disclosed proactively. These are personal donations made by Canadians and Canadian citizens only, and that is what removes any suggestion of a conflict of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest, as my colleague inappropriately suggested was the case.
Mr. Speaker, just because my colleague manufactures a series of outrages across the aisle does not change the facts. The facts are that Canada's electoral fundraising laws and regulations are among the most severe and restrictive in the world. Those are the words of Canada's Chief Electoral Officer.We respect all of the fundraising rules at all times. That is what removes any suggestion, if in fact it is done sincerely, that there is a conflict of interest. I think my colleague on the other side of the House knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, for $1,500, one can get access to the Prime Minister to further their agenda. Better yet, donations can be made to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.Are dairy and cheese producers going to have to attend a $1,500 Liberal cocktail party?Is that what anti-poverty groups, forestry sector representatives, and consumer advocacy groups are going to have to do as well?Are all Quebeckers going to have to pay $1,500 to the Liberals in order to recover the $50 billion in Quebec taxes to serve the interests of Quebec? Is that what has to happen?
Mr. Speaker, our government recognizes the hard work of seniors who helped build our country. They deserve to retire in dignity.It is why we restored the age of eligibility of OAS and GIS to 65 from 67, a very wrong-headed move by the previous government. We have raised the guaranteed income supplement for 900,000 low-income seniors, and invested over $200 million in senior housing.Make no mistake, our government is there for seniors, now and tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for raising this issue. The matter of opioids in this country is a serious public health crisis, and we have taken action on this from day one.I was very pleased early on in my mandate to make sure that naloxone was available to save hundreds, if not thousands, of lives by being available at a non-prescription status. I was also very happy to make sure we got intranasal naloxone into this country and to make sure we got approval for it. I was very happy to take steps to schedule precursors for illicit fentanyl so that it would not be available. We have taken steps to make sure that supervised consumption sites are available as a harm-reduction measure. We brought together hundreds of people, in a manner that has never been done before, including addiction specialists and all other stakeholders, to make sure that action is taken on this very serious matter.
Mr. Speaker, as we speak, the Liberal government is making 235 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants involved in replacing our CF-18 fighter jets sign lifetime non-disclosure agreements. That is a first.I have no intention of wasting my question by asking the Liberals what they have to hide. It is clear that they are just going to repeat, as they just did, that they do not want to disclose the information because it is supposedly commercially sensitive and that they are following the appropriate procedures. Instead, I would simply like to know whether public servants are being forced to sign these agreements because they did not agree with the government's decision.
Mr. Speaker, once again, the feigned indignation from my friend across the aisle does not make what he is saying a reality.As he is well aware, that donation to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, which is independent of the government, was discussed in January 2014, when the Conservatives were in power. He knows full well that he is grossly exaggerating the facts when he claims that this was somehow inappropriate.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for all of his hard work on this special committee that is focused on electoral reform. I am sure that the member opposite, who has been asking for a year that we reach out to as many Canadians as possible, will be fully supportive of the third pillar of our outreach. We will be reaching out to Canadians from all walks of life. We want to hear their values on their democratic institutions, and we are counting on every single member of this House to help ensure that their constituents have a say in this third pillar of our outreach.
Mr. Speaker, it is a service that is available to any province of any political orientation, of course. However, since my colleague is asking the question about what this trip gave to Canada: 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario. Other provinces have benefited from the same service. Is the member opposite suggesting we should not help our provinces access foreign commercial markets?Israel has benefited from this visit. Is the member opposite suggesting we weaken ties with Israel?
Mr. Speaker, despite the righteous indignation of the hon. member, we will take no lessons from a party that refused to even initiate negotiations. As the member for Lac-Saint-Jean admitted in a public statement to the press, the previous government did not even start renegotiations with the Americans.From the beginning, we have been in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We understand their concerns. We know their positions and we are defending those positions vigorously in negotiations. We are going to defend our position vigorously in front of tribunals.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague across the aisle knows very well that at all times political parties are raising money. They do so according to Canadian law.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can contribute to these fundraising events. He also knows that all donations of over $200 are proactively disclosed by the election authorities. He also knows, or should know, that the Liberal Party follows all of the election rules, and that is what removes even the suggestion of a conflict of interest.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians voted for a more responsible government that will create a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Canadian farmers use responsible land management practices. The Government of Canada is working with its provincial and territorial counterparts to help farmers reduce greenhouse gas emissions, preserve soil and water resources, and adapt to climate change.
Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals ignore farmers, our Conservative government mandated that oil companies blend ethanol and biodiesel in our transportation fuels.This has been good for jobs and the economy, good for the environment, and good for the farmers in my riding. The Ecofiscal Commission has recommended these farmers be left in the dust.Can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food confirm that the Liberals will not reduce the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Mr. Speaker, our government put an end to the most costly and longest trade war with the U.S. in 2006. Not only did we do that, but we also renegotiated an extension and a grace period that the present Liberal government has not been able to do with its BFF. There are going to be job losses, mill closures, and it is going to impact small communities from coast to coast to coast.It is not just the forestry workers. It is the small mom-and-pops. It is service industries all across Canada. When
Mr. Speaker, Canada 2020, a Liberal think tank associated with Liberal lobbyists and good friends of the Liberal Prime Minister, recently introduced a donor agreement to prevent accusations of cash for access for events it holds with Liberal ministers.It is really sad that the Liberals' actions make such agreements necessary. In light of this revelation, why can the Prime Minister not see that even his friends are embarrassed by his fundraising techniques and fear for their own reputations?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague can manufacture outrage as much as he wants.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can make donations to political parties in Canada. Those are rules that all political parties follow.He knows that the Trudeau Foundation is an independent foundation. He knows that that particular donation to which he made reference began in January 2014. He knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, last week we learned that the Minister of Democratic Institutions will, at the cost of millions, be mailing out 13 million postcards asking feel-good questions about electoral reform, but this week she said that Canada cannot have a referendum on the very same subject because we have...seen how expensive [referenda] can be.The Chief Electoral Officer has testified that a simple change that is under the minister's own direct control could cut the costs of a referendum in half. Given the minister's day-old enthusiasm for frugality, why will she not just take the CEO's advice and stop pretending that cost is an insurmountable barrier to democracy?
Mr. Speaker, it has been a while since I have heard from the hon. member, too.We listened to Canadians when we proposed the special committee to go out and hear from Canadians. We listened to Canadians and the members of this House when they said to change the composition of the committee so that the majority would be with the opposition.We will listen to Canadians in new and innovative ways. I am looking forward to receiving the committee's report on December 1. We will take that into consideration, along with the feedback we have received from Canadians, before we introduce legislation in this House.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister of what his boss, the Prime Minister of Canada, has said, both in writing and out loud: there should be no preferential access...because [of] financial contributions. When the Liberal Party engages in sectoral financing, it goes against the Prime Minister's own ethics rules.Is it any wonder, though, when the Prime Minister himself is the one leading these kinds of activities, that by sheer coincidence, just a few days later, the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation receives a $1-million donation? Well done.Why is he not following the ethics rules?
Mr. Speaker, this government boasts about its lofty principles, but when it comes time to take action, it is a whole different story. The Liberals follow the same approach when it comes to fundraising. They engage in what is called sector-specific financing, where ministers ask for money from people with whom they have a working relationship. For example, a lawyer will pay $1,500 to meet with the Minister of Justice. That is not right, and it is unethical.What will it take for the Liberal government to realize that this is inappropriate, another Gomery Commission?
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are doing. We are fighting for the interests of Canadian softwood lumber workers and producers. That is exactly why we have not yet reached an agreement. The United States' offer was not acceptable. We are continuing to work for the industry and the workers. In the meantime, we will put up a fight in court. We have never lost, and we will continue to work toward an agreement that is good for the country.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud of our government's record on the environment and climate change. As we have said many times, our government is committed to a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Bioproducts, including biofuels, can help create new economic opportunities for farmers and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Mr. Speaker, [member spoke in an indigenous language].My question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard. In 1993, the Canadian government made a commitment to supplement the Nunavut agreement with more detailed legislation on Nunavut fisheries regulations. Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. submitted draft Nunavut fisheries regulations to the department in 2013 and presented them again in 2015.Unfortunately, progress has been slow. Will the minister commit to working collaboratively with NTI to finally develop relevant Nunavut fisheries regulations?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said repeatedly, this kind of fundraising activity is completely normal and all political parties do it. That is also what the Chief Electoral Officer himself has said. My colleague knows very well that we have always followed all fundraising rules. These events are open to thousands of Canadians across the country. The same is true for all political parties.
Mr. Speaker, the information being referenced by the hon. member is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information that the Government of Canada has.Therefore, it is not unreasonable that the employees who work with that very sensitive information be required to sign non-disclosure agreements.We are determined not to make the same mistakes that the previous government made.
Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member, we are concerned about homelessness in our country, and that is why in budget 2016 we announced an additional $112 million for the homelessness partnering strategy over two years. This was a 50% increase, the first increase since 1999. Our social development minister recently met with provincial and territorial ministers, and homelessness will be a front and centre issue as we develop a national housing strategy.
Mr. Speaker, we have been standing up for Canadians from coast to coast to coast on this file since the get-go, which is more than we can say about the previous government.Our strategy remains the right strategy. We are continuing to negotiate on behalf of Canadians. We are continuing to stay in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We are going to defend ourselves in front of trade tribunals, which the previous Liberal governments under prime ministers Chrétien and Martin did. We have never lost. We will continue to move forward in that direction.
Mr. Speaker, the opposition House leader knows that the government always keeps its word. In fact
Mr. Speaker, it would seem that the ministers answering our questions do not agree with the Prime Minister.When they were asked about exclusive fundraising activities this week, they replied that the Liberals were continuing to work hard, and I quote, to bring investors to Canada.The government cannot talk out of both sides of its mouth. Either it confirms that this does not pertain to government business, or it confirms that it is attracting investment. Which is it?
As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, this is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information in the files of the Government of Canada.It is therefore not unreasonable that non-disclosure agreements be signed by those very people who are handling that information.We are determined that this procurement will be handled in the right and proper way, and that the mistakes that were made in the past will not be repeated.
Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Infrastructure.For the last two years, Prince Edward Island has led this country in export growth and is expected to again this year. The premier has tagged Prince Edward Island Canada's Food Island for its food and fish exports, but we also export many other products, such as aerospace and other goods. Critical to our export needs in all of Atlantic Canada is quality infrastructure that leads us into those export markets.My question to the minister is this. Under the new infrastructure fund, will those critical needs be met for Atlantic Canada?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday we learned the details of the plan for the future Maison de Radio-Canada.In 2009, a agreement was reached between Radio-Canada and the City of Montreal. They agreed that 20% of the construction would include social and community housing on this site. However, the developer that is buying the current tower and some of the land is not a signatory to the agreement.How is the minister responsible for social housing going to ensure that this agreement is upheld and when will the construction of this new social housing begin?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the minister's consultations. We are dealing with a government that keeps saying that it is consulting with and listening to Canadians from coast to coast to coast.If 70% of Canadians want a referendum before we change our electoral system, and if the committee has a report that indicates that a referendum is the right way to go, will the minister and the Prime Minister finally listen to Canadians and respect their wishes, or will they do as they please based on their own whims?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister that a confidential internal report by his own department called the situation critical.Economic development in the St. Lawrence corridor depends on the seaway being open all winter long. In response to this critical situation, the government says that maybe someday it might think about possibly coming up with a long-term solution for a new fleet.Is that the government's strategy? Instead of leaving the seaway up to chance, why is it not considering buying, or at least renting, the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, we announced an open and transparent consultation process with the marine industry specifically to ensure that there is no break in services.Nine Coast Guard vessels are currently providing icebreaking services in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and they will be on the St. Lawrence River next year and for several years to come.At some point, we will have to consider other options to ensure that there is no shortage of services. My colleague should not worry people by making such claims.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our colleague from Nunavut for the question. I share his view that the fisheries in Nunavut offer an important opportunity for economic development. Our government understands that a sustainable, scientifically based fishery is in the interest of the residents of Nunavut and the interest of Canada. I am happy to tell him that we are proceeding along the lines of the partnership with NTI, as he just identified. We believe in co-management with our territorial partners. Senior officials met with NTI this week. They have scheduled another meeting for December 9. We are going to work with them to get the job done.
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that my colleague would suggest proceeding in a way that is not open and transparent.We announced consultations with the entire marine industry and all partners across the country who have suggestions about the possibility of acquiring vessels for the short term and ensuring that there is no break in services.Instead of moving forward with a single suggestion, we think it is in the interest of all Canadians and taxpayers to have a more open process. That is what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Oakville for his question and for his leadership on our automotive caucus.Obviously, consumer protection is important to us with respect to road safety.That is why I introduced Bill S-2 in the Parliament of Canada. It will give us the tools we need and allow us to recall and repair any defects that are discovered in our automobiles and equipment.This bill is before Parliament, and I hope that all parties will support it when it is comes to the House.
Mr. Speaker, Canada's Chief Electoral Officer said that Canada's election financing laws are among the most advanced, constraining, and transparent in the world. What removes even the exaggerated suggestions of my friends on the other side of the aisle from pretending that a conflict interest appears, what removes that doubt, is meticulous following of the rules always. Donations of over $200 are disclosed transparently. That is something we are proud of on this side of the House, and those are rules that we always follow.
Mr. Speaker, the minister has always said that Radio-Canada had a social and historic responsibility to Montreal and to its neighbourhood. Radio-Canada acknowledged that. She also hoped that the more modern and green new facilities would be able to meet our digital realities for years to come.As the project unfolds, we hope that the crown corporation will engage in an open process with its neighbourhood, its employees, and Canadians in general. We will follow the developments of this project with great interest.
Mr. Speaker, November 20 to 26 is Education Savings Week, and Canadians are encouraged to save for a child's post-secondary education. That type of education opens doors for better jobs, and helps Canadians obtain in-demand skills and education. The government has two incentives: the Canada learning bond, and the Canada education savings grant. We encourage all Canadians to save for the future and ensure our children are successful.
Mr. Speaker, my riding of Oakville is part of the network of auto manufacturers in this country. In fact, the Ford assembly plant in my riding employs approximately 4,500 workers.They work hard to ensure that the vehicles and equipment assembled are consistent with Canadian safety standards.Can the minister inform this House on his work with regard to safety of Canadian consumers?
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the importance of the energy sector to our economy and to the livelihoods of Canadians. We have been clear that natural resources projects must go forward in an environmentally sustainable manner.The government's final decision on each major resource project will be informed by facts and evidence, including public consultation and the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples.Each major resource project has to be judged on its own merits, in order to determine if it is in the overall Canadian best interests.
Mr. Speaker, before coming up with this recommendation, the National Capital Commission did a comparative analysis of 12 potential federal sites using 21 criteria. The Tunney's Pasture site best meets the 21 criteria, and its pre-eminence is supported by the most recent data concerning the long-range plans for urban transportation, demographics, and federal land use in the National Capital Region.There were 8,000 people consulted on this, which is 7,999 more than the last government consulted.
Mr. Speaker, our government held consultations throughout Quebec on various subjects and various files, including softwood lumber.I travelled to Amqui two weeks ago. I went to the Saguenay as did the minister. She consulted Quebec industry representatives. The Minister of Agriculture and his parliamentary secretary took similar action with respect to diafiltered milk.Therefore, it is definitely not true that we are not consulting Quebeckers. That is one of our responsibilities as government.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her constant work on this file on behalf of LGBTQ2 people in our country. It is important that we work both at home and abroad to promote human rights across the world. It is important that in our statements that we advance human rights, that we are sensitive to where countries are in their own evolution, and that we always defend the rights. Over time, the long arc of history bends toward progress, and we are helping with that long arc.
Mr. Speaker, the government is proud of enhancing the transparency of judicial appointments.My Conservative colleague claims that our judicial appointments are not made in an open and transparent manner. However, he knows very well that that is not true. We changed the process in order to increase transparency and to make outstanding Canadians eligible for appointment. We are proud of that.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for Malpeque and all of the Atlantic caucus for their advocacy on infrastructure issues in their communities.After hearing their concerns, and the concerns of the province and the mayors, we made changes to allow 60% of P.E.I.'s roads to be eligible for funding compared to the 1% that were eligible under the previous government. These changes will help us grow the economy, connect to communities, and move goods to market.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to work in partnership with provinces to have a historic agreement to expand the Canada pension plan, which would improve retirement outcomes, including for women and those with disabilities, in our country. We are aware that more could be done with respect to the dropout provisions, and we have stated that very clearly to the member. However, in order to make changes to the plan, we need agreement from the provinces.Our intent is to pass the bill, as is; however, the Minister of Finance will then raise the dropout provisions at the next provincial and territorial finance ministers' meeting in December, in the context of the triennial review of the Canada pension plan.
Mr. Speaker, the NDP can be counted on to defend the rights of the LGBTQ community here and abroad.However, it is not so clear with our Prime Minister, who while in Liberia, refused to condemn the country's criminalization of homosexual activity. According to him, different countries have different paces of evolution in recognizing the rights of LGBTQ persons.Let me remind the Prime Minister that human rights are universal, no matter where people live or who they love. Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs explain this missed opportunity?
Mr. Speaker, it can be hard for parents to save for their children's post-secondary education. Day-to-day expenses, including everything from groceries to housing, always come first. However, saving for a child's education can have a huge impact on his or her future. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour inform this House of the steps the government is taking to help parents save for their children's post-secondary education?
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question and his interest in this industry in Quebec.From the beginning we have worked with Quebec's industry and its workers to understand their positions and to promote those positions. We are taking into account the distinctions between the industries in Quebec and those in the rest of the country. This is part of our negotiation strategy and we will continue to promote Quebec's interests before the tribunals during the negotiations until we have an agreement.
Mr. Speaker, what the member is suggesting is that the federal government not pay Ontario's bills.Yesterday, I asked the foreign affairs minister about the federal Liberals paying a private public relations firm $23,000 for Kathleen Wynne's recent trip to Israel. He said, The amount of money he speaks about is an amount of money that was available to anyone.... What a ridiculous answer. That money is not available to anyone unless their circle of friends includes the Prime Minister, Gerald Butts, and Katie Telford.Canadian taxpayers want to know why the federal Liberals paid for Kathleen Wynne's public relations bills.
Mr. Speaker, the government clearly does not want to confirm that it is going to continue having that mandate.Farmers in my riding depend on the ethanol and biodiesel production for their livelihoods, but the Ecofiscal Commission wants to throw them under the bus. This will kill farms and jobs, give us a weaker economy, and a dirtier environment.Why will the Liberals not stand up for farmers and our environment, and maintain the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Mr. Speaker, selling access to government ministers to secure cash for the Liberal Party is the definition of a breach of trust. For days now, the minister of fishy fundraisers has been telling us not to worry, that when ministers attend these exclusive $1,500 events, government business is not discussed. Canadians are tired of this line and deserve better. Can the Liberals tells us, if it is not government business, what the heck were they talking about during these dinners? Hors d'oeuvres?
Mr. Speaker, the federal government's management of the icebreaker fleet is a complete fiasco. What is more, rather than purchasing the Aiviq for a price taxpayers can afford, the Liberal government is dragging its feet.If the St. Lawrence seaway were shut down even for just a few days because of a lack of equipment to deal with winter weather conditions, it would be an economic disaster. As the member for the port city of Trois-Rivières, I know what I am talking about.Why is the government refusing to buy the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, I guess my colleague was sleeping when I just spoke, so I will repeat myself.This is a service available to any province, and we do not look at the political affiliation of the province. That is ridiculous as a statement. He would be unable to substantiate it.Did he not hear me describe 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario; stronger links with Israel? If he has a problem with that, I want to know why.
Mr. Speaker, for weeks now, we have demanded that the Liberals stop peddling cabinet access to their friends and lobbyists.Fresh off his trip to visit old family friends in Cuba, we learned that the Prime Minister was cosying up to Chinese Communist Party officials who attended a cash for access fundraiser in May. These same officials then made a large payment to the Trudeau Foundation.Has this Prime Minister no shame? I know he admires dictatorships from Havana to Beijing, but this goes too far. Will he stop selling influence to foreign powers?
Mr. Speaker, that is a load of blah, blah, blah.Now we know why the Liberal government was never serious about renewing the softwood lumber agreement. How do we know? The opening salvo of a new trade war with the United States was fired today.The Minister of International Trade had 387 days to defend Canada's forestry workers, but she failed. Now thousands of families in the regions are worried about being caught in the crossfire of this trade war.The Prime Minister's seduction strategy is not working. When will the government start fighting for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, 240 federal public servants have been forbidden to publicly discuss details of the Liberals politically motivated, sole-sourced Super Hornet purchase, a deal that will cost thousands of jobs and waste billions of taxpayers' dollars.In fact, this gag order forbids them from discussing the project for the rest of their lives, a move condemned as heavy handed by two former federal procurement chiefs.Why are the Liberals muzzling public servants, and what are they trying to hide from Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, again, we are not talking about Elections Canada rules. We have no problem with political parties doing fundraising according to Elections Canada rules. We are talking about the Prime Minister's own guidelines and the Prime Minister admitting that he was conducting government business at a Liberal fundraiser. Not only is this breaking his own ethical guidelines, this is coming very close to breaking other laws. Again, when will the Liberals admit that they have broken their own guidelines, they are doing the wrong thing, the immoral thing, in doing what could possibly be seen as corrupt, by doing government business at Liberal fundraisers?
They seem to find this funny, Mr. Speaker. What Canadians did not find funny was her government's inability to focus on economic growth, on cutting taxes for the middle class, on creating jobs in every region of the country. That is the word we gave to Canadians, and that is what governs our government's actions every single day.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about how vigorously the government is going to defend it. The Liberals budgeted a measly $30 million. They just gave $25 million to a foreign organization with direct and indirect links to Hamas, a jihadist terrorist group. How vigorously is the government going to defend Canadian jobs?Softwood lumber war number five is mere hours away. This means mill closures and job losses for Canadians from coast to coast to coast.The minister has mismanaged this file from day one. When is the government going to stand up for hard-working forestry families from coast to coast to coast?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in response to a question about the Liberals spending over $23,000 on an external public relations consultant for Kathleen Wynne, for her trip to Israel, the foreign affairs minister said these services are available to anyone.Seriously, anyone can get a free $23,000 PR guy funded by the Liberals? No wonder they have no hope of balancing this budget.Why will the minister not simply admit that Kathleen Wynne got the money because she is a Liberal?
Mr. Speaker, Canada is facing a crisis in the over-prescription of opioids and with illicit fentanyl and now a wave of street drugs 100 times stronger.The health minister claims to be using every lever at her disposal, but the only action we have seen from the Liberals was an exclusive conference in Ottawa. The doors were closed to addiction doctors and any expert who may have had a different opinion than the Liberals. If the minster takes the opioid crisis seriously, why is she not meeting with addiction doctors and those on the front line who work every single day with this tragic crisis?
Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber trade war is reigniting and Quebec has reason to be concerned.In a joint press release with Barack Obama in June, the Prime Minister did not say a word about exempting Quebec from any protectionist agreement. Worse yet, he is okay with a future agreement covering remanufacturers. That is even worse than the bad Conservative agreement that cost us 23,000 jobs in Quebec.Instead of selling out all the sectors of our industry, will the Prime Minister stand up and defend Quebec's forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, I have my doubts about what my colleague just said. I could go on with the long list of ministers who take donors hostage. Worse still is the fact that the Prime Minister himself is involved in this sketchy kind of fundraising, the very same Prime Minister who told his ministers not to get involved in this kind of thing. They should really walk the talk. This is serious. This government has no ethics and could not care less about rules.Will the Liberals stop holding these sketchy fundraising events?
Mr. Speaker, the fisheries minister had a hard time keeping a straight face in saying that. It is pretty obvious.When it comes to fundraising for the government, following the law is simply not good enough. Let me read something: the performance of your official duties and the arrangement of your private affairs should bear the closest public scrutiny. This is an obligation that is not fully discharged by simply acting within the law.Who said that? It was the Liberal Prime Minister. Again I ask, why does the Prime Minister have such a hard time keeping his word? Why does he say one thing and do something completely different?
Mr. Speaker, my friend's exaggerated preamble does not necessarily turn those assertions into facts. What I can assure the House is that unlike the Conservative Party, we will not appoint people like Mike Duffy and Irving Gerstein and Pamela Wallin to the Senate to raise money on the taxpayers' dime for the Conservative Party. That is why, if we want to talk about immoral and inappropriate behaviour, they are on that side of the House.
Mr. Speaker, it is high time that the federal government got to work. The tax refund we have been waiting on so we can fund housing projects for the homeless in Montreal is two months overdue. Eleven projects that would create 235 new social housing units for the homeless are on hold because the federal government refuses to release the $2 million it promised.Will the minister guarantee that all projects will be carried out on time?
Mr. Speaker, the disconnect between what the Prime Minister says and what he actually does is growing day by day. First he broke his word to cut taxes for small businesses. Then he broke his commitment to only having a small deficit. We know the deficit is absolutely ballooning. Now he is breaking his own promise to be open, accountable, and ethical. The Prime Minister is very good at putting on a big show and saying all the right things, but then doing something completely different. Why will the Prime Minister not keep his word?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for raising this question.We, too, were disappointed that the plaintiffs decided to file motions again. There had been a very good offer by the chief commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission for us to get the lawyers out of this, and be able to speak in a facilitated discussion to get going on the reforms that are really necessary.I look forward to working with the member and with all first nations to get this kind of reform. That is the real discrimination, of way too many indigenous children in care and being looked after by non-indigenous families.
Mr. Speaker, as I said in earlier responses, this is sensitive information. This is critical information. This is information that we simply do not want to have in the wrong hands. Therefore, non-disclosure is a sine qua non for those who are handling that information. We have asked those who are handling that information to sign non-disclosure agreements, which extend past their employment with the crown, and
Mr. Speaker, if my colleague wants to talk about lack of ethics and sketchy fundraising activities, maybe he should think about what his government did when it appointed people like Mike Duffy, Irving Gerstein, and Pamela Wallin to the Senate specifically to do fundraising for the Conservative Party at taxpayers' expense. That is something our government will never do.
Mr. Speaker, the decision to purchase 18 interim Super Hornets does not make any sense. The commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the Canadian commander of Norad, and the chief of the defence staff have all confirmed that there is no capability gap. What is more, we have now learned that 234 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants have been muzzled for life. They are not allowed to talk about the aircraft procurement file. According to Alan Williams, former assistant deputy minister responsible for equipment, this is unprecedented. There is something fishy about this file. The government is hiding something.How much will it cost to acquire the Super Hornets?
Mr. Speaker, real leadership would be fixing it now.One hundred and thirty first nations, the Province of British Columbia, and the Union of BC Municipalities all said no to the northern gateway pipeline. A Federal Court overturned the Conservative approval and the Liberals made multiple promises to stop it. It sounds like an easy promise to keep, even for the Liberals.However, they are waffling on other promises to protect our coasts.Would the Liberals commit today to introduce legislation to permanently ban crude oil tankers on B.C.'s north coast, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, for two weeks now, the NDP has been asking the Liberals to fix their flawed CPP expansion bill, Bill C-26.After refusing to address it last night, Liberal MPs once again prevented us from fixing it.The Liberals also refused to answer why the dropout provisions were not included in the first place. Did the minister not realize the impact this would have on women and people living with disabilities?If the Liberal government truly recognizes this problem, then why is it forcing through a flawed bill?
Mr. Speaker, this week Cindy Blackstock, AFN, Chiefs of Ontario, and Nishnawbe Aski Nation all filed motions of non-compliance against the government, after already issuing two previous compliance orders.When the Liberals supported our motion, indigenous families hoped things would change, but two days later the government was back in court fighting first nations children. When will the government do what it promised and work with first nations peoples and not against them?
Mr. Speaker, what he is not saying is when the cheque was written.This government is trying to defend the indefensible. It is hiding behind a law written for all parliamentarians to claim that it is obeying the law. We are all familiar with the saying that just because it is legal does not mean it is ethical.The Minister of Justice invited lawyers to a cocktail party. If they are ambitious they will attend, because when she appoints judges she will think of the Liberal Party's friends.Will this government respect the House and stop the intimidation with its political fundraising?
Mr. Speaker, my constituents and forestry workers deserve to know what their future will be now that the United States trade representative is planning to launch trade action against Canada. Albertans cannot afford another drastic hit. There is no time to waste, too many jobs are at stake.Why will the minister not do her job, and ensure stability and predictability for forestry workers, or does she just not care about Albertans' livelihood?
Mr. Speaker, last night I had a telephone town hall with the residents of my riding of Essex. In Essex there is a crisis, with one in 11 seniors living in poverty. Some of them are living on one meal a day and are having to choose between paying for their prescription drugs, hydro bills, or food. Our seniors worked hard to build the society we all enjoy today. Now our country owes them a debt of responsibility. The Liberal government needs to do more for our seniors. They deserve to be able to age with dignity. What is the government doing to lift seniors out of poverty?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member that it was the previous government, his party, that let the treaty expire and failed to reinitiate negotiations with our American partners.We are prepared for any eventuality on this file. We understand that there may be a complaint lodged in front of the department of commerce by the American industry. We will defend at every step of the way in front of tribunals our Canadian workers, our Canadian forestry industry. We have never lost. We are confident moving forward. In the meantime, we will continue to negotiate a good settlement for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the environment minister announced that she will force the Ottawa Hospital to build at Tunney's, a location the hospital twice studied and rejected. Reaction has been fast and furious. Former mayor Jim Durrell said it is appalling...a terrible decision. Councillor Hubley said that traffic will be a huge problem. The Ottawa Citizen's Kelly Egan said, The Ottawa Hospital should reject the Tunney's offer.Why will the environment minister not get out of the way and let the hospital decide for itself where it will build?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite is well aware that Canada has some of the strictest political financing regulations in the world. The same rules apply to all parliamentarians, and our government is very committed to following them. We are perfectly aware that any contribution of more than $200 is disclosed proactively. These are personal donations made by Canadians and Canadian citizens only, and that is what removes any suggestion of a conflict of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest, as my colleague inappropriately suggested was the case.
Mr. Speaker, just because my colleague manufactures a series of outrages across the aisle does not change the facts. The facts are that Canada's electoral fundraising laws and regulations are among the most severe and restrictive in the world. Those are the words of Canada's Chief Electoral Officer.We respect all of the fundraising rules at all times. That is what removes any suggestion, if in fact it is done sincerely, that there is a conflict of interest. I think my colleague on the other side of the House knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, for $1,500, one can get access to the Prime Minister to further their agenda. Better yet, donations can be made to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.Are dairy and cheese producers going to have to attend a $1,500 Liberal cocktail party?Is that what anti-poverty groups, forestry sector representatives, and consumer advocacy groups are going to have to do as well?Are all Quebeckers going to have to pay $1,500 to the Liberals in order to recover the $50 billion in Quebec taxes to serve the interests of Quebec? Is that what has to happen?
Mr. Speaker, our government recognizes the hard work of seniors who helped build our country. They deserve to retire in dignity.It is why we restored the age of eligibility of OAS and GIS to 65 from 67, a very wrong-headed move by the previous government. We have raised the guaranteed income supplement for 900,000 low-income seniors, and invested over $200 million in senior housing.Make no mistake, our government is there for seniors, now and tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for raising this issue. The matter of opioids in this country is a serious public health crisis, and we have taken action on this from day one.I was very pleased early on in my mandate to make sure that naloxone was available to save hundreds, if not thousands, of lives by being available at a non-prescription status. I was also very happy to make sure we got intranasal naloxone into this country and to make sure we got approval for it. I was very happy to take steps to schedule precursors for illicit fentanyl so that it would not be available. We have taken steps to make sure that supervised consumption sites are available as a harm-reduction measure. We brought together hundreds of people, in a manner that has never been done before, including addiction specialists and all other stakeholders, to make sure that action is taken on this very serious matter.
Mr. Speaker, as we speak, the Liberal government is making 235 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants involved in replacing our CF-18 fighter jets sign lifetime non-disclosure agreements. That is a first.I have no intention of wasting my question by asking the Liberals what they have to hide. It is clear that they are just going to repeat, as they just did, that they do not want to disclose the information because it is supposedly commercially sensitive and that they are following the appropriate procedures. Instead, I would simply like to know whether public servants are being forced to sign these agreements because they did not agree with the government's decision.
Mr. Speaker, once again, the feigned indignation from my friend across the aisle does not make what he is saying a reality.As he is well aware, that donation to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, which is independent of the government, was discussed in January 2014, when the Conservatives were in power. He knows full well that he is grossly exaggerating the facts when he claims that this was somehow inappropriate.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for all of his hard work on this special committee that is focused on electoral reform. I am sure that the member opposite, who has been asking for a year that we reach out to as many Canadians as possible, will be fully supportive of the third pillar of our outreach. We will be reaching out to Canadians from all walks of life. We want to hear their values on their democratic institutions, and we are counting on every single member of this House to help ensure that their constituents have a say in this third pillar of our outreach.
Mr. Speaker, it is a service that is available to any province of any political orientation, of course. However, since my colleague is asking the question about what this trip gave to Canada: 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario. Other provinces have benefited from the same service. Is the member opposite suggesting we should not help our provinces access foreign commercial markets?Israel has benefited from this visit. Is the member opposite suggesting we weaken ties with Israel?
Mr. Speaker, despite the righteous indignation of the hon. member, we will take no lessons from a party that refused to even initiate negotiations. As the member for Lac-Saint-Jean admitted in a public statement to the press, the previous government did not even start renegotiations with the Americans.From the beginning, we have been in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We understand their concerns. We know their positions and we are defending those positions vigorously in negotiations. We are going to defend our position vigorously in front of tribunals.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague across the aisle knows very well that at all times political parties are raising money. They do so according to Canadian law.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can contribute to these fundraising events. He also knows that all donations of over $200 are proactively disclosed by the election authorities. He also knows, or should know, that the Liberal Party follows all of the election rules, and that is what removes even the suggestion of a conflict of interest.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians voted for a more responsible government that will create a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Canadian farmers use responsible land management practices. The Government of Canada is working with its provincial and territorial counterparts to help farmers reduce greenhouse gas emissions, preserve soil and water resources, and adapt to climate change.
Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals ignore farmers, our Conservative government mandated that oil companies blend ethanol and biodiesel in our transportation fuels.This has been good for jobs and the economy, good for the environment, and good for the farmers in my riding. The Ecofiscal Commission has recommended these farmers be left in the dust.Can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food confirm that the Liberals will not reduce the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Mr. Speaker, our government put an end to the most costly and longest trade war with the U.S. in 2006. Not only did we do that, but we also renegotiated an extension and a grace period that the present Liberal government has not been able to do with its BFF. There are going to be job losses, mill closures, and it is going to impact small communities from coast to coast to coast.It is not just the forestry workers. It is the small mom-and-pops. It is service industries all across Canada. When
Mr. Speaker, Canada 2020, a Liberal think tank associated with Liberal lobbyists and good friends of the Liberal Prime Minister, recently introduced a donor agreement to prevent accusations of cash for access for events it holds with Liberal ministers.It is really sad that the Liberals' actions make such agreements necessary. In light of this revelation, why can the Prime Minister not see that even his friends are embarrassed by his fundraising techniques and fear for their own reputations?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague can manufacture outrage as much as he wants.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can make donations to political parties in Canada. Those are rules that all political parties follow.He knows that the Trudeau Foundation is an independent foundation. He knows that that particular donation to which he made reference began in January 2014. He knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, last week we learned that the Minister of Democratic Institutions will, at the cost of millions, be mailing out 13 million postcards asking feel-good questions about electoral reform, but this week she said that Canada cannot have a referendum on the very same subject because we have...seen how expensive [referenda] can be.The Chief Electoral Officer has testified that a simple change that is under the minister's own direct control could cut the costs of a referendum in half. Given the minister's day-old enthusiasm for frugality, why will she not just take the CEO's advice and stop pretending that cost is an insurmountable barrier to democracy?
Mr. Speaker, it has been a while since I have heard from the hon. member, too.We listened to Canadians when we proposed the special committee to go out and hear from Canadians. We listened to Canadians and the members of this House when they said to change the composition of the committee so that the majority would be with the opposition.We will listen to Canadians in new and innovative ways. I am looking forward to receiving the committee's report on December 1. We will take that into consideration, along with the feedback we have received from Canadians, before we introduce legislation in this House.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister of what his boss, the Prime Minister of Canada, has said, both in writing and out loud: there should be no preferential access...because [of] financial contributions. When the Liberal Party engages in sectoral financing, it goes against the Prime Minister's own ethics rules.Is it any wonder, though, when the Prime Minister himself is the one leading these kinds of activities, that by sheer coincidence, just a few days later, the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation receives a $1-million donation? Well done.Why is he not following the ethics rules?
Mr. Speaker, this government boasts about its lofty principles, but when it comes time to take action, it is a whole different story. The Liberals follow the same approach when it comes to fundraising. They engage in what is called sector-specific financing, where ministers ask for money from people with whom they have a working relationship. For example, a lawyer will pay $1,500 to meet with the Minister of Justice. That is not right, and it is unethical.What will it take for the Liberal government to realize that this is inappropriate, another Gomery Commission?
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are doing. We are fighting for the interests of Canadian softwood lumber workers and producers. That is exactly why we have not yet reached an agreement. The United States' offer was not acceptable. We are continuing to work for the industry and the workers. In the meantime, we will put up a fight in court. We have never lost, and we will continue to work toward an agreement that is good for the country.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud of our government's record on the environment and climate change. As we have said many times, our government is committed to a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Bioproducts, including biofuels, can help create new economic opportunities for farmers and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Mr. Speaker, [member spoke in an indigenous language].My question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard. In 1993, the Canadian government made a commitment to supplement the Nunavut agreement with more detailed legislation on Nunavut fisheries regulations. Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. submitted draft Nunavut fisheries regulations to the department in 2013 and presented them again in 2015.Unfortunately, progress has been slow. Will the minister commit to working collaboratively with NTI to finally develop relevant Nunavut fisheries regulations?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said repeatedly, this kind of fundraising activity is completely normal and all political parties do it. That is also what the Chief Electoral Officer himself has said. My colleague knows very well that we have always followed all fundraising rules. These events are open to thousands of Canadians across the country. The same is true for all political parties.
Mr. Speaker, the information being referenced by the hon. member is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information that the Government of Canada has.Therefore, it is not unreasonable that the employees who work with that very sensitive information be required to sign non-disclosure agreements.We are determined not to make the same mistakes that the previous government made.
Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member, we are concerned about homelessness in our country, and that is why in budget 2016 we announced an additional $112 million for the homelessness partnering strategy over two years. This was a 50% increase, the first increase since 1999. Our social development minister recently met with provincial and territorial ministers, and homelessness will be a front and centre issue as we develop a national housing strategy.
Mr. Speaker, we have been standing up for Canadians from coast to coast to coast on this file since the get-go, which is more than we can say about the previous government.Our strategy remains the right strategy. We are continuing to negotiate on behalf of Canadians. We are continuing to stay in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We are going to defend ourselves in front of trade tribunals, which the previous Liberal governments under prime ministers Chrétien and Martin did. We have never lost. We will continue to move forward in that direction.
Mr. Speaker, the opposition House leader knows that the government always keeps its word. In fact
Mr. Speaker, it would seem that the ministers answering our questions do not agree with the Prime Minister.When they were asked about exclusive fundraising activities this week, they replied that the Liberals were continuing to work hard, and I quote, to bring investors to Canada.The government cannot talk out of both sides of its mouth. Either it confirms that this does not pertain to government business, or it confirms that it is attracting investment. Which is it?
As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, this is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information in the files of the Government of Canada.It is therefore not unreasonable that non-disclosure agreements be signed by those very people who are handling that information.We are determined that this procurement will be handled in the right and proper way, and that the mistakes that were made in the past will not be repeated.
Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Infrastructure.For the last two years, Prince Edward Island has led this country in export growth and is expected to again this year. The premier has tagged Prince Edward Island Canada's Food Island for its food and fish exports, but we also export many other products, such as aerospace and other goods. Critical to our export needs in all of Atlantic Canada is quality infrastructure that leads us into those export markets.My question to the minister is this. Under the new infrastructure fund, will those critical needs be met for Atlantic Canada?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday we learned the details of the plan for the future Maison de Radio-Canada.In 2009, a agreement was reached between Radio-Canada and the City of Montreal. They agreed that 20% of the construction would include social and community housing on this site. However, the developer that is buying the current tower and some of the land is not a signatory to the agreement.How is the minister responsible for social housing going to ensure that this agreement is upheld and when will the construction of this new social housing begin?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the minister's consultations. We are dealing with a government that keeps saying that it is consulting with and listening to Canadians from coast to coast to coast.If 70% of Canadians want a referendum before we change our electoral system, and if the committee has a report that indicates that a referendum is the right way to go, will the minister and the Prime Minister finally listen to Canadians and respect their wishes, or will they do as they please based on their own whims?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister that a confidential internal report by his own department called the situation critical.Economic development in the St. Lawrence corridor depends on the seaway being open all winter long. In response to this critical situation, the government says that maybe someday it might think about possibly coming up with a long-term solution for a new fleet.Is that the government's strategy? Instead of leaving the seaway up to chance, why is it not considering buying, or at least renting, the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, we announced an open and transparent consultation process with the marine industry specifically to ensure that there is no break in services.Nine Coast Guard vessels are currently providing icebreaking services in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and they will be on the St. Lawrence River next year and for several years to come.At some point, we will have to consider other options to ensure that there is no shortage of services. My colleague should not worry people by making such claims.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our colleague from Nunavut for the question. I share his view that the fisheries in Nunavut offer an important opportunity for economic development. Our government understands that a sustainable, scientifically based fishery is in the interest of the residents of Nunavut and the interest of Canada. I am happy to tell him that we are proceeding along the lines of the partnership with NTI, as he just identified. We believe in co-management with our territorial partners. Senior officials met with NTI this week. They have scheduled another meeting for December 9. We are going to work with them to get the job done.
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that my colleague would suggest proceeding in a way that is not open and transparent.We announced consultations with the entire marine industry and all partners across the country who have suggestions about the possibility of acquiring vessels for the short term and ensuring that there is no break in services.Instead of moving forward with a single suggestion, we think it is in the interest of all Canadians and taxpayers to have a more open process. That is what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Oakville for his question and for his leadership on our automotive caucus.Obviously, consumer protection is important to us with respect to road safety.That is why I introduced Bill S-2 in the Parliament of Canada. It will give us the tools we need and allow us to recall and repair any defects that are discovered in our automobiles and equipment.This bill is before Parliament, and I hope that all parties will support it when it is comes to the House.
Mr. Speaker, Canada's Chief Electoral Officer said that Canada's election financing laws are among the most advanced, constraining, and transparent in the world. What removes even the exaggerated suggestions of my friends on the other side of the aisle from pretending that a conflict interest appears, what removes that doubt, is meticulous following of the rules always. Donations of over $200 are disclosed transparently. That is something we are proud of on this side of the House, and those are rules that we always follow.
Mr. Speaker, the minister has always said that Radio-Canada had a social and historic responsibility to Montreal and to its neighbourhood. Radio-Canada acknowledged that. She also hoped that the more modern and green new facilities would be able to meet our digital realities for years to come.As the project unfolds, we hope that the crown corporation will engage in an open process with its neighbourhood, its employees, and Canadians in general. We will follow the developments of this project with great interest.
Mr. Speaker, November 20 to 26 is Education Savings Week, and Canadians are encouraged to save for a child's post-secondary education. That type of education opens doors for better jobs, and helps Canadians obtain in-demand skills and education. The government has two incentives: the Canada learning bond, and the Canada education savings grant. We encourage all Canadians to save for the future and ensure our children are successful.
Mr. Speaker, my riding of Oakville is part of the network of auto manufacturers in this country. In fact, the Ford assembly plant in my riding employs approximately 4,500 workers.They work hard to ensure that the vehicles and equipment assembled are consistent with Canadian safety standards.Can the minister inform this House on his work with regard to safety of Canadian consumers?
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the importance of the energy sector to our economy and to the livelihoods of Canadians. We have been clear that natural resources projects must go forward in an environmentally sustainable manner.The government's final decision on each major resource project will be informed by facts and evidence, including public consultation and the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples.Each major resource project has to be judged on its own merits, in order to determine if it is in the overall Canadian best interests.
Mr. Speaker, before coming up with this recommendation, the National Capital Commission did a comparative analysis of 12 potential federal sites using 21 criteria. The Tunney's Pasture site best meets the 21 criteria, and its pre-eminence is supported by the most recent data concerning the long-range plans for urban transportation, demographics, and federal land use in the National Capital Region.There were 8,000 people consulted on this, which is 7,999 more than the last government consulted.
Mr. Speaker, our government held consultations throughout Quebec on various subjects and various files, including softwood lumber.I travelled to Amqui two weeks ago. I went to the Saguenay as did the minister. She consulted Quebec industry representatives. The Minister of Agriculture and his parliamentary secretary took similar action with respect to diafiltered milk.Therefore, it is definitely not true that we are not consulting Quebeckers. That is one of our responsibilities as government.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her constant work on this file on behalf of LGBTQ2 people in our country. It is important that we work both at home and abroad to promote human rights across the world. It is important that in our statements that we advance human rights, that we are sensitive to where countries are in their own evolution, and that we always defend the rights. Over time, the long arc of history bends toward progress, and we are helping with that long arc.
Mr. Speaker, the government is proud of enhancing the transparency of judicial appointments.My Conservative colleague claims that our judicial appointments are not made in an open and transparent manner. However, he knows very well that that is not true. We changed the process in order to increase transparency and to make outstanding Canadians eligible for appointment. We are proud of that.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for Malpeque and all of the Atlantic caucus for their advocacy on infrastructure issues in their communities.After hearing their concerns, and the concerns of the province and the mayors, we made changes to allow 60% of P.E.I.'s roads to be eligible for funding compared to the 1% that were eligible under the previous government. These changes will help us grow the economy, connect to communities, and move goods to market.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to work in partnership with provinces to have a historic agreement to expand the Canada pension plan, which would improve retirement outcomes, including for women and those with disabilities, in our country. We are aware that more could be done with respect to the dropout provisions, and we have stated that very clearly to the member. However, in order to make changes to the plan, we need agreement from the provinces.Our intent is to pass the bill, as is; however, the Minister of Finance will then raise the dropout provisions at the next provincial and territorial finance ministers' meeting in December, in the context of the triennial review of the Canada pension plan.
Mr. Speaker, the NDP can be counted on to defend the rights of the LGBTQ community here and abroad.However, it is not so clear with our Prime Minister, who while in Liberia, refused to condemn the country's criminalization of homosexual activity. According to him, different countries have different paces of evolution in recognizing the rights of LGBTQ persons.Let me remind the Prime Minister that human rights are universal, no matter where people live or who they love. Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs explain this missed opportunity?
Mr. Speaker, it can be hard for parents to save for their children's post-secondary education. Day-to-day expenses, including everything from groceries to housing, always come first. However, saving for a child's education can have a huge impact on his or her future. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour inform this House of the steps the government is taking to help parents save for their children's post-secondary education?
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question and his interest in this industry in Quebec.From the beginning we have worked with Quebec's industry and its workers to understand their positions and to promote those positions. We are taking into account the distinctions between the industries in Quebec and those in the rest of the country. This is part of our negotiation strategy and we will continue to promote Quebec's interests before the tribunals during the negotiations until we have an agreement.
Most negative speeches
Mr. Speaker, it would seem that the ministers answering our questions do not agree with the Prime Minister.When they were asked about exclusive fundraising activities this week, they replied that the Liberals were continuing to work hard, and I quote, to bring investors to Canada.The government cannot talk out of both sides of its mouth. Either it confirms that this does not pertain to government business, or it confirms that it is attracting investment. Which is it?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about how vigorously the government is going to defend it. The Liberals budgeted a measly $30 million. They just gave $25 million to a foreign organization with direct and indirect links to Hamas, a jihadist terrorist group. How vigorously is the government going to defend Canadian jobs?Softwood lumber war number five is mere hours away. This means mill closures and job losses for Canadians from coast to coast to coast.The minister has mismanaged this file from day one. When is the government going to stand up for hard-working forestry families from coast to coast to coast?
Mr. Speaker, my friend's exaggerated preamble does not necessarily turn those assertions into facts. What I can assure the House is that unlike the Conservative Party, we will not appoint people like Mike Duffy and Irving Gerstein and Pamela Wallin to the Senate to raise money on the taxpayers' dime for the Conservative Party. That is why, if we want to talk about immoral and inappropriate behaviour, they are on that side of the House.
Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber trade war is reigniting and Quebec has reason to be concerned.In a joint press release with Barack Obama in June, the Prime Minister did not say a word about exempting Quebec from any protectionist agreement. Worse yet, he is okay with a future agreement covering remanufacturers. That is even worse than the bad Conservative agreement that cost us 23,000 jobs in Quebec.Instead of selling out all the sectors of our industry, will the Prime Minister stand up and defend Quebec's forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, for two weeks now, the NDP has been asking the Liberals to fix their flawed CPP expansion bill, Bill C-26.After refusing to address it last night, Liberal MPs once again prevented us from fixing it.The Liberals also refused to answer why the dropout provisions were not included in the first place. Did the minister not realize the impact this would have on women and people living with disabilities?If the Liberal government truly recognizes this problem, then why is it forcing through a flawed bill?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for Malpeque and all of the Atlantic caucus for their advocacy on infrastructure issues in their communities.After hearing their concerns, and the concerns of the province and the mayors, we made changes to allow 60% of P.E.I.'s roads to be eligible for funding compared to the 1% that were eligible under the previous government. These changes will help us grow the economy, connect to communities, and move goods to market.
Mr. Speaker, Canada is facing a crisis in the over-prescription of opioids and with illicit fentanyl and now a wave of street drugs 100 times stronger.The health minister claims to be using every lever at her disposal, but the only action we have seen from the Liberals was an exclusive conference in Ottawa. The doors were closed to addiction doctors and any expert who may have had a different opinion than the Liberals. If the minster takes the opioid crisis seriously, why is she not meeting with addiction doctors and those on the front line who work every single day with this tragic crisis?
Mr. Speaker, my riding of Oakville is part of the network of auto manufacturers in this country. In fact, the Ford assembly plant in my riding employs approximately 4,500 workers.They work hard to ensure that the vehicles and equipment assembled are consistent with Canadian safety standards.Can the minister inform this House on his work with regard to safety of Canadian consumers?
Mr. Speaker, as I said in earlier responses, this is sensitive information. This is critical information. This is information that we simply do not want to have in the wrong hands. Therefore, non-disclosure is a sine qua non for those who are handling that information. We have asked those who are handling that information to sign non-disclosure agreements, which extend past their employment with the crown, and
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the environment minister announced that she will force the Ottawa Hospital to build at Tunney's, a location the hospital twice studied and rejected. Reaction has been fast and furious. Former mayor Jim Durrell said it is appalling...a terrible decision. Councillor Hubley said that traffic will be a huge problem. The Ottawa Citizen's Kelly Egan said, The Ottawa Hospital should reject the Tunney's offer.Why will the environment minister not get out of the way and let the hospital decide for itself where it will build?
Mr. Speaker, I guess my colleague was sleeping when I just spoke, so I will repeat myself.This is a service available to any province, and we do not look at the political affiliation of the province. That is ridiculous as a statement. He would be unable to substantiate it.Did he not hear me describe 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario; stronger links with Israel? If he has a problem with that, I want to know why.
Mr. Speaker, our government recognizes the hard work of seniors who helped build our country. They deserve to retire in dignity.It is why we restored the age of eligibility of OAS and GIS to 65 from 67, a very wrong-headed move by the previous government. We have raised the guaranteed income supplement for 900,000 low-income seniors, and invested over $200 million in senior housing.Make no mistake, our government is there for seniors, now and tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, despite the righteous indignation of the hon. member, we will take no lessons from a party that refused to even initiate negotiations. As the member for Lac-Saint-Jean admitted in a public statement to the press, the previous government did not even start renegotiations with the Americans.From the beginning, we have been in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We understand their concerns. We know their positions and we are defending those positions vigorously in negotiations. We are going to defend our position vigorously in front of tribunals.
Mr. Speaker, what the member is suggesting is that the federal government not pay Ontario's bills.Yesterday, I asked the foreign affairs minister about the federal Liberals paying a private public relations firm $23,000 for Kathleen Wynne's recent trip to Israel. He said, The amount of money he speaks about is an amount of money that was available to anyone.... What a ridiculous answer. That money is not available to anyone unless their circle of friends includes the Prime Minister, Gerald Butts, and Katie Telford.Canadian taxpayers want to know why the federal Liberals paid for Kathleen Wynne's public relations bills.
Mr. Speaker, that is a load of blah, blah, blah.Now we know why the Liberal government was never serious about renewing the softwood lumber agreement. How do we know? The opening salvo of a new trade war with the United States was fired today.The Minister of International Trade had 387 days to defend Canada's forestry workers, but she failed. Now thousands of families in the regions are worried about being caught in the crossfire of this trade war.The Prime Minister's seduction strategy is not working. When will the government start fighting for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, we announced an open and transparent consultation process with the marine industry specifically to ensure that there is no break in services.Nine Coast Guard vessels are currently providing icebreaking services in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and they will be on the St. Lawrence River next year and for several years to come.At some point, we will have to consider other options to ensure that there is no shortage of services. My colleague should not worry people by making such claims.
Mr. Speaker, the fisheries minister had a hard time keeping a straight face in saying that. It is pretty obvious.When it comes to fundraising for the government, following the law is simply not good enough. Let me read something: the performance of your official duties and the arrangement of your private affairs should bear the closest public scrutiny. This is an obligation that is not fully discharged by simply acting within the law.Who said that? It was the Liberal Prime Minister. Again I ask, why does the Prime Minister have such a hard time keeping his word? Why does he say one thing and do something completely different?
Mr. Speaker, last week we learned that the Minister of Democratic Institutions will, at the cost of millions, be mailing out 13 million postcards asking feel-good questions about electoral reform, but this week she said that Canada cannot have a referendum on the very same subject because we have...seen how expensive [referenda] can be.The Chief Electoral Officer has testified that a simple change that is under the minister's own direct control could cut the costs of a referendum in half. Given the minister's day-old enthusiasm for frugality, why will she not just take the CEO's advice and stop pretending that cost is an insurmountable barrier to democracy?
Mr. Speaker, our government held consultations throughout Quebec on various subjects and various files, including softwood lumber.I travelled to Amqui two weeks ago. I went to the Saguenay as did the minister. She consulted Quebec industry representatives. The Minister of Agriculture and his parliamentary secretary took similar action with respect to diafiltered milk.Therefore, it is definitely not true that we are not consulting Quebeckers. That is one of our responsibilities as government.
Mr. Speaker, 240 federal public servants have been forbidden to publicly discuss details of the Liberals politically motivated, sole-sourced Super Hornet purchase, a deal that will cost thousands of jobs and waste billions of taxpayers' dollars.In fact, this gag order forbids them from discussing the project for the rest of their lives, a move condemned as heavy handed by two former federal procurement chiefs.Why are the Liberals muzzling public servants, and what are they trying to hide from Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, the opposition House leader knows that the government always keeps its word. In fact
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question and his interest in this industry in Quebec.From the beginning we have worked with Quebec's industry and its workers to understand their positions and to promote those positions. We are taking into account the distinctions between the industries in Quebec and those in the rest of the country. This is part of our negotiation strategy and we will continue to promote Quebec's interests before the tribunals during the negotiations until we have an agreement.
They seem to find this funny, Mr. Speaker. What Canadians did not find funny was her government's inability to focus on economic growth, on cutting taxes for the middle class, on creating jobs in every region of the country. That is the word we gave to Canadians, and that is what governs our government's actions every single day.
Mr. Speaker, real leadership would be fixing it now.One hundred and thirty first nations, the Province of British Columbia, and the Union of BC Municipalities all said no to the northern gateway pipeline. A Federal Court overturned the Conservative approval and the Liberals made multiple promises to stop it. It sounds like an easy promise to keep, even for the Liberals.However, they are waffling on other promises to protect our coasts.Would the Liberals commit today to introduce legislation to permanently ban crude oil tankers on B.C.'s north coast, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, it is a service that is available to any province of any political orientation, of course. However, since my colleague is asking the question about what this trip gave to Canada: 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario. Other provinces have benefited from the same service. Is the member opposite suggesting we should not help our provinces access foreign commercial markets?Israel has benefited from this visit. Is the member opposite suggesting we weaken ties with Israel?
Mr. Speaker, this government boasts about its lofty principles, but when it comes time to take action, it is a whole different story. The Liberals follow the same approach when it comes to fundraising. They engage in what is called sector-specific financing, where ministers ask for money from people with whom they have a working relationship. For example, a lawyer will pay $1,500 to meet with the Minister of Justice. That is not right, and it is unethical.What will it take for the Liberal government to realize that this is inappropriate, another Gomery Commission?
Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Infrastructure.For the last two years, Prince Edward Island has led this country in export growth and is expected to again this year. The premier has tagged Prince Edward Island Canada's Food Island for its food and fish exports, but we also export many other products, such as aerospace and other goods. Critical to our export needs in all of Atlantic Canada is quality infrastructure that leads us into those export markets.My question to the minister is this. Under the new infrastructure fund, will those critical needs be met for Atlantic Canada?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member that it was the previous government, his party, that let the treaty expire and failed to reinitiate negotiations with our American partners.We are prepared for any eventuality on this file. We understand that there may be a complaint lodged in front of the department of commerce by the American industry. We will defend at every step of the way in front of tribunals our Canadian workers, our Canadian forestry industry. We have never lost. We are confident moving forward. In the meantime, we will continue to negotiate a good settlement for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, for weeks now, we have demanded that the Liberals stop peddling cabinet access to their friends and lobbyists.Fresh off his trip to visit old family friends in Cuba, we learned that the Prime Minister was cosying up to Chinese Communist Party officials who attended a cash for access fundraiser in May. These same officials then made a large payment to the Trudeau Foundation.Has this Prime Minister no shame? I know he admires dictatorships from Havana to Beijing, but this goes too far. Will he stop selling influence to foreign powers?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister that a confidential internal report by his own department called the situation critical.Economic development in the St. Lawrence corridor depends on the seaway being open all winter long. In response to this critical situation, the government says that maybe someday it might think about possibly coming up with a long-term solution for a new fleet.Is that the government's strategy? Instead of leaving the seaway up to chance, why is it not considering buying, or at least renting, the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, as we speak, the Liberal government is making 235 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants involved in replacing our CF-18 fighter jets sign lifetime non-disclosure agreements. That is a first.I have no intention of wasting my question by asking the Liberals what they have to hide. It is clear that they are just going to repeat, as they just did, that they do not want to disclose the information because it is supposedly commercially sensitive and that they are following the appropriate procedures. Instead, I would simply like to know whether public servants are being forced to sign these agreements because they did not agree with the government's decision.
Mr. Speaker, again, we are not talking about Elections Canada rules. We have no problem with political parties doing fundraising according to Elections Canada rules. We are talking about the Prime Minister's own guidelines and the Prime Minister admitting that he was conducting government business at a Liberal fundraiser. Not only is this breaking his own ethical guidelines, this is coming very close to breaking other laws. Again, when will the Liberals admit that they have broken their own guidelines, they are doing the wrong thing, the immoral thing, in doing what could possibly be seen as corrupt, by doing government business at Liberal fundraisers?
Mr. Speaker, I have my doubts about what my colleague just said. I could go on with the long list of ministers who take donors hostage. Worse still is the fact that the Prime Minister himself is involved in this sketchy kind of fundraising, the very same Prime Minister who told his ministers not to get involved in this kind of thing. They should really walk the talk. This is serious. This government has no ethics and could not care less about rules.Will the Liberals stop holding these sketchy fundraising events?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday we learned the details of the plan for the future Maison de Radio-Canada.In 2009, a agreement was reached between Radio-Canada and the City of Montreal. They agreed that 20% of the construction would include social and community housing on this site. However, the developer that is buying the current tower and some of the land is not a signatory to the agreement.How is the minister responsible for social housing going to ensure that this agreement is upheld and when will the construction of this new social housing begin?
Mr. Speaker, this week Cindy Blackstock, AFN, Chiefs of Ontario, and Nishnawbe Aski Nation all filed motions of non-compliance against the government, after already issuing two previous compliance orders.When the Liberals supported our motion, indigenous families hoped things would change, but two days later the government was back in court fighting first nations children. When will the government do what it promised and work with first nations peoples and not against them?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister of what his boss, the Prime Minister of Canada, has said, both in writing and out loud: there should be no preferential access...because [of] financial contributions. When the Liberal Party engages in sectoral financing, it goes against the Prime Minister's own ethics rules.Is it any wonder, though, when the Prime Minister himself is the one leading these kinds of activities, that by sheer coincidence, just a few days later, the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation receives a $1-million donation? Well done.Why is he not following the ethics rules?
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that my colleague would suggest proceeding in a way that is not open and transparent.We announced consultations with the entire marine industry and all partners across the country who have suggestions about the possibility of acquiring vessels for the short term and ensuring that there is no break in services.Instead of moving forward with a single suggestion, we think it is in the interest of all Canadians and taxpayers to have a more open process. That is what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, the NDP can be counted on to defend the rights of the LGBTQ community here and abroad.However, it is not so clear with our Prime Minister, who while in Liberia, refused to condemn the country's criminalization of homosexual activity. According to him, different countries have different paces of evolution in recognizing the rights of LGBTQ persons.Let me remind the Prime Minister that human rights are universal, no matter where people live or who they love. Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs explain this missed opportunity?
Mr. Speaker, the information being referenced by the hon. member is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information that the Government of Canada has.Therefore, it is not unreasonable that the employees who work with that very sensitive information be required to sign non-disclosure agreements.We are determined not to make the same mistakes that the previous government made.
Mr. Speaker, our government put an end to the most costly and longest trade war with the U.S. in 2006. Not only did we do that, but we also renegotiated an extension and a grace period that the present Liberal government has not been able to do with its BFF. There are going to be job losses, mill closures, and it is going to impact small communities from coast to coast to coast.It is not just the forestry workers. It is the small mom-and-pops. It is service industries all across Canada. When
Mr. Speaker, the federal government's management of the icebreaker fleet is a complete fiasco. What is more, rather than purchasing the Aiviq for a price taxpayers can afford, the Liberal government is dragging its feet.If the St. Lawrence seaway were shut down even for just a few days because of a lack of equipment to deal with winter weather conditions, it would be an economic disaster. As the member for the port city of Trois-Rivières, I know what I am talking about.Why is the government refusing to buy the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, it can be hard for parents to save for their children's post-secondary education. Day-to-day expenses, including everything from groceries to housing, always come first. However, saving for a child's education can have a huge impact on his or her future. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour inform this House of the steps the government is taking to help parents save for their children's post-secondary education?
As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, this is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information in the files of the Government of Canada.It is therefore not unreasonable that non-disclosure agreements be signed by those very people who are handling that information.We are determined that this procurement will be handled in the right and proper way, and that the mistakes that were made in the past will not be repeated.
Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member, we are concerned about homelessness in our country, and that is why in budget 2016 we announced an additional $112 million for the homelessness partnering strategy over two years. This was a 50% increase, the first increase since 1999. Our social development minister recently met with provincial and territorial ministers, and homelessness will be a front and centre issue as we develop a national housing strategy.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague can manufacture outrage as much as he wants.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can make donations to political parties in Canada. Those are rules that all political parties follow.He knows that the Trudeau Foundation is an independent foundation. He knows that that particular donation to which he made reference began in January 2014. He knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, what he is not saying is when the cheque was written.This government is trying to defend the indefensible. It is hiding behind a law written for all parliamentarians to claim that it is obeying the law. We are all familiar with the saying that just because it is legal does not mean it is ethical.The Minister of Justice invited lawyers to a cocktail party. If they are ambitious they will attend, because when she appoints judges she will think of the Liberal Party's friends.Will this government respect the House and stop the intimidation with its political fundraising?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague across the aisle knows very well that at all times political parties are raising money. They do so according to Canadian law.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can contribute to these fundraising events. He also knows that all donations of over $200 are proactively disclosed by the election authorities. He also knows, or should know, that the Liberal Party follows all of the election rules, and that is what removes even the suggestion of a conflict of interest.
Mr. Speaker, my constituents and forestry workers deserve to know what their future will be now that the United States trade representative is planning to launch trade action against Canada. Albertans cannot afford another drastic hit. There is no time to waste, too many jobs are at stake.Why will the minister not do her job, and ensure stability and predictability for forestry workers, or does she just not care about Albertans' livelihood?
Mr. Speaker, it is high time that the federal government got to work. The tax refund we have been waiting on so we can fund housing projects for the homeless in Montreal is two months overdue. Eleven projects that would create 235 new social housing units for the homeless are on hold because the federal government refuses to release the $2 million it promised.Will the minister guarantee that all projects will be carried out on time?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in response to a question about the Liberals spending over $23,000 on an external public relations consultant for Kathleen Wynne, for her trip to Israel, the foreign affairs minister said these services are available to anyone.Seriously, anyone can get a free $23,000 PR guy funded by the Liberals? No wonder they have no hope of balancing this budget.Why will the minister not simply admit that Kathleen Wynne got the money because she is a Liberal?
Mr. Speaker, we have been standing up for Canadians from coast to coast to coast on this file since the get-go, which is more than we can say about the previous government.Our strategy remains the right strategy. We are continuing to negotiate on behalf of Canadians. We are continuing to stay in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We are going to defend ourselves in front of trade tribunals, which the previous Liberal governments under prime ministers Chrétien and Martin did. We have never lost. We will continue to move forward in that direction.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite is well aware that Canada has some of the strictest political financing regulations in the world. The same rules apply to all parliamentarians, and our government is very committed to following them. We are perfectly aware that any contribution of more than $200 is disclosed proactively. These are personal donations made by Canadians and Canadian citizens only, and that is what removes any suggestion of a conflict of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest, as my colleague inappropriately suggested was the case.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for all of his hard work on this special committee that is focused on electoral reform. I am sure that the member opposite, who has been asking for a year that we reach out to as many Canadians as possible, will be fully supportive of the third pillar of our outreach. We will be reaching out to Canadians from all walks of life. We want to hear their values on their democratic institutions, and we are counting on every single member of this House to help ensure that their constituents have a say in this third pillar of our outreach.
Mr. Speaker, the disconnect between what the Prime Minister says and what he actually does is growing day by day. First he broke his word to cut taxes for small businesses. Then he broke his commitment to only having a small deficit. We know the deficit is absolutely ballooning. Now he is breaking his own promise to be open, accountable, and ethical. The Prime Minister is very good at putting on a big show and saying all the right things, but then doing something completely different. Why will the Prime Minister not keep his word?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the feigned indignation from my friend across the aisle does not make what he is saying a reality.As he is well aware, that donation to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, which is independent of the government, was discussed in January 2014, when the Conservatives were in power. He knows full well that he is grossly exaggerating the facts when he claims that this was somehow inappropriate.
Mr. Speaker, the government clearly does not want to confirm that it is going to continue having that mandate.Farmers in my riding depend on the ethanol and biodiesel production for their livelihoods, but the Ecofiscal Commission wants to throw them under the bus. This will kill farms and jobs, give us a weaker economy, and a dirtier environment.Why will the Liberals not stand up for farmers and our environment, and maintain the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her constant work on this file on behalf of LGBTQ2 people in our country. It is important that we work both at home and abroad to promote human rights across the world. It is important that in our statements that we advance human rights, that we are sensitive to where countries are in their own evolution, and that we always defend the rights. Over time, the long arc of history bends toward progress, and we are helping with that long arc.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said repeatedly, this kind of fundraising activity is completely normal and all political parties do it. That is also what the Chief Electoral Officer himself has said. My colleague knows very well that we have always followed all fundraising rules. These events are open to thousands of Canadians across the country. The same is true for all political parties.
Mr. Speaker, selling access to government ministers to secure cash for the Liberal Party is the definition of a breach of trust. For days now, the minister of fishy fundraisers has been telling us not to worry, that when ministers attend these exclusive $1,500 events, government business is not discussed. Canadians are tired of this line and deserve better. Can the Liberals tells us, if it is not government business, what the heck were they talking about during these dinners? Hors d'oeuvres?
Mr. Speaker, Canada 2020, a Liberal think tank associated with Liberal lobbyists and good friends of the Liberal Prime Minister, recently introduced a donor agreement to prevent accusations of cash for access for events it holds with Liberal ministers.It is really sad that the Liberals' actions make such agreements necessary. In light of this revelation, why can the Prime Minister not see that even his friends are embarrassed by his fundraising techniques and fear for their own reputations?
Mr. Speaker, Canada's Chief Electoral Officer said that Canada's election financing laws are among the most advanced, constraining, and transparent in the world. What removes even the exaggerated suggestions of my friends on the other side of the aisle from pretending that a conflict interest appears, what removes that doubt, is meticulous following of the rules always. Donations of over $200 are disclosed transparently. That is something we are proud of on this side of the House, and those are rules that we always follow.
Mr. Speaker, the minister has always said that Radio-Canada had a social and historic responsibility to Montreal and to its neighbourhood. Radio-Canada acknowledged that. She also hoped that the more modern and green new facilities would be able to meet our digital realities for years to come.As the project unfolds, we hope that the crown corporation will engage in an open process with its neighbourhood, its employees, and Canadians in general. We will follow the developments of this project with great interest.
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the importance of the energy sector to our economy and to the livelihoods of Canadians. We have been clear that natural resources projects must go forward in an environmentally sustainable manner.The government's final decision on each major resource project will be informed by facts and evidence, including public consultation and the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples.Each major resource project has to be judged on its own merits, in order to determine if it is in the overall Canadian best interests.
Mr. Speaker, if my colleague wants to talk about lack of ethics and sketchy fundraising activities, maybe he should think about what his government did when it appointed people like Mike Duffy, Irving Gerstein, and Pamela Wallin to the Senate specifically to do fundraising for the Conservative Party at taxpayers' expense. That is something our government will never do.
Mr. Speaker, [member spoke in an indigenous language].My question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard. In 1993, the Canadian government made a commitment to supplement the Nunavut agreement with more detailed legislation on Nunavut fisheries regulations. Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. submitted draft Nunavut fisheries regulations to the department in 2013 and presented them again in 2015.Unfortunately, progress has been slow. Will the minister commit to working collaboratively with NTI to finally develop relevant Nunavut fisheries regulations?
Mr. Speaker, last night I had a telephone town hall with the residents of my riding of Essex. In Essex there is a crisis, with one in 11 seniors living in poverty. Some of them are living on one meal a day and are having to choose between paying for their prescription drugs, hydro bills, or food. Our seniors worked hard to build the society we all enjoy today. Now our country owes them a debt of responsibility. The Liberal government needs to do more for our seniors. They deserve to be able to age with dignity. What is the government doing to lift seniors out of poverty?
Mr. Speaker, for $1,500, one can get access to the Prime Minister to further their agenda. Better yet, donations can be made to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.Are dairy and cheese producers going to have to attend a $1,500 Liberal cocktail party?Is that what anti-poverty groups, forestry sector representatives, and consumer advocacy groups are going to have to do as well?Are all Quebeckers going to have to pay $1,500 to the Liberals in order to recover the $50 billion in Quebec taxes to serve the interests of Quebec? Is that what has to happen?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for raising this question.We, too, were disappointed that the plaintiffs decided to file motions again. There had been a very good offer by the chief commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission for us to get the lawyers out of this, and be able to speak in a facilitated discussion to get going on the reforms that are really necessary.I look forward to working with the member and with all first nations to get this kind of reform. That is the real discrimination, of way too many indigenous children in care and being looked after by non-indigenous families.
Mr. Speaker, just because my colleague manufactures a series of outrages across the aisle does not change the facts. The facts are that Canada's electoral fundraising laws and regulations are among the most severe and restrictive in the world. Those are the words of Canada's Chief Electoral Officer.We respect all of the fundraising rules at all times. That is what removes any suggestion, if in fact it is done sincerely, that there is a conflict of interest. I think my colleague on the other side of the House knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, the decision to purchase 18 interim Super Hornets does not make any sense. The commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the Canadian commander of Norad, and the chief of the defence staff have all confirmed that there is no capability gap. What is more, we have now learned that 234 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants have been muzzled for life. They are not allowed to talk about the aircraft procurement file. According to Alan Williams, former assistant deputy minister responsible for equipment, this is unprecedented. There is something fishy about this file. The government is hiding something.How much will it cost to acquire the Super Hornets?
Mr. Speaker, before coming up with this recommendation, the National Capital Commission did a comparative analysis of 12 potential federal sites using 21 criteria. The Tunney's Pasture site best meets the 21 criteria, and its pre-eminence is supported by the most recent data concerning the long-range plans for urban transportation, demographics, and federal land use in the National Capital Region.There were 8,000 people consulted on this, which is 7,999 more than the last government consulted.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the minister's consultations. We are dealing with a government that keeps saying that it is consulting with and listening to Canadians from coast to coast to coast.If 70% of Canadians want a referendum before we change our electoral system, and if the committee has a report that indicates that a referendum is the right way to go, will the minister and the Prime Minister finally listen to Canadians and respect their wishes, or will they do as they please based on their own whims?
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to work in partnership with provinces to have a historic agreement to expand the Canada pension plan, which would improve retirement outcomes, including for women and those with disabilities, in our country. We are aware that more could be done with respect to the dropout provisions, and we have stated that very clearly to the member. However, in order to make changes to the plan, we need agreement from the provinces.Our intent is to pass the bill, as is; however, the Minister of Finance will then raise the dropout provisions at the next provincial and territorial finance ministers' meeting in December, in the context of the triennial review of the Canada pension plan.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for raising this issue. The matter of opioids in this country is a serious public health crisis, and we have taken action on this from day one.I was very pleased early on in my mandate to make sure that naloxone was available to save hundreds, if not thousands, of lives by being available at a non-prescription status. I was also very happy to make sure we got intranasal naloxone into this country and to make sure we got approval for it. I was very happy to take steps to schedule precursors for illicit fentanyl so that it would not be available. We have taken steps to make sure that supervised consumption sites are available as a harm-reduction measure. We brought together hundreds of people, in a manner that has never been done before, including addiction specialists and all other stakeholders, to make sure that action is taken on this very serious matter.
Mr. Speaker, it has been a while since I have heard from the hon. member, too.We listened to Canadians when we proposed the special committee to go out and hear from Canadians. We listened to Canadians and the members of this House when they said to change the composition of the committee so that the majority would be with the opposition.We will listen to Canadians in new and innovative ways. I am looking forward to receiving the committee's report on December 1. We will take that into consideration, along with the feedback we have received from Canadians, before we introduce legislation in this House.
Mr. Speaker, the government is proud of enhancing the transparency of judicial appointments.My Conservative colleague claims that our judicial appointments are not made in an open and transparent manner. However, he knows very well that that is not true. We changed the process in order to increase transparency and to make outstanding Canadians eligible for appointment. We are proud of that.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians voted for a more responsible government that will create a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Canadian farmers use responsible land management practices. The Government of Canada is working with its provincial and territorial counterparts to help farmers reduce greenhouse gas emissions, preserve soil and water resources, and adapt to climate change.
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are doing. We are fighting for the interests of Canadian softwood lumber workers and producers. That is exactly why we have not yet reached an agreement. The United States' offer was not acceptable. We are continuing to work for the industry and the workers. In the meantime, we will put up a fight in court. We have never lost, and we will continue to work toward an agreement that is good for the country.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Oakville for his question and for his leadership on our automotive caucus.Obviously, consumer protection is important to us with respect to road safety.That is why I introduced Bill S-2 in the Parliament of Canada. It will give us the tools we need and allow us to recall and repair any defects that are discovered in our automobiles and equipment.This bill is before Parliament, and I hope that all parties will support it when it is comes to the House.
Mr. Speaker, November 20 to 26 is Education Savings Week, and Canadians are encouraged to save for a child's post-secondary education. That type of education opens doors for better jobs, and helps Canadians obtain in-demand skills and education. The government has two incentives: the Canada learning bond, and the Canada education savings grant. We encourage all Canadians to save for the future and ensure our children are successful.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud of our government's record on the environment and climate change. As we have said many times, our government is committed to a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Bioproducts, including biofuels, can help create new economic opportunities for farmers and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our colleague from Nunavut for the question. I share his view that the fisheries in Nunavut offer an important opportunity for economic development. Our government understands that a sustainable, scientifically based fishery is in the interest of the residents of Nunavut and the interest of Canada. I am happy to tell him that we are proceeding along the lines of the partnership with NTI, as he just identified. We believe in co-management with our territorial partners. Senior officials met with NTI this week. They have scheduled another meeting for December 9. We are going to work with them to get the job done.
Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals ignore farmers, our Conservative government mandated that oil companies blend ethanol and biodiesel in our transportation fuels.This has been good for jobs and the economy, good for the environment, and good for the farmers in my riding. The Ecofiscal Commission has recommended these farmers be left in the dust.Can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food confirm that the Liberals will not reduce the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Mr. Speaker, it would seem that the ministers answering our questions do not agree with the Prime Minister.When they were asked about exclusive fundraising activities this week, they replied that the Liberals were continuing to work hard, and I quote, to bring investors to Canada.The government cannot talk out of both sides of its mouth. Either it confirms that this does not pertain to government business, or it confirms that it is attracting investment. Which is it?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about how vigorously the government is going to defend it. The Liberals budgeted a measly $30 million. They just gave $25 million to a foreign organization with direct and indirect links to Hamas, a jihadist terrorist group. How vigorously is the government going to defend Canadian jobs?Softwood lumber war number five is mere hours away. This means mill closures and job losses for Canadians from coast to coast to coast.The minister has mismanaged this file from day one. When is the government going to stand up for hard-working forestry families from coast to coast to coast?
Mr. Speaker, my friend's exaggerated preamble does not necessarily turn those assertions into facts. What I can assure the House is that unlike the Conservative Party, we will not appoint people like Mike Duffy and Irving Gerstein and Pamela Wallin to the Senate to raise money on the taxpayers' dime for the Conservative Party. That is why, if we want to talk about immoral and inappropriate behaviour, they are on that side of the House.
Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber trade war is reigniting and Quebec has reason to be concerned.In a joint press release with Barack Obama in June, the Prime Minister did not say a word about exempting Quebec from any protectionist agreement. Worse yet, he is okay with a future agreement covering remanufacturers. That is even worse than the bad Conservative agreement that cost us 23,000 jobs in Quebec.Instead of selling out all the sectors of our industry, will the Prime Minister stand up and defend Quebec's forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, for two weeks now, the NDP has been asking the Liberals to fix their flawed CPP expansion bill, Bill C-26.After refusing to address it last night, Liberal MPs once again prevented us from fixing it.The Liberals also refused to answer why the dropout provisions were not included in the first place. Did the minister not realize the impact this would have on women and people living with disabilities?If the Liberal government truly recognizes this problem, then why is it forcing through a flawed bill?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for Malpeque and all of the Atlantic caucus for their advocacy on infrastructure issues in their communities.After hearing their concerns, and the concerns of the province and the mayors, we made changes to allow 60% of P.E.I.'s roads to be eligible for funding compared to the 1% that were eligible under the previous government. These changes will help us grow the economy, connect to communities, and move goods to market.
Mr. Speaker, Canada is facing a crisis in the over-prescription of opioids and with illicit fentanyl and now a wave of street drugs 100 times stronger.The health minister claims to be using every lever at her disposal, but the only action we have seen from the Liberals was an exclusive conference in Ottawa. The doors were closed to addiction doctors and any expert who may have had a different opinion than the Liberals. If the minster takes the opioid crisis seriously, why is she not meeting with addiction doctors and those on the front line who work every single day with this tragic crisis?
Mr. Speaker, my riding of Oakville is part of the network of auto manufacturers in this country. In fact, the Ford assembly plant in my riding employs approximately 4,500 workers.They work hard to ensure that the vehicles and equipment assembled are consistent with Canadian safety standards.Can the minister inform this House on his work with regard to safety of Canadian consumers?
Mr. Speaker, as I said in earlier responses, this is sensitive information. This is critical information. This is information that we simply do not want to have in the wrong hands. Therefore, non-disclosure is a sine qua non for those who are handling that information. We have asked those who are handling that information to sign non-disclosure agreements, which extend past their employment with the crown, and
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the environment minister announced that she will force the Ottawa Hospital to build at Tunney's, a location the hospital twice studied and rejected. Reaction has been fast and furious. Former mayor Jim Durrell said it is appalling...a terrible decision. Councillor Hubley said that traffic will be a huge problem. The Ottawa Citizen's Kelly Egan said, The Ottawa Hospital should reject the Tunney's offer.Why will the environment minister not get out of the way and let the hospital decide for itself where it will build?
Mr. Speaker, I guess my colleague was sleeping when I just spoke, so I will repeat myself.This is a service available to any province, and we do not look at the political affiliation of the province. That is ridiculous as a statement. He would be unable to substantiate it.Did he not hear me describe 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario; stronger links with Israel? If he has a problem with that, I want to know why.
Mr. Speaker, our government recognizes the hard work of seniors who helped build our country. They deserve to retire in dignity.It is why we restored the age of eligibility of OAS and GIS to 65 from 67, a very wrong-headed move by the previous government. We have raised the guaranteed income supplement for 900,000 low-income seniors, and invested over $200 million in senior housing.Make no mistake, our government is there for seniors, now and tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, despite the righteous indignation of the hon. member, we will take no lessons from a party that refused to even initiate negotiations. As the member for Lac-Saint-Jean admitted in a public statement to the press, the previous government did not even start renegotiations with the Americans.From the beginning, we have been in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We understand their concerns. We know their positions and we are defending those positions vigorously in negotiations. We are going to defend our position vigorously in front of tribunals.
Mr. Speaker, what the member is suggesting is that the federal government not pay Ontario's bills.Yesterday, I asked the foreign affairs minister about the federal Liberals paying a private public relations firm $23,000 for Kathleen Wynne's recent trip to Israel. He said, The amount of money he speaks about is an amount of money that was available to anyone.... What a ridiculous answer. That money is not available to anyone unless their circle of friends includes the Prime Minister, Gerald Butts, and Katie Telford.Canadian taxpayers want to know why the federal Liberals paid for Kathleen Wynne's public relations bills.
Mr. Speaker, that is a load of blah, blah, blah.Now we know why the Liberal government was never serious about renewing the softwood lumber agreement. How do we know? The opening salvo of a new trade war with the United States was fired today.The Minister of International Trade had 387 days to defend Canada's forestry workers, but she failed. Now thousands of families in the regions are worried about being caught in the crossfire of this trade war.The Prime Minister's seduction strategy is not working. When will the government start fighting for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, we announced an open and transparent consultation process with the marine industry specifically to ensure that there is no break in services.Nine Coast Guard vessels are currently providing icebreaking services in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and they will be on the St. Lawrence River next year and for several years to come.At some point, we will have to consider other options to ensure that there is no shortage of services. My colleague should not worry people by making such claims.
Mr. Speaker, the fisheries minister had a hard time keeping a straight face in saying that. It is pretty obvious.When it comes to fundraising for the government, following the law is simply not good enough. Let me read something: the performance of your official duties and the arrangement of your private affairs should bear the closest public scrutiny. This is an obligation that is not fully discharged by simply acting within the law.Who said that? It was the Liberal Prime Minister. Again I ask, why does the Prime Minister have such a hard time keeping his word? Why does he say one thing and do something completely different?
Mr. Speaker, last week we learned that the Minister of Democratic Institutions will, at the cost of millions, be mailing out 13 million postcards asking feel-good questions about electoral reform, but this week she said that Canada cannot have a referendum on the very same subject because we have...seen how expensive [referenda] can be.The Chief Electoral Officer has testified that a simple change that is under the minister's own direct control could cut the costs of a referendum in half. Given the minister's day-old enthusiasm for frugality, why will she not just take the CEO's advice and stop pretending that cost is an insurmountable barrier to democracy?
Mr. Speaker, our government held consultations throughout Quebec on various subjects and various files, including softwood lumber.I travelled to Amqui two weeks ago. I went to the Saguenay as did the minister. She consulted Quebec industry representatives. The Minister of Agriculture and his parliamentary secretary took similar action with respect to diafiltered milk.Therefore, it is definitely not true that we are not consulting Quebeckers. That is one of our responsibilities as government.
Mr. Speaker, 240 federal public servants have been forbidden to publicly discuss details of the Liberals politically motivated, sole-sourced Super Hornet purchase, a deal that will cost thousands of jobs and waste billions of taxpayers' dollars.In fact, this gag order forbids them from discussing the project for the rest of their lives, a move condemned as heavy handed by two former federal procurement chiefs.Why are the Liberals muzzling public servants, and what are they trying to hide from Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, the opposition House leader knows that the government always keeps its word. In fact
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question and his interest in this industry in Quebec.From the beginning we have worked with Quebec's industry and its workers to understand their positions and to promote those positions. We are taking into account the distinctions between the industries in Quebec and those in the rest of the country. This is part of our negotiation strategy and we will continue to promote Quebec's interests before the tribunals during the negotiations until we have an agreement.
They seem to find this funny, Mr. Speaker. What Canadians did not find funny was her government's inability to focus on economic growth, on cutting taxes for the middle class, on creating jobs in every region of the country. That is the word we gave to Canadians, and that is what governs our government's actions every single day.
Mr. Speaker, real leadership would be fixing it now.One hundred and thirty first nations, the Province of British Columbia, and the Union of BC Municipalities all said no to the northern gateway pipeline. A Federal Court overturned the Conservative approval and the Liberals made multiple promises to stop it. It sounds like an easy promise to keep, even for the Liberals.However, they are waffling on other promises to protect our coasts.Would the Liberals commit today to introduce legislation to permanently ban crude oil tankers on B.C.'s north coast, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, it is a service that is available to any province of any political orientation, of course. However, since my colleague is asking the question about what this trip gave to Canada: 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario. Other provinces have benefited from the same service. Is the member opposite suggesting we should not help our provinces access foreign commercial markets?Israel has benefited from this visit. Is the member opposite suggesting we weaken ties with Israel?
Mr. Speaker, this government boasts about its lofty principles, but when it comes time to take action, it is a whole different story. The Liberals follow the same approach when it comes to fundraising. They engage in what is called sector-specific financing, where ministers ask for money from people with whom they have a working relationship. For example, a lawyer will pay $1,500 to meet with the Minister of Justice. That is not right, and it is unethical.What will it take for the Liberal government to realize that this is inappropriate, another Gomery Commission?
Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Infrastructure.For the last two years, Prince Edward Island has led this country in export growth and is expected to again this year. The premier has tagged Prince Edward Island Canada's Food Island for its food and fish exports, but we also export many other products, such as aerospace and other goods. Critical to our export needs in all of Atlantic Canada is quality infrastructure that leads us into those export markets.My question to the minister is this. Under the new infrastructure fund, will those critical needs be met for Atlantic Canada?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member that it was the previous government, his party, that let the treaty expire and failed to reinitiate negotiations with our American partners.We are prepared for any eventuality on this file. We understand that there may be a complaint lodged in front of the department of commerce by the American industry. We will defend at every step of the way in front of tribunals our Canadian workers, our Canadian forestry industry. We have never lost. We are confident moving forward. In the meantime, we will continue to negotiate a good settlement for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, for weeks now, we have demanded that the Liberals stop peddling cabinet access to their friends and lobbyists.Fresh off his trip to visit old family friends in Cuba, we learned that the Prime Minister was cosying up to Chinese Communist Party officials who attended a cash for access fundraiser in May. These same officials then made a large payment to the Trudeau Foundation.Has this Prime Minister no shame? I know he admires dictatorships from Havana to Beijing, but this goes too far. Will he stop selling influence to foreign powers?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister that a confidential internal report by his own department called the situation critical.Economic development in the St. Lawrence corridor depends on the seaway being open all winter long. In response to this critical situation, the government says that maybe someday it might think about possibly coming up with a long-term solution for a new fleet.Is that the government's strategy? Instead of leaving the seaway up to chance, why is it not considering buying, or at least renting, the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, as we speak, the Liberal government is making 235 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants involved in replacing our CF-18 fighter jets sign lifetime non-disclosure agreements. That is a first.I have no intention of wasting my question by asking the Liberals what they have to hide. It is clear that they are just going to repeat, as they just did, that they do not want to disclose the information because it is supposedly commercially sensitive and that they are following the appropriate procedures. Instead, I would simply like to know whether public servants are being forced to sign these agreements because they did not agree with the government's decision.
Mr. Speaker, again, we are not talking about Elections Canada rules. We have no problem with political parties doing fundraising according to Elections Canada rules. We are talking about the Prime Minister's own guidelines and the Prime Minister admitting that he was conducting government business at a Liberal fundraiser. Not only is this breaking his own ethical guidelines, this is coming very close to breaking other laws. Again, when will the Liberals admit that they have broken their own guidelines, they are doing the wrong thing, the immoral thing, in doing what could possibly be seen as corrupt, by doing government business at Liberal fundraisers?
Mr. Speaker, I have my doubts about what my colleague just said. I could go on with the long list of ministers who take donors hostage. Worse still is the fact that the Prime Minister himself is involved in this sketchy kind of fundraising, the very same Prime Minister who told his ministers not to get involved in this kind of thing. They should really walk the talk. This is serious. This government has no ethics and could not care less about rules.Will the Liberals stop holding these sketchy fundraising events?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday we learned the details of the plan for the future Maison de Radio-Canada.In 2009, a agreement was reached between Radio-Canada and the City of Montreal. They agreed that 20% of the construction would include social and community housing on this site. However, the developer that is buying the current tower and some of the land is not a signatory to the agreement.How is the minister responsible for social housing going to ensure that this agreement is upheld and when will the construction of this new social housing begin?
Mr. Speaker, this week Cindy Blackstock, AFN, Chiefs of Ontario, and Nishnawbe Aski Nation all filed motions of non-compliance against the government, after already issuing two previous compliance orders.When the Liberals supported our motion, indigenous families hoped things would change, but two days later the government was back in court fighting first nations children. When will the government do what it promised and work with first nations peoples and not against them?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister of what his boss, the Prime Minister of Canada, has said, both in writing and out loud: there should be no preferential access...because [of] financial contributions. When the Liberal Party engages in sectoral financing, it goes against the Prime Minister's own ethics rules.Is it any wonder, though, when the Prime Minister himself is the one leading these kinds of activities, that by sheer coincidence, just a few days later, the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation receives a $1-million donation? Well done.Why is he not following the ethics rules?
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that my colleague would suggest proceeding in a way that is not open and transparent.We announced consultations with the entire marine industry and all partners across the country who have suggestions about the possibility of acquiring vessels for the short term and ensuring that there is no break in services.Instead of moving forward with a single suggestion, we think it is in the interest of all Canadians and taxpayers to have a more open process. That is what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, the NDP can be counted on to defend the rights of the LGBTQ community here and abroad.However, it is not so clear with our Prime Minister, who while in Liberia, refused to condemn the country's criminalization of homosexual activity. According to him, different countries have different paces of evolution in recognizing the rights of LGBTQ persons.Let me remind the Prime Minister that human rights are universal, no matter where people live or who they love. Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs explain this missed opportunity?
Mr. Speaker, the information being referenced by the hon. member is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information that the Government of Canada has.Therefore, it is not unreasonable that the employees who work with that very sensitive information be required to sign non-disclosure agreements.We are determined not to make the same mistakes that the previous government made.
Mr. Speaker, our government put an end to the most costly and longest trade war with the U.S. in 2006. Not only did we do that, but we also renegotiated an extension and a grace period that the present Liberal government has not been able to do with its BFF. There are going to be job losses, mill closures, and it is going to impact small communities from coast to coast to coast.It is not just the forestry workers. It is the small mom-and-pops. It is service industries all across Canada. When
Mr. Speaker, the federal government's management of the icebreaker fleet is a complete fiasco. What is more, rather than purchasing the Aiviq for a price taxpayers can afford, the Liberal government is dragging its feet.If the St. Lawrence seaway were shut down even for just a few days because of a lack of equipment to deal with winter weather conditions, it would be an economic disaster. As the member for the port city of Trois-Rivières, I know what I am talking about.Why is the government refusing to buy the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, it can be hard for parents to save for their children's post-secondary education. Day-to-day expenses, including everything from groceries to housing, always come first. However, saving for a child's education can have a huge impact on his or her future. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour inform this House of the steps the government is taking to help parents save for their children's post-secondary education?
As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, this is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information in the files of the Government of Canada.It is therefore not unreasonable that non-disclosure agreements be signed by those very people who are handling that information.We are determined that this procurement will be handled in the right and proper way, and that the mistakes that were made in the past will not be repeated.
Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member, we are concerned about homelessness in our country, and that is why in budget 2016 we announced an additional $112 million for the homelessness partnering strategy over two years. This was a 50% increase, the first increase since 1999. Our social development minister recently met with provincial and territorial ministers, and homelessness will be a front and centre issue as we develop a national housing strategy.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague can manufacture outrage as much as he wants.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can make donations to political parties in Canada. Those are rules that all political parties follow.He knows that the Trudeau Foundation is an independent foundation. He knows that that particular donation to which he made reference began in January 2014. He knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, what he is not saying is when the cheque was written.This government is trying to defend the indefensible. It is hiding behind a law written for all parliamentarians to claim that it is obeying the law. We are all familiar with the saying that just because it is legal does not mean it is ethical.The Minister of Justice invited lawyers to a cocktail party. If they are ambitious they will attend, because when she appoints judges she will think of the Liberal Party's friends.Will this government respect the House and stop the intimidation with its political fundraising?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague across the aisle knows very well that at all times political parties are raising money. They do so according to Canadian law.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can contribute to these fundraising events. He also knows that all donations of over $200 are proactively disclosed by the election authorities. He also knows, or should know, that the Liberal Party follows all of the election rules, and that is what removes even the suggestion of a conflict of interest.
Mr. Speaker, my constituents and forestry workers deserve to know what their future will be now that the United States trade representative is planning to launch trade action against Canada. Albertans cannot afford another drastic hit. There is no time to waste, too many jobs are at stake.Why will the minister not do her job, and ensure stability and predictability for forestry workers, or does she just not care about Albertans' livelihood?
Mr. Speaker, it is high time that the federal government got to work. The tax refund we have been waiting on so we can fund housing projects for the homeless in Montreal is two months overdue. Eleven projects that would create 235 new social housing units for the homeless are on hold because the federal government refuses to release the $2 million it promised.Will the minister guarantee that all projects will be carried out on time?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in response to a question about the Liberals spending over $23,000 on an external public relations consultant for Kathleen Wynne, for her trip to Israel, the foreign affairs minister said these services are available to anyone.Seriously, anyone can get a free $23,000 PR guy funded by the Liberals? No wonder they have no hope of balancing this budget.Why will the minister not simply admit that Kathleen Wynne got the money because she is a Liberal?
Mr. Speaker, we have been standing up for Canadians from coast to coast to coast on this file since the get-go, which is more than we can say about the previous government.Our strategy remains the right strategy. We are continuing to negotiate on behalf of Canadians. We are continuing to stay in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We are going to defend ourselves in front of trade tribunals, which the previous Liberal governments under prime ministers Chrétien and Martin did. We have never lost. We will continue to move forward in that direction.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite is well aware that Canada has some of the strictest political financing regulations in the world. The same rules apply to all parliamentarians, and our government is very committed to following them. We are perfectly aware that any contribution of more than $200 is disclosed proactively. These are personal donations made by Canadians and Canadian citizens only, and that is what removes any suggestion of a conflict of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest, as my colleague inappropriately suggested was the case.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for all of his hard work on this special committee that is focused on electoral reform. I am sure that the member opposite, who has been asking for a year that we reach out to as many Canadians as possible, will be fully supportive of the third pillar of our outreach. We will be reaching out to Canadians from all walks of life. We want to hear their values on their democratic institutions, and we are counting on every single member of this House to help ensure that their constituents have a say in this third pillar of our outreach.
Mr. Speaker, the disconnect between what the Prime Minister says and what he actually does is growing day by day. First he broke his word to cut taxes for small businesses. Then he broke his commitment to only having a small deficit. We know the deficit is absolutely ballooning. Now he is breaking his own promise to be open, accountable, and ethical. The Prime Minister is very good at putting on a big show and saying all the right things, but then doing something completely different. Why will the Prime Minister not keep his word?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the feigned indignation from my friend across the aisle does not make what he is saying a reality.As he is well aware, that donation to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, which is independent of the government, was discussed in January 2014, when the Conservatives were in power. He knows full well that he is grossly exaggerating the facts when he claims that this was somehow inappropriate.
Mr. Speaker, the government clearly does not want to confirm that it is going to continue having that mandate.Farmers in my riding depend on the ethanol and biodiesel production for their livelihoods, but the Ecofiscal Commission wants to throw them under the bus. This will kill farms and jobs, give us a weaker economy, and a dirtier environment.Why will the Liberals not stand up for farmers and our environment, and maintain the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her constant work on this file on behalf of LGBTQ2 people in our country. It is important that we work both at home and abroad to promote human rights across the world. It is important that in our statements that we advance human rights, that we are sensitive to where countries are in their own evolution, and that we always defend the rights. Over time, the long arc of history bends toward progress, and we are helping with that long arc.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said repeatedly, this kind of fundraising activity is completely normal and all political parties do it. That is also what the Chief Electoral Officer himself has said. My colleague knows very well that we have always followed all fundraising rules. These events are open to thousands of Canadians across the country. The same is true for all political parties.
Mr. Speaker, selling access to government ministers to secure cash for the Liberal Party is the definition of a breach of trust. For days now, the minister of fishy fundraisers has been telling us not to worry, that when ministers attend these exclusive $1,500 events, government business is not discussed. Canadians are tired of this line and deserve better. Can the Liberals tells us, if it is not government business, what the heck were they talking about during these dinners? Hors d'oeuvres?
Mr. Speaker, Canada 2020, a Liberal think tank associated with Liberal lobbyists and good friends of the Liberal Prime Minister, recently introduced a donor agreement to prevent accusations of cash for access for events it holds with Liberal ministers.It is really sad that the Liberals' actions make such agreements necessary. In light of this revelation, why can the Prime Minister not see that even his friends are embarrassed by his fundraising techniques and fear for their own reputations?
Mr. Speaker, Canada's Chief Electoral Officer said that Canada's election financing laws are among the most advanced, constraining, and transparent in the world. What removes even the exaggerated suggestions of my friends on the other side of the aisle from pretending that a conflict interest appears, what removes that doubt, is meticulous following of the rules always. Donations of over $200 are disclosed transparently. That is something we are proud of on this side of the House, and those are rules that we always follow.
Mr. Speaker, the minister has always said that Radio-Canada had a social and historic responsibility to Montreal and to its neighbourhood. Radio-Canada acknowledged that. She also hoped that the more modern and green new facilities would be able to meet our digital realities for years to come.As the project unfolds, we hope that the crown corporation will engage in an open process with its neighbourhood, its employees, and Canadians in general. We will follow the developments of this project with great interest.
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the importance of the energy sector to our economy and to the livelihoods of Canadians. We have been clear that natural resources projects must go forward in an environmentally sustainable manner.The government's final decision on each major resource project will be informed by facts and evidence, including public consultation and the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples.Each major resource project has to be judged on its own merits, in order to determine if it is in the overall Canadian best interests.
Mr. Speaker, if my colleague wants to talk about lack of ethics and sketchy fundraising activities, maybe he should think about what his government did when it appointed people like Mike Duffy, Irving Gerstein, and Pamela Wallin to the Senate specifically to do fundraising for the Conservative Party at taxpayers' expense. That is something our government will never do.
Mr. Speaker, [member spoke in an indigenous language].My question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard. In 1993, the Canadian government made a commitment to supplement the Nunavut agreement with more detailed legislation on Nunavut fisheries regulations. Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. submitted draft Nunavut fisheries regulations to the department in 2013 and presented them again in 2015.Unfortunately, progress has been slow. Will the minister commit to working collaboratively with NTI to finally develop relevant Nunavut fisheries regulations?
Mr. Speaker, last night I had a telephone town hall with the residents of my riding of Essex. In Essex there is a crisis, with one in 11 seniors living in poverty. Some of them are living on one meal a day and are having to choose between paying for their prescription drugs, hydro bills, or food. Our seniors worked hard to build the society we all enjoy today. Now our country owes them a debt of responsibility. The Liberal government needs to do more for our seniors. They deserve to be able to age with dignity. What is the government doing to lift seniors out of poverty?
Mr. Speaker, for $1,500, one can get access to the Prime Minister to further their agenda. Better yet, donations can be made to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.Are dairy and cheese producers going to have to attend a $1,500 Liberal cocktail party?Is that what anti-poverty groups, forestry sector representatives, and consumer advocacy groups are going to have to do as well?Are all Quebeckers going to have to pay $1,500 to the Liberals in order to recover the $50 billion in Quebec taxes to serve the interests of Quebec? Is that what has to happen?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for raising this question.We, too, were disappointed that the plaintiffs decided to file motions again. There had been a very good offer by the chief commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission for us to get the lawyers out of this, and be able to speak in a facilitated discussion to get going on the reforms that are really necessary.I look forward to working with the member and with all first nations to get this kind of reform. That is the real discrimination, of way too many indigenous children in care and being looked after by non-indigenous families.
Mr. Speaker, just because my colleague manufactures a series of outrages across the aisle does not change the facts. The facts are that Canada's electoral fundraising laws and regulations are among the most severe and restrictive in the world. Those are the words of Canada's Chief Electoral Officer.We respect all of the fundraising rules at all times. That is what removes any suggestion, if in fact it is done sincerely, that there is a conflict of interest. I think my colleague on the other side of the House knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, the decision to purchase 18 interim Super Hornets does not make any sense. The commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the Canadian commander of Norad, and the chief of the defence staff have all confirmed that there is no capability gap. What is more, we have now learned that 234 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants have been muzzled for life. They are not allowed to talk about the aircraft procurement file. According to Alan Williams, former assistant deputy minister responsible for equipment, this is unprecedented. There is something fishy about this file. The government is hiding something.How much will it cost to acquire the Super Hornets?
Mr. Speaker, before coming up with this recommendation, the National Capital Commission did a comparative analysis of 12 potential federal sites using 21 criteria. The Tunney's Pasture site best meets the 21 criteria, and its pre-eminence is supported by the most recent data concerning the long-range plans for urban transportation, demographics, and federal land use in the National Capital Region.There were 8,000 people consulted on this, which is 7,999 more than the last government consulted.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the minister's consultations. We are dealing with a government that keeps saying that it is consulting with and listening to Canadians from coast to coast to coast.If 70% of Canadians want a referendum before we change our electoral system, and if the committee has a report that indicates that a referendum is the right way to go, will the minister and the Prime Minister finally listen to Canadians and respect their wishes, or will they do as they please based on their own whims?
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to work in partnership with provinces to have a historic agreement to expand the Canada pension plan, which would improve retirement outcomes, including for women and those with disabilities, in our country. We are aware that more could be done with respect to the dropout provisions, and we have stated that very clearly to the member. However, in order to make changes to the plan, we need agreement from the provinces.Our intent is to pass the bill, as is; however, the Minister of Finance will then raise the dropout provisions at the next provincial and territorial finance ministers' meeting in December, in the context of the triennial review of the Canada pension plan.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for raising this issue. The matter of opioids in this country is a serious public health crisis, and we have taken action on this from day one.I was very pleased early on in my mandate to make sure that naloxone was available to save hundreds, if not thousands, of lives by being available at a non-prescription status. I was also very happy to make sure we got intranasal naloxone into this country and to make sure we got approval for it. I was very happy to take steps to schedule precursors for illicit fentanyl so that it would not be available. We have taken steps to make sure that supervised consumption sites are available as a harm-reduction measure. We brought together hundreds of people, in a manner that has never been done before, including addiction specialists and all other stakeholders, to make sure that action is taken on this very serious matter.
Mr. Speaker, it has been a while since I have heard from the hon. member, too.We listened to Canadians when we proposed the special committee to go out and hear from Canadians. We listened to Canadians and the members of this House when they said to change the composition of the committee so that the majority would be with the opposition.We will listen to Canadians in new and innovative ways. I am looking forward to receiving the committee's report on December 1. We will take that into consideration, along with the feedback we have received from Canadians, before we introduce legislation in this House.
Mr. Speaker, the government is proud of enhancing the transparency of judicial appointments.My Conservative colleague claims that our judicial appointments are not made in an open and transparent manner. However, he knows very well that that is not true. We changed the process in order to increase transparency and to make outstanding Canadians eligible for appointment. We are proud of that.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians voted for a more responsible government that will create a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Canadian farmers use responsible land management practices. The Government of Canada is working with its provincial and territorial counterparts to help farmers reduce greenhouse gas emissions, preserve soil and water resources, and adapt to climate change.
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are doing. We are fighting for the interests of Canadian softwood lumber workers and producers. That is exactly why we have not yet reached an agreement. The United States' offer was not acceptable. We are continuing to work for the industry and the workers. In the meantime, we will put up a fight in court. We have never lost, and we will continue to work toward an agreement that is good for the country.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Oakville for his question and for his leadership on our automotive caucus.Obviously, consumer protection is important to us with respect to road safety.That is why I introduced Bill S-2 in the Parliament of Canada. It will give us the tools we need and allow us to recall and repair any defects that are discovered in our automobiles and equipment.This bill is before Parliament, and I hope that all parties will support it when it is comes to the House.
Mr. Speaker, November 20 to 26 is Education Savings Week, and Canadians are encouraged to save for a child's post-secondary education. That type of education opens doors for better jobs, and helps Canadians obtain in-demand skills and education. The government has two incentives: the Canada learning bond, and the Canada education savings grant. We encourage all Canadians to save for the future and ensure our children are successful.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud of our government's record on the environment and climate change. As we have said many times, our government is committed to a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Bioproducts, including biofuels, can help create new economic opportunities for farmers and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our colleague from Nunavut for the question. I share his view that the fisheries in Nunavut offer an important opportunity for economic development. Our government understands that a sustainable, scientifically based fishery is in the interest of the residents of Nunavut and the interest of Canada. I am happy to tell him that we are proceeding along the lines of the partnership with NTI, as he just identified. We believe in co-management with our territorial partners. Senior officials met with NTI this week. They have scheduled another meeting for December 9. We are going to work with them to get the job done.
Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals ignore farmers, our Conservative government mandated that oil companies blend ethanol and biodiesel in our transportation fuels.This has been good for jobs and the economy, good for the environment, and good for the farmers in my riding. The Ecofiscal Commission has recommended these farmers be left in the dust.Can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food confirm that the Liberals will not reduce the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Most positive speeches
Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals ignore farmers, our Conservative government mandated that oil companies blend ethanol and biodiesel in our transportation fuels.This has been good for jobs and the economy, good for the environment, and good for the farmers in my riding. The Ecofiscal Commission has recommended these farmers be left in the dust.Can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food confirm that the Liberals will not reduce the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our colleague from Nunavut for the question. I share his view that the fisheries in Nunavut offer an important opportunity for economic development. Our government understands that a sustainable, scientifically based fishery is in the interest of the residents of Nunavut and the interest of Canada. I am happy to tell him that we are proceeding along the lines of the partnership with NTI, as he just identified. We believe in co-management with our territorial partners. Senior officials met with NTI this week. They have scheduled another meeting for December 9. We are going to work with them to get the job done.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud of our government's record on the environment and climate change. As we have said many times, our government is committed to a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Bioproducts, including biofuels, can help create new economic opportunities for farmers and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Mr. Speaker, November 20 to 26 is Education Savings Week, and Canadians are encouraged to save for a child's post-secondary education. That type of education opens doors for better jobs, and helps Canadians obtain in-demand skills and education. The government has two incentives: the Canada learning bond, and the Canada education savings grant. We encourage all Canadians to save for the future and ensure our children are successful.
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are doing. We are fighting for the interests of Canadian softwood lumber workers and producers. That is exactly why we have not yet reached an agreement. The United States' offer was not acceptable. We are continuing to work for the industry and the workers. In the meantime, we will put up a fight in court. We have never lost, and we will continue to work toward an agreement that is good for the country.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Oakville for his question and for his leadership on our automotive caucus.Obviously, consumer protection is important to us with respect to road safety.That is why I introduced Bill S-2 in the Parliament of Canada. It will give us the tools we need and allow us to recall and repair any defects that are discovered in our automobiles and equipment.This bill is before Parliament, and I hope that all parties will support it when it is comes to the House.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians voted for a more responsible government that will create a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Canadian farmers use responsible land management practices. The Government of Canada is working with its provincial and territorial counterparts to help farmers reduce greenhouse gas emissions, preserve soil and water resources, and adapt to climate change.
Mr. Speaker, the government is proud of enhancing the transparency of judicial appointments.My Conservative colleague claims that our judicial appointments are not made in an open and transparent manner. However, he knows very well that that is not true. We changed the process in order to increase transparency and to make outstanding Canadians eligible for appointment. We are proud of that.
Mr. Speaker, it has been a while since I have heard from the hon. member, too.We listened to Canadians when we proposed the special committee to go out and hear from Canadians. We listened to Canadians and the members of this House when they said to change the composition of the committee so that the majority would be with the opposition.We will listen to Canadians in new and innovative ways. I am looking forward to receiving the committee's report on December 1. We will take that into consideration, along with the feedback we have received from Canadians, before we introduce legislation in this House.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for raising this issue. The matter of opioids in this country is a serious public health crisis, and we have taken action on this from day one.I was very pleased early on in my mandate to make sure that naloxone was available to save hundreds, if not thousands, of lives by being available at a non-prescription status. I was also very happy to make sure we got intranasal naloxone into this country and to make sure we got approval for it. I was very happy to take steps to schedule precursors for illicit fentanyl so that it would not be available. We have taken steps to make sure that supervised consumption sites are available as a harm-reduction measure. We brought together hundreds of people, in a manner that has never been done before, including addiction specialists and all other stakeholders, to make sure that action is taken on this very serious matter.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to work in partnership with provinces to have a historic agreement to expand the Canada pension plan, which would improve retirement outcomes, including for women and those with disabilities, in our country. We are aware that more could be done with respect to the dropout provisions, and we have stated that very clearly to the member. However, in order to make changes to the plan, we need agreement from the provinces.Our intent is to pass the bill, as is; however, the Minister of Finance will then raise the dropout provisions at the next provincial and territorial finance ministers' meeting in December, in the context of the triennial review of the Canada pension plan.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the minister's consultations. We are dealing with a government that keeps saying that it is consulting with and listening to Canadians from coast to coast to coast.If 70% of Canadians want a referendum before we change our electoral system, and if the committee has a report that indicates that a referendum is the right way to go, will the minister and the Prime Minister finally listen to Canadians and respect their wishes, or will they do as they please based on their own whims?
Mr. Speaker, before coming up with this recommendation, the National Capital Commission did a comparative analysis of 12 potential federal sites using 21 criteria. The Tunney's Pasture site best meets the 21 criteria, and its pre-eminence is supported by the most recent data concerning the long-range plans for urban transportation, demographics, and federal land use in the National Capital Region.There were 8,000 people consulted on this, which is 7,999 more than the last government consulted.
Mr. Speaker, the decision to purchase 18 interim Super Hornets does not make any sense. The commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the Canadian commander of Norad, and the chief of the defence staff have all confirmed that there is no capability gap. What is more, we have now learned that 234 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants have been muzzled for life. They are not allowed to talk about the aircraft procurement file. According to Alan Williams, former assistant deputy minister responsible for equipment, this is unprecedented. There is something fishy about this file. The government is hiding something.How much will it cost to acquire the Super Hornets?
Mr. Speaker, just because my colleague manufactures a series of outrages across the aisle does not change the facts. The facts are that Canada's electoral fundraising laws and regulations are among the most severe and restrictive in the world. Those are the words of Canada's Chief Electoral Officer.We respect all of the fundraising rules at all times. That is what removes any suggestion, if in fact it is done sincerely, that there is a conflict of interest. I think my colleague on the other side of the House knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for raising this question.We, too, were disappointed that the plaintiffs decided to file motions again. There had been a very good offer by the chief commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission for us to get the lawyers out of this, and be able to speak in a facilitated discussion to get going on the reforms that are really necessary.I look forward to working with the member and with all first nations to get this kind of reform. That is the real discrimination, of way too many indigenous children in care and being looked after by non-indigenous families.
Mr. Speaker, for $1,500, one can get access to the Prime Minister to further their agenda. Better yet, donations can be made to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.Are dairy and cheese producers going to have to attend a $1,500 Liberal cocktail party?Is that what anti-poverty groups, forestry sector representatives, and consumer advocacy groups are going to have to do as well?Are all Quebeckers going to have to pay $1,500 to the Liberals in order to recover the $50 billion in Quebec taxes to serve the interests of Quebec? Is that what has to happen?
Mr. Speaker, last night I had a telephone town hall with the residents of my riding of Essex. In Essex there is a crisis, with one in 11 seniors living in poverty. Some of them are living on one meal a day and are having to choose between paying for their prescription drugs, hydro bills, or food. Our seniors worked hard to build the society we all enjoy today. Now our country owes them a debt of responsibility. The Liberal government needs to do more for our seniors. They deserve to be able to age with dignity. What is the government doing to lift seniors out of poverty?
Mr. Speaker, if my colleague wants to talk about lack of ethics and sketchy fundraising activities, maybe he should think about what his government did when it appointed people like Mike Duffy, Irving Gerstein, and Pamela Wallin to the Senate specifically to do fundraising for the Conservative Party at taxpayers' expense. That is something our government will never do.
Mr. Speaker, [member spoke in an indigenous language].My question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard. In 1993, the Canadian government made a commitment to supplement the Nunavut agreement with more detailed legislation on Nunavut fisheries regulations. Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. submitted draft Nunavut fisheries regulations to the department in 2013 and presented them again in 2015.Unfortunately, progress has been slow. Will the minister commit to working collaboratively with NTI to finally develop relevant Nunavut fisheries regulations?
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the importance of the energy sector to our economy and to the livelihoods of Canadians. We have been clear that natural resources projects must go forward in an environmentally sustainable manner.The government's final decision on each major resource project will be informed by facts and evidence, including public consultation and the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples.Each major resource project has to be judged on its own merits, in order to determine if it is in the overall Canadian best interests.
Mr. Speaker, the minister has always said that Radio-Canada had a social and historic responsibility to Montreal and to its neighbourhood. Radio-Canada acknowledged that. She also hoped that the more modern and green new facilities would be able to meet our digital realities for years to come.As the project unfolds, we hope that the crown corporation will engage in an open process with its neighbourhood, its employees, and Canadians in general. We will follow the developments of this project with great interest.
Mr. Speaker, Canada's Chief Electoral Officer said that Canada's election financing laws are among the most advanced, constraining, and transparent in the world. What removes even the exaggerated suggestions of my friends on the other side of the aisle from pretending that a conflict interest appears, what removes that doubt, is meticulous following of the rules always. Donations of over $200 are disclosed transparently. That is something we are proud of on this side of the House, and those are rules that we always follow.
Mr. Speaker, Canada 2020, a Liberal think tank associated with Liberal lobbyists and good friends of the Liberal Prime Minister, recently introduced a donor agreement to prevent accusations of cash for access for events it holds with Liberal ministers.It is really sad that the Liberals' actions make such agreements necessary. In light of this revelation, why can the Prime Minister not see that even his friends are embarrassed by his fundraising techniques and fear for their own reputations?
Mr. Speaker, selling access to government ministers to secure cash for the Liberal Party is the definition of a breach of trust. For days now, the minister of fishy fundraisers has been telling us not to worry, that when ministers attend these exclusive $1,500 events, government business is not discussed. Canadians are tired of this line and deserve better. Can the Liberals tells us, if it is not government business, what the heck were they talking about during these dinners? Hors d'oeuvres?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said repeatedly, this kind of fundraising activity is completely normal and all political parties do it. That is also what the Chief Electoral Officer himself has said. My colleague knows very well that we have always followed all fundraising rules. These events are open to thousands of Canadians across the country. The same is true for all political parties.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her constant work on this file on behalf of LGBTQ2 people in our country. It is important that we work both at home and abroad to promote human rights across the world. It is important that in our statements that we advance human rights, that we are sensitive to where countries are in their own evolution, and that we always defend the rights. Over time, the long arc of history bends toward progress, and we are helping with that long arc.
Mr. Speaker, once again, the feigned indignation from my friend across the aisle does not make what he is saying a reality.As he is well aware, that donation to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, which is independent of the government, was discussed in January 2014, when the Conservatives were in power. He knows full well that he is grossly exaggerating the facts when he claims that this was somehow inappropriate.
Mr. Speaker, the government clearly does not want to confirm that it is going to continue having that mandate.Farmers in my riding depend on the ethanol and biodiesel production for their livelihoods, but the Ecofiscal Commission wants to throw them under the bus. This will kill farms and jobs, give us a weaker economy, and a dirtier environment.Why will the Liberals not stand up for farmers and our environment, and maintain the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Mr. Speaker, the disconnect between what the Prime Minister says and what he actually does is growing day by day. First he broke his word to cut taxes for small businesses. Then he broke his commitment to only having a small deficit. We know the deficit is absolutely ballooning. Now he is breaking his own promise to be open, accountable, and ethical. The Prime Minister is very good at putting on a big show and saying all the right things, but then doing something completely different. Why will the Prime Minister not keep his word?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for all of his hard work on this special committee that is focused on electoral reform. I am sure that the member opposite, who has been asking for a year that we reach out to as many Canadians as possible, will be fully supportive of the third pillar of our outreach. We will be reaching out to Canadians from all walks of life. We want to hear their values on their democratic institutions, and we are counting on every single member of this House to help ensure that their constituents have a say in this third pillar of our outreach.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite is well aware that Canada has some of the strictest political financing regulations in the world. The same rules apply to all parliamentarians, and our government is very committed to following them. We are perfectly aware that any contribution of more than $200 is disclosed proactively. These are personal donations made by Canadians and Canadian citizens only, and that is what removes any suggestion of a conflict of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest, as my colleague inappropriately suggested was the case.
Mr. Speaker, we have been standing up for Canadians from coast to coast to coast on this file since the get-go, which is more than we can say about the previous government.Our strategy remains the right strategy. We are continuing to negotiate on behalf of Canadians. We are continuing to stay in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We are going to defend ourselves in front of trade tribunals, which the previous Liberal governments under prime ministers Chrétien and Martin did. We have never lost. We will continue to move forward in that direction.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in response to a question about the Liberals spending over $23,000 on an external public relations consultant for Kathleen Wynne, for her trip to Israel, the foreign affairs minister said these services are available to anyone.Seriously, anyone can get a free $23,000 PR guy funded by the Liberals? No wonder they have no hope of balancing this budget.Why will the minister not simply admit that Kathleen Wynne got the money because she is a Liberal?
Mr. Speaker, it is high time that the federal government got to work. The tax refund we have been waiting on so we can fund housing projects for the homeless in Montreal is two months overdue. Eleven projects that would create 235 new social housing units for the homeless are on hold because the federal government refuses to release the $2 million it promised.Will the minister guarantee that all projects will be carried out on time?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague across the aisle knows very well that at all times political parties are raising money. They do so according to Canadian law.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can contribute to these fundraising events. He also knows that all donations of over $200 are proactively disclosed by the election authorities. He also knows, or should know, that the Liberal Party follows all of the election rules, and that is what removes even the suggestion of a conflict of interest.
Mr. Speaker, my constituents and forestry workers deserve to know what their future will be now that the United States trade representative is planning to launch trade action against Canada. Albertans cannot afford another drastic hit. There is no time to waste, too many jobs are at stake.Why will the minister not do her job, and ensure stability and predictability for forestry workers, or does she just not care about Albertans' livelihood?
Mr. Speaker, what he is not saying is when the cheque was written.This government is trying to defend the indefensible. It is hiding behind a law written for all parliamentarians to claim that it is obeying the law. We are all familiar with the saying that just because it is legal does not mean it is ethical.The Minister of Justice invited lawyers to a cocktail party. If they are ambitious they will attend, because when she appoints judges she will think of the Liberal Party's friends.Will this government respect the House and stop the intimidation with its political fundraising?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague can manufacture outrage as much as he wants.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can make donations to political parties in Canada. Those are rules that all political parties follow.He knows that the Trudeau Foundation is an independent foundation. He knows that that particular donation to which he made reference began in January 2014. He knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member, we are concerned about homelessness in our country, and that is why in budget 2016 we announced an additional $112 million for the homelessness partnering strategy over two years. This was a 50% increase, the first increase since 1999. Our social development minister recently met with provincial and territorial ministers, and homelessness will be a front and centre issue as we develop a national housing strategy.
As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, this is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information in the files of the Government of Canada.It is therefore not unreasonable that non-disclosure agreements be signed by those very people who are handling that information.We are determined that this procurement will be handled in the right and proper way, and that the mistakes that were made in the past will not be repeated.
Mr. Speaker, it can be hard for parents to save for their children's post-secondary education. Day-to-day expenses, including everything from groceries to housing, always come first. However, saving for a child's education can have a huge impact on his or her future. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour inform this House of the steps the government is taking to help parents save for their children's post-secondary education?
Mr. Speaker, the federal government's management of the icebreaker fleet is a complete fiasco. What is more, rather than purchasing the Aiviq for a price taxpayers can afford, the Liberal government is dragging its feet.If the St. Lawrence seaway were shut down even for just a few days because of a lack of equipment to deal with winter weather conditions, it would be an economic disaster. As the member for the port city of Trois-Rivières, I know what I am talking about.Why is the government refusing to buy the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, our government put an end to the most costly and longest trade war with the U.S. in 2006. Not only did we do that, but we also renegotiated an extension and a grace period that the present Liberal government has not been able to do with its BFF. There are going to be job losses, mill closures, and it is going to impact small communities from coast to coast to coast.It is not just the forestry workers. It is the small mom-and-pops. It is service industries all across Canada. When
Mr. Speaker, the information being referenced by the hon. member is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information that the Government of Canada has.Therefore, it is not unreasonable that the employees who work with that very sensitive information be required to sign non-disclosure agreements.We are determined not to make the same mistakes that the previous government made.
Mr. Speaker, the NDP can be counted on to defend the rights of the LGBTQ community here and abroad.However, it is not so clear with our Prime Minister, who while in Liberia, refused to condemn the country's criminalization of homosexual activity. According to him, different countries have different paces of evolution in recognizing the rights of LGBTQ persons.Let me remind the Prime Minister that human rights are universal, no matter where people live or who they love. Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs explain this missed opportunity?
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that my colleague would suggest proceeding in a way that is not open and transparent.We announced consultations with the entire marine industry and all partners across the country who have suggestions about the possibility of acquiring vessels for the short term and ensuring that there is no break in services.Instead of moving forward with a single suggestion, we think it is in the interest of all Canadians and taxpayers to have a more open process. That is what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister of what his boss, the Prime Minister of Canada, has said, both in writing and out loud: there should be no preferential access...because [of] financial contributions. When the Liberal Party engages in sectoral financing, it goes against the Prime Minister's own ethics rules.Is it any wonder, though, when the Prime Minister himself is the one leading these kinds of activities, that by sheer coincidence, just a few days later, the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation receives a $1-million donation? Well done.Why is he not following the ethics rules?
Mr. Speaker, this week Cindy Blackstock, AFN, Chiefs of Ontario, and Nishnawbe Aski Nation all filed motions of non-compliance against the government, after already issuing two previous compliance orders.When the Liberals supported our motion, indigenous families hoped things would change, but two days later the government was back in court fighting first nations children. When will the government do what it promised and work with first nations peoples and not against them?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday we learned the details of the plan for the future Maison de Radio-Canada.In 2009, a agreement was reached between Radio-Canada and the City of Montreal. They agreed that 20% of the construction would include social and community housing on this site. However, the developer that is buying the current tower and some of the land is not a signatory to the agreement.How is the minister responsible for social housing going to ensure that this agreement is upheld and when will the construction of this new social housing begin?
Mr. Speaker, again, we are not talking about Elections Canada rules. We have no problem with political parties doing fundraising according to Elections Canada rules. We are talking about the Prime Minister's own guidelines and the Prime Minister admitting that he was conducting government business at a Liberal fundraiser. Not only is this breaking his own ethical guidelines, this is coming very close to breaking other laws. Again, when will the Liberals admit that they have broken their own guidelines, they are doing the wrong thing, the immoral thing, in doing what could possibly be seen as corrupt, by doing government business at Liberal fundraisers?
Mr. Speaker, I have my doubts about what my colleague just said. I could go on with the long list of ministers who take donors hostage. Worse still is the fact that the Prime Minister himself is involved in this sketchy kind of fundraising, the very same Prime Minister who told his ministers not to get involved in this kind of thing. They should really walk the talk. This is serious. This government has no ethics and could not care less about rules.Will the Liberals stop holding these sketchy fundraising events?
Mr. Speaker, as we speak, the Liberal government is making 235 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants involved in replacing our CF-18 fighter jets sign lifetime non-disclosure agreements. That is a first.I have no intention of wasting my question by asking the Liberals what they have to hide. It is clear that they are just going to repeat, as they just did, that they do not want to disclose the information because it is supposedly commercially sensitive and that they are following the appropriate procedures. Instead, I would simply like to know whether public servants are being forced to sign these agreements because they did not agree with the government's decision.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister that a confidential internal report by his own department called the situation critical.Economic development in the St. Lawrence corridor depends on the seaway being open all winter long. In response to this critical situation, the government says that maybe someday it might think about possibly coming up with a long-term solution for a new fleet.Is that the government's strategy? Instead of leaving the seaway up to chance, why is it not considering buying, or at least renting, the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, for weeks now, we have demanded that the Liberals stop peddling cabinet access to their friends and lobbyists.Fresh off his trip to visit old family friends in Cuba, we learned that the Prime Minister was cosying up to Chinese Communist Party officials who attended a cash for access fundraiser in May. These same officials then made a large payment to the Trudeau Foundation.Has this Prime Minister no shame? I know he admires dictatorships from Havana to Beijing, but this goes too far. Will he stop selling influence to foreign powers?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member that it was the previous government, his party, that let the treaty expire and failed to reinitiate negotiations with our American partners.We are prepared for any eventuality on this file. We understand that there may be a complaint lodged in front of the department of commerce by the American industry. We will defend at every step of the way in front of tribunals our Canadian workers, our Canadian forestry industry. We have never lost. We are confident moving forward. In the meantime, we will continue to negotiate a good settlement for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Infrastructure.For the last two years, Prince Edward Island has led this country in export growth and is expected to again this year. The premier has tagged Prince Edward Island Canada's Food Island for its food and fish exports, but we also export many other products, such as aerospace and other goods. Critical to our export needs in all of Atlantic Canada is quality infrastructure that leads us into those export markets.My question to the minister is this. Under the new infrastructure fund, will those critical needs be met for Atlantic Canada?
Mr. Speaker, this government boasts about its lofty principles, but when it comes time to take action, it is a whole different story. The Liberals follow the same approach when it comes to fundraising. They engage in what is called sector-specific financing, where ministers ask for money from people with whom they have a working relationship. For example, a lawyer will pay $1,500 to meet with the Minister of Justice. That is not right, and it is unethical.What will it take for the Liberal government to realize that this is inappropriate, another Gomery Commission?
Mr. Speaker, it is a service that is available to any province of any political orientation, of course. However, since my colleague is asking the question about what this trip gave to Canada: 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario. Other provinces have benefited from the same service. Is the member opposite suggesting we should not help our provinces access foreign commercial markets?Israel has benefited from this visit. Is the member opposite suggesting we weaken ties with Israel?
Mr. Speaker, real leadership would be fixing it now.One hundred and thirty first nations, the Province of British Columbia, and the Union of BC Municipalities all said no to the northern gateway pipeline. A Federal Court overturned the Conservative approval and the Liberals made multiple promises to stop it. It sounds like an easy promise to keep, even for the Liberals.However, they are waffling on other promises to protect our coasts.Would the Liberals commit today to introduce legislation to permanently ban crude oil tankers on B.C.'s north coast, yes or no?
They seem to find this funny, Mr. Speaker. What Canadians did not find funny was her government's inability to focus on economic growth, on cutting taxes for the middle class, on creating jobs in every region of the country. That is the word we gave to Canadians, and that is what governs our government's actions every single day.
Mr. Speaker, the opposition House leader knows that the government always keeps its word. In fact
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question and his interest in this industry in Quebec.From the beginning we have worked with Quebec's industry and its workers to understand their positions and to promote those positions. We are taking into account the distinctions between the industries in Quebec and those in the rest of the country. This is part of our negotiation strategy and we will continue to promote Quebec's interests before the tribunals during the negotiations until we have an agreement.
Mr. Speaker, 240 federal public servants have been forbidden to publicly discuss details of the Liberals politically motivated, sole-sourced Super Hornet purchase, a deal that will cost thousands of jobs and waste billions of taxpayers' dollars.In fact, this gag order forbids them from discussing the project for the rest of their lives, a move condemned as heavy handed by two former federal procurement chiefs.Why are the Liberals muzzling public servants, and what are they trying to hide from Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, our government held consultations throughout Quebec on various subjects and various files, including softwood lumber.I travelled to Amqui two weeks ago. I went to the Saguenay as did the minister. She consulted Quebec industry representatives. The Minister of Agriculture and his parliamentary secretary took similar action with respect to diafiltered milk.Therefore, it is definitely not true that we are not consulting Quebeckers. That is one of our responsibilities as government.
Mr. Speaker, last week we learned that the Minister of Democratic Institutions will, at the cost of millions, be mailing out 13 million postcards asking feel-good questions about electoral reform, but this week she said that Canada cannot have a referendum on the very same subject because we have...seen how expensive [referenda] can be.The Chief Electoral Officer has testified that a simple change that is under the minister's own direct control could cut the costs of a referendum in half. Given the minister's day-old enthusiasm for frugality, why will she not just take the CEO's advice and stop pretending that cost is an insurmountable barrier to democracy?
Mr. Speaker, the fisheries minister had a hard time keeping a straight face in saying that. It is pretty obvious.When it comes to fundraising for the government, following the law is simply not good enough. Let me read something: the performance of your official duties and the arrangement of your private affairs should bear the closest public scrutiny. This is an obligation that is not fully discharged by simply acting within the law.Who said that? It was the Liberal Prime Minister. Again I ask, why does the Prime Minister have such a hard time keeping his word? Why does he say one thing and do something completely different?
Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, we announced an open and transparent consultation process with the marine industry specifically to ensure that there is no break in services.Nine Coast Guard vessels are currently providing icebreaking services in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and they will be on the St. Lawrence River next year and for several years to come.At some point, we will have to consider other options to ensure that there is no shortage of services. My colleague should not worry people by making such claims.
Mr. Speaker, that is a load of blah, blah, blah.Now we know why the Liberal government was never serious about renewing the softwood lumber agreement. How do we know? The opening salvo of a new trade war with the United States was fired today.The Minister of International Trade had 387 days to defend Canada's forestry workers, but she failed. Now thousands of families in the regions are worried about being caught in the crossfire of this trade war.The Prime Minister's seduction strategy is not working. When will the government start fighting for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, what the member is suggesting is that the federal government not pay Ontario's bills.Yesterday, I asked the foreign affairs minister about the federal Liberals paying a private public relations firm $23,000 for Kathleen Wynne's recent trip to Israel. He said, The amount of money he speaks about is an amount of money that was available to anyone.... What a ridiculous answer. That money is not available to anyone unless their circle of friends includes the Prime Minister, Gerald Butts, and Katie Telford.Canadian taxpayers want to know why the federal Liberals paid for Kathleen Wynne's public relations bills.
Mr. Speaker, despite the righteous indignation of the hon. member, we will take no lessons from a party that refused to even initiate negotiations. As the member for Lac-Saint-Jean admitted in a public statement to the press, the previous government did not even start renegotiations with the Americans.From the beginning, we have been in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We understand their concerns. We know their positions and we are defending those positions vigorously in negotiations. We are going to defend our position vigorously in front of tribunals.
Mr. Speaker, our government recognizes the hard work of seniors who helped build our country. They deserve to retire in dignity.It is why we restored the age of eligibility of OAS and GIS to 65 from 67, a very wrong-headed move by the previous government. We have raised the guaranteed income supplement for 900,000 low-income seniors, and invested over $200 million in senior housing.Make no mistake, our government is there for seniors, now and tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, I guess my colleague was sleeping when I just spoke, so I will repeat myself.This is a service available to any province, and we do not look at the political affiliation of the province. That is ridiculous as a statement. He would be unable to substantiate it.Did he not hear me describe 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario; stronger links with Israel? If he has a problem with that, I want to know why.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the environment minister announced that she will force the Ottawa Hospital to build at Tunney's, a location the hospital twice studied and rejected. Reaction has been fast and furious. Former mayor Jim Durrell said it is appalling...a terrible decision. Councillor Hubley said that traffic will be a huge problem. The Ottawa Citizen's Kelly Egan said, The Ottawa Hospital should reject the Tunney's offer.Why will the environment minister not get out of the way and let the hospital decide for itself where it will build?
Mr. Speaker, as I said in earlier responses, this is sensitive information. This is critical information. This is information that we simply do not want to have in the wrong hands. Therefore, non-disclosure is a sine qua non for those who are handling that information. We have asked those who are handling that information to sign non-disclosure agreements, which extend past their employment with the crown, and
Mr. Speaker, my riding of Oakville is part of the network of auto manufacturers in this country. In fact, the Ford assembly plant in my riding employs approximately 4,500 workers.They work hard to ensure that the vehicles and equipment assembled are consistent with Canadian safety standards.Can the minister inform this House on his work with regard to safety of Canadian consumers?
Mr. Speaker, Canada is facing a crisis in the over-prescription of opioids and with illicit fentanyl and now a wave of street drugs 100 times stronger.The health minister claims to be using every lever at her disposal, but the only action we have seen from the Liberals was an exclusive conference in Ottawa. The doors were closed to addiction doctors and any expert who may have had a different opinion than the Liberals. If the minster takes the opioid crisis seriously, why is she not meeting with addiction doctors and those on the front line who work every single day with this tragic crisis?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for Malpeque and all of the Atlantic caucus for their advocacy on infrastructure issues in their communities.After hearing their concerns, and the concerns of the province and the mayors, we made changes to allow 60% of P.E.I.'s roads to be eligible for funding compared to the 1% that were eligible under the previous government. These changes will help us grow the economy, connect to communities, and move goods to market.
Mr. Speaker, for two weeks now, the NDP has been asking the Liberals to fix their flawed CPP expansion bill, Bill C-26.After refusing to address it last night, Liberal MPs once again prevented us from fixing it.The Liberals also refused to answer why the dropout provisions were not included in the first place. Did the minister not realize the impact this would have on women and people living with disabilities?If the Liberal government truly recognizes this problem, then why is it forcing through a flawed bill?
Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber trade war is reigniting and Quebec has reason to be concerned.In a joint press release with Barack Obama in June, the Prime Minister did not say a word about exempting Quebec from any protectionist agreement. Worse yet, he is okay with a future agreement covering remanufacturers. That is even worse than the bad Conservative agreement that cost us 23,000 jobs in Quebec.Instead of selling out all the sectors of our industry, will the Prime Minister stand up and defend Quebec's forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, my friend's exaggerated preamble does not necessarily turn those assertions into facts. What I can assure the House is that unlike the Conservative Party, we will not appoint people like Mike Duffy and Irving Gerstein and Pamela Wallin to the Senate to raise money on the taxpayers' dime for the Conservative Party. That is why, if we want to talk about immoral and inappropriate behaviour, they are on that side of the House.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about how vigorously the government is going to defend it. The Liberals budgeted a measly $30 million. They just gave $25 million to a foreign organization with direct and indirect links to Hamas, a jihadist terrorist group. How vigorously is the government going to defend Canadian jobs?Softwood lumber war number five is mere hours away. This means mill closures and job losses for Canadians from coast to coast to coast.The minister has mismanaged this file from day one. When is the government going to stand up for hard-working forestry families from coast to coast to coast?
Mr. Speaker, it would seem that the ministers answering our questions do not agree with the Prime Minister.When they were asked about exclusive fundraising activities this week, they replied that the Liberals were continuing to work hard, and I quote, to bring investors to Canada.The government cannot talk out of both sides of its mouth. Either it confirms that this does not pertain to government business, or it confirms that it is attracting investment. Which is it?
Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals ignore farmers, our Conservative government mandated that oil companies blend ethanol and biodiesel in our transportation fuels.This has been good for jobs and the economy, good for the environment, and good for the farmers in my riding. The Ecofiscal Commission has recommended these farmers be left in the dust.Can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food confirm that the Liberals will not reduce the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our colleague from Nunavut for the question. I share his view that the fisheries in Nunavut offer an important opportunity for economic development. Our government understands that a sustainable, scientifically based fishery is in the interest of the residents of Nunavut and the interest of Canada. I am happy to tell him that we are proceeding along the lines of the partnership with NTI, as he just identified. We believe in co-management with our territorial partners. Senior officials met with NTI this week. They have scheduled another meeting for December 9. We are going to work with them to get the job done.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud of our government's record on the environment and climate change. As we have said many times, our government is committed to a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Bioproducts, including biofuels, can help create new economic opportunities for farmers and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Mr. Speaker, November 20 to 26 is Education Savings Week, and Canadians are encouraged to save for a child's post-secondary education. That type of education opens doors for better jobs, and helps Canadians obtain in-demand skills and education. The government has two incentives: the Canada learning bond, and the Canada education savings grant. We encourage all Canadians to save for the future and ensure our children are successful.
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are doing. We are fighting for the interests of Canadian softwood lumber workers and producers. That is exactly why we have not yet reached an agreement. The United States' offer was not acceptable. We are continuing to work for the industry and the workers. In the meantime, we will put up a fight in court. We have never lost, and we will continue to work toward an agreement that is good for the country.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Oakville for his question and for his leadership on our automotive caucus.Obviously, consumer protection is important to us with respect to road safety.That is why I introduced Bill S-2 in the Parliament of Canada. It will give us the tools we need and allow us to recall and repair any defects that are discovered in our automobiles and equipment.This bill is before Parliament, and I hope that all parties will support it when it is comes to the House.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians voted for a more responsible government that will create a cleaner environment and a more innovative economy. Canadian farmers use responsible land management practices. The Government of Canada is working with its provincial and territorial counterparts to help farmers reduce greenhouse gas emissions, preserve soil and water resources, and adapt to climate change.
Mr. Speaker, the government is proud of enhancing the transparency of judicial appointments.My Conservative colleague claims that our judicial appointments are not made in an open and transparent manner. However, he knows very well that that is not true. We changed the process in order to increase transparency and to make outstanding Canadians eligible for appointment. We are proud of that.
Mr. Speaker, it has been a while since I have heard from the hon. member, too.We listened to Canadians when we proposed the special committee to go out and hear from Canadians. We listened to Canadians and the members of this House when they said to change the composition of the committee so that the majority would be with the opposition.We will listen to Canadians in new and innovative ways. I am looking forward to receiving the committee's report on December 1. We will take that into consideration, along with the feedback we have received from Canadians, before we introduce legislation in this House.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for raising this issue. The matter of opioids in this country is a serious public health crisis, and we have taken action on this from day one.I was very pleased early on in my mandate to make sure that naloxone was available to save hundreds, if not thousands, of lives by being available at a non-prescription status. I was also very happy to make sure we got intranasal naloxone into this country and to make sure we got approval for it. I was very happy to take steps to schedule precursors for illicit fentanyl so that it would not be available. We have taken steps to make sure that supervised consumption sites are available as a harm-reduction measure. We brought together hundreds of people, in a manner that has never been done before, including addiction specialists and all other stakeholders, to make sure that action is taken on this very serious matter.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud to work in partnership with provinces to have a historic agreement to expand the Canada pension plan, which would improve retirement outcomes, including for women and those with disabilities, in our country. We are aware that more could be done with respect to the dropout provisions, and we have stated that very clearly to the member. However, in order to make changes to the plan, we need agreement from the provinces.Our intent is to pass the bill, as is; however, the Minister of Finance will then raise the dropout provisions at the next provincial and territorial finance ministers' meeting in December, in the context of the triennial review of the Canada pension plan.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the minister's consultations. We are dealing with a government that keeps saying that it is consulting with and listening to Canadians from coast to coast to coast.If 70% of Canadians want a referendum before we change our electoral system, and if the committee has a report that indicates that a referendum is the right way to go, will the minister and the Prime Minister finally listen to Canadians and respect their wishes, or will they do as they please based on their own whims?
Mr. Speaker, before coming up with this recommendation, the National Capital Commission did a comparative analysis of 12 potential federal sites using 21 criteria. The Tunney's Pasture site best meets the 21 criteria, and its pre-eminence is supported by the most recent data concerning the long-range plans for urban transportation, demographics, and federal land use in the National Capital Region.There were 8,000 people consulted on this, which is 7,999 more than the last government consulted.
Mr. Speaker, the decision to purchase 18 interim Super Hornets does not make any sense. The commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the Canadian commander of Norad, and the chief of the defence staff have all confirmed that there is no capability gap. What is more, we have now learned that 234 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants have been muzzled for life. They are not allowed to talk about the aircraft procurement file. According to Alan Williams, former assistant deputy minister responsible for equipment, this is unprecedented. There is something fishy about this file. The government is hiding something.How much will it cost to acquire the Super Hornets?
Mr. Speaker, just because my colleague manufactures a series of outrages across the aisle does not change the facts. The facts are that Canada's electoral fundraising laws and regulations are among the most severe and restrictive in the world. Those are the words of Canada's Chief Electoral Officer.We respect all of the fundraising rules at all times. That is what removes any suggestion, if in fact it is done sincerely, that there is a conflict of interest. I think my colleague on the other side of the House knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for raising this question.We, too, were disappointed that the plaintiffs decided to file motions again. There had been a very good offer by the chief commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission for us to get the lawyers out of this, and be able to speak in a facilitated discussion to get going on the reforms that are really necessary.I look forward to working with the member and with all first nations to get this kind of reform. That is the real discrimination, of way too many indigenous children in care and being looked after by non-indigenous families.
Mr. Speaker, for $1,500, one can get access to the Prime Minister to further their agenda. Better yet, donations can be made to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.Are dairy and cheese producers going to have to attend a $1,500 Liberal cocktail party?Is that what anti-poverty groups, forestry sector representatives, and consumer advocacy groups are going to have to do as well?Are all Quebeckers going to have to pay $1,500 to the Liberals in order to recover the $50 billion in Quebec taxes to serve the interests of Quebec? Is that what has to happen?
Mr. Speaker, last night I had a telephone town hall with the residents of my riding of Essex. In Essex there is a crisis, with one in 11 seniors living in poverty. Some of them are living on one meal a day and are having to choose between paying for their prescription drugs, hydro bills, or food. Our seniors worked hard to build the society we all enjoy today. Now our country owes them a debt of responsibility. The Liberal government needs to do more for our seniors. They deserve to be able to age with dignity. What is the government doing to lift seniors out of poverty?
Mr. Speaker, if my colleague wants to talk about lack of ethics and sketchy fundraising activities, maybe he should think about what his government did when it appointed people like Mike Duffy, Irving Gerstein, and Pamela Wallin to the Senate specifically to do fundraising for the Conservative Party at taxpayers' expense. That is something our government will never do.
Mr. Speaker, [member spoke in an indigenous language].My question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard. In 1993, the Canadian government made a commitment to supplement the Nunavut agreement with more detailed legislation on Nunavut fisheries regulations. Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. submitted draft Nunavut fisheries regulations to the department in 2013 and presented them again in 2015.Unfortunately, progress has been slow. Will the minister commit to working collaboratively with NTI to finally develop relevant Nunavut fisheries regulations?
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the importance of the energy sector to our economy and to the livelihoods of Canadians. We have been clear that natural resources projects must go forward in an environmentally sustainable manner.The government's final decision on each major resource project will be informed by facts and evidence, including public consultation and the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples.Each major resource project has to be judged on its own merits, in order to determine if it is in the overall Canadian best interests.
Mr. Speaker, the minister has always said that Radio-Canada had a social and historic responsibility to Montreal and to its neighbourhood. Radio-Canada acknowledged that. She also hoped that the more modern and green new facilities would be able to meet our digital realities for years to come.As the project unfolds, we hope that the crown corporation will engage in an open process with its neighbourhood, its employees, and Canadians in general. We will follow the developments of this project with great interest.
Mr. Speaker, Canada's Chief Electoral Officer said that Canada's election financing laws are among the most advanced, constraining, and transparent in the world. What removes even the exaggerated suggestions of my friends on the other side of the aisle from pretending that a conflict interest appears, what removes that doubt, is meticulous following of the rules always. Donations of over $200 are disclosed transparently. That is something we are proud of on this side of the House, and those are rules that we always follow.
Mr. Speaker, Canada 2020, a Liberal think tank associated with Liberal lobbyists and good friends of the Liberal Prime Minister, recently introduced a donor agreement to prevent accusations of cash for access for events it holds with Liberal ministers.It is really sad that the Liberals' actions make such agreements necessary. In light of this revelation, why can the Prime Minister not see that even his friends are embarrassed by his fundraising techniques and fear for their own reputations?
Mr. Speaker, selling access to government ministers to secure cash for the Liberal Party is the definition of a breach of trust. For days now, the minister of fishy fundraisers has been telling us not to worry, that when ministers attend these exclusive $1,500 events, government business is not discussed. Canadians are tired of this line and deserve better. Can the Liberals tells us, if it is not government business, what the heck were they talking about during these dinners? Hors d'oeuvres?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said repeatedly, this kind of fundraising activity is completely normal and all political parties do it. That is also what the Chief Electoral Officer himself has said. My colleague knows very well that we have always followed all fundraising rules. These events are open to thousands of Canadians across the country. The same is true for all political parties.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her constant work on this file on behalf of LGBTQ2 people in our country. It is important that we work both at home and abroad to promote human rights across the world. It is important that in our statements that we advance human rights, that we are sensitive to where countries are in their own evolution, and that we always defend the rights. Over time, the long arc of history bends toward progress, and we are helping with that long arc.
Mr. Speaker, once again, the feigned indignation from my friend across the aisle does not make what he is saying a reality.As he is well aware, that donation to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, which is independent of the government, was discussed in January 2014, when the Conservatives were in power. He knows full well that he is grossly exaggerating the facts when he claims that this was somehow inappropriate.
Mr. Speaker, the government clearly does not want to confirm that it is going to continue having that mandate.Farmers in my riding depend on the ethanol and biodiesel production for their livelihoods, but the Ecofiscal Commission wants to throw them under the bus. This will kill farms and jobs, give us a weaker economy, and a dirtier environment.Why will the Liberals not stand up for farmers and our environment, and maintain the ethanol and biodiesel mandate?
Mr. Speaker, the disconnect between what the Prime Minister says and what he actually does is growing day by day. First he broke his word to cut taxes for small businesses. Then he broke his commitment to only having a small deficit. We know the deficit is absolutely ballooning. Now he is breaking his own promise to be open, accountable, and ethical. The Prime Minister is very good at putting on a big show and saying all the right things, but then doing something completely different. Why will the Prime Minister not keep his word?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for all of his hard work on this special committee that is focused on electoral reform. I am sure that the member opposite, who has been asking for a year that we reach out to as many Canadians as possible, will be fully supportive of the third pillar of our outreach. We will be reaching out to Canadians from all walks of life. We want to hear their values on their democratic institutions, and we are counting on every single member of this House to help ensure that their constituents have a say in this third pillar of our outreach.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite is well aware that Canada has some of the strictest political financing regulations in the world. The same rules apply to all parliamentarians, and our government is very committed to following them. We are perfectly aware that any contribution of more than $200 is disclosed proactively. These are personal donations made by Canadians and Canadian citizens only, and that is what removes any suggestion of a conflict of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest, as my colleague inappropriately suggested was the case.
Mr. Speaker, we have been standing up for Canadians from coast to coast to coast on this file since the get-go, which is more than we can say about the previous government.Our strategy remains the right strategy. We are continuing to negotiate on behalf of Canadians. We are continuing to stay in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We are going to defend ourselves in front of trade tribunals, which the previous Liberal governments under prime ministers Chrétien and Martin did. We have never lost. We will continue to move forward in that direction.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in response to a question about the Liberals spending over $23,000 on an external public relations consultant for Kathleen Wynne, for her trip to Israel, the foreign affairs minister said these services are available to anyone.Seriously, anyone can get a free $23,000 PR guy funded by the Liberals? No wonder they have no hope of balancing this budget.Why will the minister not simply admit that Kathleen Wynne got the money because she is a Liberal?
Mr. Speaker, it is high time that the federal government got to work. The tax refund we have been waiting on so we can fund housing projects for the homeless in Montreal is two months overdue. Eleven projects that would create 235 new social housing units for the homeless are on hold because the federal government refuses to release the $2 million it promised.Will the minister guarantee that all projects will be carried out on time?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague across the aisle knows very well that at all times political parties are raising money. They do so according to Canadian law.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can contribute to these fundraising events. He also knows that all donations of over $200 are proactively disclosed by the election authorities. He also knows, or should know, that the Liberal Party follows all of the election rules, and that is what removes even the suggestion of a conflict of interest.
Mr. Speaker, my constituents and forestry workers deserve to know what their future will be now that the United States trade representative is planning to launch trade action against Canada. Albertans cannot afford another drastic hit. There is no time to waste, too many jobs are at stake.Why will the minister not do her job, and ensure stability and predictability for forestry workers, or does she just not care about Albertans' livelihood?
Mr. Speaker, what he is not saying is when the cheque was written.This government is trying to defend the indefensible. It is hiding behind a law written for all parliamentarians to claim that it is obeying the law. We are all familiar with the saying that just because it is legal does not mean it is ethical.The Minister of Justice invited lawyers to a cocktail party. If they are ambitious they will attend, because when she appoints judges she will think of the Liberal Party's friends.Will this government respect the House and stop the intimidation with its political fundraising?
Mr. Speaker, my colleague can manufacture outrage as much as he wants.He knows very well that only Canadian citizens can make donations to political parties in Canada. Those are rules that all political parties follow.He knows that the Trudeau Foundation is an independent foundation. He knows that that particular donation to which he made reference began in January 2014. He knows that very well.
Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member, we are concerned about homelessness in our country, and that is why in budget 2016 we announced an additional $112 million for the homelessness partnering strategy over two years. This was a 50% increase, the first increase since 1999. Our social development minister recently met with provincial and territorial ministers, and homelessness will be a front and centre issue as we develop a national housing strategy.
As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, this is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information in the files of the Government of Canada.It is therefore not unreasonable that non-disclosure agreements be signed by those very people who are handling that information.We are determined that this procurement will be handled in the right and proper way, and that the mistakes that were made in the past will not be repeated.
Mr. Speaker, it can be hard for parents to save for their children's post-secondary education. Day-to-day expenses, including everything from groceries to housing, always come first. However, saving for a child's education can have a huge impact on his or her future. Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour inform this House of the steps the government is taking to help parents save for their children's post-secondary education?
Mr. Speaker, the federal government's management of the icebreaker fleet is a complete fiasco. What is more, rather than purchasing the Aiviq for a price taxpayers can afford, the Liberal government is dragging its feet.If the St. Lawrence seaway were shut down even for just a few days because of a lack of equipment to deal with winter weather conditions, it would be an economic disaster. As the member for the port city of Trois-Rivières, I know what I am talking about.Why is the government refusing to buy the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, our government put an end to the most costly and longest trade war with the U.S. in 2006. Not only did we do that, but we also renegotiated an extension and a grace period that the present Liberal government has not been able to do with its BFF. There are going to be job losses, mill closures, and it is going to impact small communities from coast to coast to coast.It is not just the forestry workers. It is the small mom-and-pops. It is service industries all across Canada. When
Mr. Speaker, the information being referenced by the hon. member is possibly some of the most commercially and security sensitive information that the Government of Canada has.Therefore, it is not unreasonable that the employees who work with that very sensitive information be required to sign non-disclosure agreements.We are determined not to make the same mistakes that the previous government made.
Mr. Speaker, the NDP can be counted on to defend the rights of the LGBTQ community here and abroad.However, it is not so clear with our Prime Minister, who while in Liberia, refused to condemn the country's criminalization of homosexual activity. According to him, different countries have different paces of evolution in recognizing the rights of LGBTQ persons.Let me remind the Prime Minister that human rights are universal, no matter where people live or who they love. Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs explain this missed opportunity?
Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that my colleague would suggest proceeding in a way that is not open and transparent.We announced consultations with the entire marine industry and all partners across the country who have suggestions about the possibility of acquiring vessels for the short term and ensuring that there is no break in services.Instead of moving forward with a single suggestion, we think it is in the interest of all Canadians and taxpayers to have a more open process. That is what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister of what his boss, the Prime Minister of Canada, has said, both in writing and out loud: there should be no preferential access...because [of] financial contributions. When the Liberal Party engages in sectoral financing, it goes against the Prime Minister's own ethics rules.Is it any wonder, though, when the Prime Minister himself is the one leading these kinds of activities, that by sheer coincidence, just a few days later, the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation receives a $1-million donation? Well done.Why is he not following the ethics rules?
Mr. Speaker, this week Cindy Blackstock, AFN, Chiefs of Ontario, and Nishnawbe Aski Nation all filed motions of non-compliance against the government, after already issuing two previous compliance orders.When the Liberals supported our motion, indigenous families hoped things would change, but two days later the government was back in court fighting first nations children. When will the government do what it promised and work with first nations peoples and not against them?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday we learned the details of the plan for the future Maison de Radio-Canada.In 2009, a agreement was reached between Radio-Canada and the City of Montreal. They agreed that 20% of the construction would include social and community housing on this site. However, the developer that is buying the current tower and some of the land is not a signatory to the agreement.How is the minister responsible for social housing going to ensure that this agreement is upheld and when will the construction of this new social housing begin?
Mr. Speaker, again, we are not talking about Elections Canada rules. We have no problem with political parties doing fundraising according to Elections Canada rules. We are talking about the Prime Minister's own guidelines and the Prime Minister admitting that he was conducting government business at a Liberal fundraiser. Not only is this breaking his own ethical guidelines, this is coming very close to breaking other laws. Again, when will the Liberals admit that they have broken their own guidelines, they are doing the wrong thing, the immoral thing, in doing what could possibly be seen as corrupt, by doing government business at Liberal fundraisers?
Mr. Speaker, I have my doubts about what my colleague just said. I could go on with the long list of ministers who take donors hostage. Worse still is the fact that the Prime Minister himself is involved in this sketchy kind of fundraising, the very same Prime Minister who told his ministers not to get involved in this kind of thing. They should really walk the talk. This is serious. This government has no ethics and could not care less about rules.Will the Liberals stop holding these sketchy fundraising events?
Mr. Speaker, as we speak, the Liberal government is making 235 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and public servants involved in replacing our CF-18 fighter jets sign lifetime non-disclosure agreements. That is a first.I have no intention of wasting my question by asking the Liberals what they have to hide. It is clear that they are just going to repeat, as they just did, that they do not want to disclose the information because it is supposedly commercially sensitive and that they are following the appropriate procedures. Instead, I would simply like to know whether public servants are being forced to sign these agreements because they did not agree with the government's decision.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister that a confidential internal report by his own department called the situation critical.Economic development in the St. Lawrence corridor depends on the seaway being open all winter long. In response to this critical situation, the government says that maybe someday it might think about possibly coming up with a long-term solution for a new fleet.Is that the government's strategy? Instead of leaving the seaway up to chance, why is it not considering buying, or at least renting, the Aiviq?
Mr. Speaker, for weeks now, we have demanded that the Liberals stop peddling cabinet access to their friends and lobbyists.Fresh off his trip to visit old family friends in Cuba, we learned that the Prime Minister was cosying up to Chinese Communist Party officials who attended a cash for access fundraiser in May. These same officials then made a large payment to the Trudeau Foundation.Has this Prime Minister no shame? I know he admires dictatorships from Havana to Beijing, but this goes too far. Will he stop selling influence to foreign powers?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member that it was the previous government, his party, that let the treaty expire and failed to reinitiate negotiations with our American partners.We are prepared for any eventuality on this file. We understand that there may be a complaint lodged in front of the department of commerce by the American industry. We will defend at every step of the way in front of tribunals our Canadian workers, our Canadian forestry industry. We have never lost. We are confident moving forward. In the meantime, we will continue to negotiate a good settlement for Canada.
Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Infrastructure.For the last two years, Prince Edward Island has led this country in export growth and is expected to again this year. The premier has tagged Prince Edward Island Canada's Food Island for its food and fish exports, but we also export many other products, such as aerospace and other goods. Critical to our export needs in all of Atlantic Canada is quality infrastructure that leads us into those export markets.My question to the minister is this. Under the new infrastructure fund, will those critical needs be met for Atlantic Canada?
Mr. Speaker, this government boasts about its lofty principles, but when it comes time to take action, it is a whole different story. The Liberals follow the same approach when it comes to fundraising. They engage in what is called sector-specific financing, where ministers ask for money from people with whom they have a working relationship. For example, a lawyer will pay $1,500 to meet with the Minister of Justice. That is not right, and it is unethical.What will it take for the Liberal government to realize that this is inappropriate, another Gomery Commission?
Mr. Speaker, it is a service that is available to any province of any political orientation, of course. However, since my colleague is asking the question about what this trip gave to Canada: 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario. Other provinces have benefited from the same service. Is the member opposite suggesting we should not help our provinces access foreign commercial markets?Israel has benefited from this visit. Is the member opposite suggesting we weaken ties with Israel?
Mr. Speaker, real leadership would be fixing it now.One hundred and thirty first nations, the Province of British Columbia, and the Union of BC Municipalities all said no to the northern gateway pipeline. A Federal Court overturned the Conservative approval and the Liberals made multiple promises to stop it. It sounds like an easy promise to keep, even for the Liberals.However, they are waffling on other promises to protect our coasts.Would the Liberals commit today to introduce legislation to permanently ban crude oil tankers on B.C.'s north coast, yes or no?
They seem to find this funny, Mr. Speaker. What Canadians did not find funny was her government's inability to focus on economic growth, on cutting taxes for the middle class, on creating jobs in every region of the country. That is the word we gave to Canadians, and that is what governs our government's actions every single day.
Mr. Speaker, the opposition House leader knows that the government always keeps its word. In fact
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question and his interest in this industry in Quebec.From the beginning we have worked with Quebec's industry and its workers to understand their positions and to promote those positions. We are taking into account the distinctions between the industries in Quebec and those in the rest of the country. This is part of our negotiation strategy and we will continue to promote Quebec's interests before the tribunals during the negotiations until we have an agreement.
Mr. Speaker, 240 federal public servants have been forbidden to publicly discuss details of the Liberals politically motivated, sole-sourced Super Hornet purchase, a deal that will cost thousands of jobs and waste billions of taxpayers' dollars.In fact, this gag order forbids them from discussing the project for the rest of their lives, a move condemned as heavy handed by two former federal procurement chiefs.Why are the Liberals muzzling public servants, and what are they trying to hide from Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, our government held consultations throughout Quebec on various subjects and various files, including softwood lumber.I travelled to Amqui two weeks ago. I went to the Saguenay as did the minister. She consulted Quebec industry representatives. The Minister of Agriculture and his parliamentary secretary took similar action with respect to diafiltered milk.Therefore, it is definitely not true that we are not consulting Quebeckers. That is one of our responsibilities as government.
Mr. Speaker, last week we learned that the Minister of Democratic Institutions will, at the cost of millions, be mailing out 13 million postcards asking feel-good questions about electoral reform, but this week she said that Canada cannot have a referendum on the very same subject because we have...seen how expensive [referenda] can be.The Chief Electoral Officer has testified that a simple change that is under the minister's own direct control could cut the costs of a referendum in half. Given the minister's day-old enthusiasm for frugality, why will she not just take the CEO's advice and stop pretending that cost is an insurmountable barrier to democracy?
Mr. Speaker, the fisheries minister had a hard time keeping a straight face in saying that. It is pretty obvious.When it comes to fundraising for the government, following the law is simply not good enough. Let me read something: the performance of your official duties and the arrangement of your private affairs should bear the closest public scrutiny. This is an obligation that is not fully discharged by simply acting within the law.Who said that? It was the Liberal Prime Minister. Again I ask, why does the Prime Minister have such a hard time keeping his word? Why does he say one thing and do something completely different?
Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, we announced an open and transparent consultation process with the marine industry specifically to ensure that there is no break in services.Nine Coast Guard vessels are currently providing icebreaking services in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and they will be on the St. Lawrence River next year and for several years to come.At some point, we will have to consider other options to ensure that there is no shortage of services. My colleague should not worry people by making such claims.
Mr. Speaker, that is a load of blah, blah, blah.Now we know why the Liberal government was never serious about renewing the softwood lumber agreement. How do we know? The opening salvo of a new trade war with the United States was fired today.The Minister of International Trade had 387 days to defend Canada's forestry workers, but she failed. Now thousands of families in the regions are worried about being caught in the crossfire of this trade war.The Prime Minister's seduction strategy is not working. When will the government start fighting for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, what the member is suggesting is that the federal government not pay Ontario's bills.Yesterday, I asked the foreign affairs minister about the federal Liberals paying a private public relations firm $23,000 for Kathleen Wynne's recent trip to Israel. He said, The amount of money he speaks about is an amount of money that was available to anyone.... What a ridiculous answer. That money is not available to anyone unless their circle of friends includes the Prime Minister, Gerald Butts, and Katie Telford.Canadian taxpayers want to know why the federal Liberals paid for Kathleen Wynne's public relations bills.
Mr. Speaker, despite the righteous indignation of the hon. member, we will take no lessons from a party that refused to even initiate negotiations. As the member for Lac-Saint-Jean admitted in a public statement to the press, the previous government did not even start renegotiations with the Americans.From the beginning, we have been in contact with workers and the industry across the country. We understand their concerns. We know their positions and we are defending those positions vigorously in negotiations. We are going to defend our position vigorously in front of tribunals.
Mr. Speaker, our government recognizes the hard work of seniors who helped build our country. They deserve to retire in dignity.It is why we restored the age of eligibility of OAS and GIS to 65 from 67, a very wrong-headed move by the previous government. We have raised the guaranteed income supplement for 900,000 low-income seniors, and invested over $200 million in senior housing.Make no mistake, our government is there for seniors, now and tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, I guess my colleague was sleeping when I just spoke, so I will repeat myself.This is a service available to any province, and we do not look at the political affiliation of the province. That is ridiculous as a statement. He would be unable to substantiate it.Did he not hear me describe 44 commercial agreements; $118 million; 200 jobs in Ontario; stronger links with Israel? If he has a problem with that, I want to know why.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the environment minister announced that she will force the Ottawa Hospital to build at Tunney's, a location the hospital twice studied and rejected. Reaction has been fast and furious. Former mayor Jim Durrell said it is appalling...a terrible decision. Councillor Hubley said that traffic will be a huge problem. The Ottawa Citizen's Kelly Egan said, The Ottawa Hospital should reject the Tunney's offer.Why will the environment minister not get out of the way and let the hospital decide for itself where it will build?
Mr. Speaker, as I said in earlier responses, this is sensitive information. This is critical information. This is information that we simply do not want to have in the wrong hands. Therefore, non-disclosure is a sine qua non for those who are handling that information. We have asked those who are handling that information to sign non-disclosure agreements, which extend past their employment with the crown, and
Mr. Speaker, my riding of Oakville is part of the network of auto manufacturers in this country. In fact, the Ford assembly plant in my riding employs approximately 4,500 workers.They work hard to ensure that the vehicles and equipment assembled are consistent with Canadian safety standards.Can the minister inform this House on his work with regard to safety of Canadian consumers?
Mr. Speaker, Canada is facing a crisis in the over-prescription of opioids and with illicit fentanyl and now a wave of street drugs 100 times stronger.The health minister claims to be using every lever at her disposal, but the only action we have seen from the Liberals was an exclusive conference in Ottawa. The doors were closed to addiction doctors and any expert who may have had a different opinion than the Liberals. If the minster takes the opioid crisis seriously, why is she not meeting with addiction doctors and those on the front line who work every single day with this tragic crisis?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for Malpeque and all of the Atlantic caucus for their advocacy on infrastructure issues in their communities.After hearing their concerns, and the concerns of the province and the mayors, we made changes to allow 60% of P.E.I.'s roads to be eligible for funding compared to the 1% that were eligible under the previous government. These changes will help us grow the economy, connect to communities, and move goods to market.
Mr. Speaker, for two weeks now, the NDP has been asking the Liberals to fix their flawed CPP expansion bill, Bill C-26.After refusing to address it last night, Liberal MPs once again prevented us from fixing it.The Liberals also refused to answer why the dropout provisions were not included in the first place. Did the minister not realize the impact this would have on women and people living with disabilities?If the Liberal government truly recognizes this problem, then why is it forcing through a flawed bill?
Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber trade war is reigniting and Quebec has reason to be concerned.In a joint press release with Barack Obama in June, the Prime Minister did not say a word about exempting Quebec from any protectionist agreement. Worse yet, he is okay with a future agreement covering remanufacturers. That is even worse than the bad Conservative agreement that cost us 23,000 jobs in Quebec.Instead of selling out all the sectors of our industry, will the Prime Minister stand up and defend Quebec's forestry industry?
Mr. Speaker, my friend's exaggerated preamble does not necessarily turn those assertions into facts. What I can assure the House is that unlike the Conservative Party, we will not appoint people like Mike Duffy and Irving Gerstein and Pamela Wallin to the Senate to raise money on the taxpayers' dime for the Conservative Party. That is why, if we want to talk about immoral and inappropriate behaviour, they are on that side of the House.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about how vigorously the government is going to defend it. The Liberals budgeted a measly $30 million. They just gave $25 million to a foreign organization with direct and indirect links to Hamas, a jihadist terrorist group. How vigorously is the government going to defend Canadian jobs?Softwood lumber war number five is mere hours away. This means mill closures and job losses for Canadians from coast to coast to coast.The minister has mismanaged this file from day one. When is the government going to stand up for hard-working forestry families from coast to coast to coast?
Mr. Speaker, it would seem that the ministers answering our questions do not agree with the Prime Minister.When they were asked about exclusive fundraising activities this week, they replied that the Liberals were continuing to work hard, and I quote, to bring investors to Canada.The government cannot talk out of both sides of its mouth. Either it confirms that this does not pertain to government business, or it confirms that it is attracting investment. Which is it?