Most toxic speeches
Mr. Speaker, UN Watch is now reporting, ...UNRWA hires and employs racist staff, and places the education of impressionable Palestinian youth in their hands. Canada would never tolerate the employment of racist teachers in its own schools. Why are the Liberals funding this UN organization when there is clear evidence that it employs racist anti-Semites and terrorist sympathizers?
Let us try this again. A rose by any other name, Mr. Speaker. The answer we just heard is total nonsense. The PBO itself is saying that Liberals are restricting its ability to do its job.The Liberal omnibus bill will allow the government to shut down any PBO work that is not to the government's liking. It will give the Senate veto over the parliamentary budget officer's work and stop Canadians from getting the answers they so rightly deserve.These changes are clearly not designed to help accountability. They are designed to help the Liberal Party in governing. Why do the Liberals keep pursuing these unaccountable changes? When will they finally turn a corner and do what they promised to do for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the cash for access scandal, the Liberals have somehow conveniently managed to miss the entire point. They keep polishing that turd, but it is still a turd somehow.The same special access to the Prime Minister and his cabinet
Mr. Speaker, the four fundamental values of the Canadian Armed Forces are duty, integrity, loyalty, and courage. Distorting reality is not on the list.With all his mistruths, the minister has lost all credibility. Spokesperson Charles McCabe of the Armed Forces Pensioners'/Annuitants' Association of Canada said, It is disgusting. Everyone is disgusted. He has lost the confidence of everyone who wears or has worn the uniform.When will he step down?
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we are taught in the army is to lead by example.Ever since the Minister of National Defence joined the Liberal ranks, that lesson has been lost on him. He misled Canadians on withdrawing CF-18s from Iraq, on the capabilities of our Royal Canadian Air Force, on the danger pay for our troops fighting ISIS, and on his involvement in Operation Medusa. The minister is a complete joke. No one believes him any more.When will he step down?
Mr. Speaker, the flawed study of the Afghan detainees scandal was cut short by the Conservatives after only reviewing an initial set of documents. Stéphane Dion at that point said, [w]hen you read these documents, you will have questions to ask to your Prime Minister. He also said that the Conservatives were blocking an inquiry because of being afraid of having to answer to Canadians. Therefore, will the Minister of National Defence appear before the defence committee to answer questions about this scandal, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, this is unbelievable. He is actually misleading Canadians again and misleading this House again about this particular issue around compensation for the troops who are fighting the fight against ISIS. Right here, I have a documentI looked at it before question periodsigned by the minister himself that clearly states the exact opposite of what he just said.When is the minister going to stop misleading Canadians and misleading the House and, frankly, step aside?
Mr. Speaker, the Quebec justice minister had only one short comment about the appointment of four judges: we are short 10.In response to the crisis precipitated by the Jordan decision, Quebec appointed 18 new judges and hired about a hundred legal professionals. We do not want any more criminals to go free because their cases have been thrown out. Quebec took action and appointed 18 judges. Ottawa appointed four. That is ridiculous. What is the minister waiting for? When will she appoint judges to fill the 10 vacancies?
Mr. Speaker, Canadian manufacturers can compete with anyone in the world provided they have a level playing field, yet these same manufacturers are at a tipping point as their energy costs and taxes skyrocket while under President Trump their American competitors will pay lower taxes and electricity costs. Instead of helping businesses, the Liberals are increasing taxes on them and strangling them with red tape. Why is the Prime Minister chasing Canada's manufacturing jobs out of Canada with a massive carbon tax?
Mr. Speaker, this self-proclaimed feminist Prime Minister sure talks a good talk, but has failed to do anything meaningful for women in need, like zip for pay equity.The Liberals have no issue padding the pockets of their Liberal friends and wasting taxpayer dollars on their lavish accommodations and vacations, but when it comes to funding shelters for women in need, the Liberals have not made it a priority.Will the minister finally stop wasting taxpayer money and start investing seriously in projects that protect vulnerable women?
Mr. Speaker, I point to your direction in these matters. You do have the ability to, as you have on many occasions, censure different members or remind them of their behaviour. However, it is incumbent upon all of us to manage our own behaviour here. That includes members of the government giving answers, which frankly, many Canadians find repulsive. I think that by all of us raising the point in debate, that includes the government actually being accountable to members of the opposition by providing real, relevant answers, which many of these ministers do not.
Mr. Speaker, the minister's misleading comments about his service record are a direct hit on our men and women in uniform. Yesterday, a parent of a Canadian Armed Forces member wrote me saying that the minister's stolen valour has directly affected the morale and confidence of Canada's front line infantry soldiers. The feelings of our troops and veterans have gone from disappointment and outrage to distrust and dismay. Will the minister do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about that record. In our last year in office, the defence spending was nearly twice what the Liberals spent in any given year. We came in and we bought our men and women proper uniforms for Afghanistan, after the Liberals sent them into a desert with green camouflage. We bought them new planes so they did not have to hitch rides from the Americans. We bought them helicopters, tanks, and new LAVs so they could protect themselves from IEDs.The Liberals sent them to Afghanistan with none of that support, and the minister knows that very well. We are happy to compare our record to the Liberal decade of darkness.
Mr. Speaker, when he was in opposition, the member who is now the Minister of Public Safety accused the Conservative government of wanting to hide the truth when it refused to open an inquiry on Afghan detainees. Now, the Liberal government is the one that is refusing to launch a public inquiry.What has changed? Why have the Liberals once again changed their tune?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to defence issues, the Liberals cannot be trusted. After he cut $12 billion from Canada's defence budget, the finance minister said that our military was appropriately provisioned. Now the defence minister, after he was caught misleading Canadians about his military service record, is promising to restore the funding that his government cut in the first place. The problem is that, now, no one believes what these guys say. The only way for the government to begin to regain the confidence of our troops is for the minister to step aside. When will he?
Mr. Speaker, the 308-page omnibus bill bears the signature of the Minister of Finance. My question is for him.How is it that this man, a dignified, honourable man who has always been steadfast, is now doing the Liberal government's dirty work?
Mr. Speaker, it is a shame that we sometimes cannot hear everything a member has to say.Last fall, after being caught red-handed, the Liberals decided to press pause on their cash for access fundraisers, but as we might have guessed, they decided to press play again. This evening, the Prime Minister will be in Montreal rubbing shoulders with some of the Liberal Party's generous donors. The Liberals seem to think that no one will notice, however. It is though they are trying to play a Jedi mind trick on us by waving their hand and saying, This is not a cash for access fundraiser.Honestly, do the Liberals not realize that Canadians can see right through them?
Mr. Speaker, given what has been said, we would like to review Hansard and we will get back to you in a relatively short time span.
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Quebec says that it needs 14 judges to be appointed in order to avoid lengthy proceedings that result in the release of the accused pursuant to the Jordan ruling. I did say 14. What did the Minister of Justice do? She appointed four judges. Does the minister realize that she may be enabling the release of dangerous criminals, putting Quebeckers at risk, and helping to discredit our justice system?
Mr. Speaker, documents reveal that the Minister of Status of Women spent more money renovating her offices than on supporting shelters for abused women.While the minister was spending over $1 million on her luxury accommodations, she spent less than $700,000 on emergency housing for battered women.How can the minister justify this blatant misuse taxpayer funds while every night women in need are being turned away from emergency shelters across Canada because of the lack of funding?
Mr. Speaker, the previous Conservative government allowed the agreement to expire and did nothing to initiate negotiations. We are now facing the fifth softwood lumber dispute, and our workers and producers have never been found in the wrong. We disagree strongly with the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair and punitive duty. The American accusations are baseless and unfounded. We continue to raise this important issue with the U.S., as the Prime Minister did with the President just last week.
Mr. Speaker, a Canadian citizen, Sun Qian, has been imprisoned in Beijing for her belief in truth, compassion, and tolerance.Canada's new ambassador to China refused to publicly protest this latest case of Chinese extrajudicial detention, but by muting content on the plight of dual citizens unjustly held in China, Iran, Turkey, or any other undemocratic country, Canada is treating these citizens as second-class citizens.Why are the Liberals prioritizing trade and muting Canada's principled voice on the rule of law?
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary budget officer is concerned, and rightfully so. The government is using Bill C-44 to try to take away his power. As the parliamentary budget officer himself said, this will undermine his independence and political impartiality. Why? Because, from now on, the parliamentary budget officer will have to report to the Speaker of the House, and he will have to submit his game plan for the year. I really like you, Mr. Speaker, but you should have nothing to do with the work of the parliamentary budget officer.Why is the Liberal government stooping so low?
Mr. Speaker, if the minister does not have the honour to resign, he should be fired. Instead of choosing to keep the disgraced minister in place, the Prime Minister could choose the member for Orléans, a former army commander. He could choose the MP for KanataCarleton, a former navigator and former squadron commander. He could choose the MP for AuroraOak RidgesRichmond Hill, a former air force captain. He could choose any one of these Liberals who has not been accused of stealing valour.Why will the Prime Minister not fire the minister and replace him with someone worthy of the trust of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence may have apologized for embellishing his service record, but it is not enough. His claim of being the architect of operation Medusa, a claim that he made at least twice, when it was not true, was intended for one thing: to make him look good as a Liberal politician. This is a violation of the honour expected of men and women in uniform. He has now lost their trust and their respect. As a result, he simply cannot continue in the job that he has.After what he has done, does he really think staying on is the best situation for the troops?
Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that a soldier has the right to complain, but the Prime Minister and the defence minister are actively denying that right to our soldiers who were deployed in the fight against ISIS. The defence minister made a promise to give back the benefits he took away from those troops. Now he has broken that promise and he is clamping down on those who dare speak out.Here we have yet another example of the defence minister minister breaking his word to our military. Can he not see why he has lost their confidence?
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important matter for us.However, I want to remind the hon. member of our Prime Minister's repeated confirmation that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian. Unlike the previous government, we have never shied away from defending our Canadian citizens abroad.Consular services are being provided to all citizens who are in need. We are seized by this particular matter that the hon. member has raised. We are providing assistance to the family and we will continue to advocate for our citizens abroad.
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Minister of National Defence cannot escape this quagmire of his own making. He has lost the confidence of the Canadian people, of our allies, and, most important, our men and women in uniform. There are 12 members of the Liberal caucus who have served in the Canadian Forces and only one of them has been accused of stealing valour.When will the Prime Minister fire the Minister of National Defence and replace him with someone worthy of the respect of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, no members of the Canadian Forces should be at a disadvantage because of their service to Canada. The Prime Minister stood with his hand over his heart and he promised, no veteran should have to take their own government to court. The Liberals have not fulfilled their campaign promise to return to lifelong pensions, forcing Equitas veterans to continue to fight in court. So long as the minister continues to delay introducing promised lifelong pensions, our new veterans will remain at a disadvantage. When will the Liberals stop the necessity for the court action and bring back lifelong pensions for veterans, as they promised?
Mr. Speaker, Canada's forestry industry supports hundreds of thousands of good, middle-class jobs. We strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair, punitive tax. Their accusations are unfounded. We will continue to bring the matter up with the United States, just as the Prime Minister did with the U.S. President.The coalition never offered conditions that Canada could accept. We want a good agreement, not just any agreement.
Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, I am addressing you in your capacity as the custodian of our rights and privileges. For weeks, the government has been claiming that all members will be able to fully participate in the parliamentary reform. It said so as recently as yesterday. However, nothing could be further from the truth.The government's proposed parliamentary reform and the approach it is taking to this issue violate the rights and privileges of members who do not belong to recognized parties. Hundreds of thousands of voters are being muzzled.I checked, and I can tell the House that the letter from the Leader of the Government on the changes to electoral reform was sent only to her counterparts in the recognized parties. Not only were we not informed by letter like the other parliamentarians, but we had to learn about the leader's intentions in the newspapers.We did not get the leader's letter until yesterday afternoon. What is worse, she indicated in that letter that the government will now have to use time allocation motions more often. That means we will have even less speaking time. The government's decision will limit our freedom of speech and have a direct impact on our work, the work that hundreds of thousands of Quebeckers elected us to do.How can the government possibly amend the Standing Orders of the House without including every single elected member of the House, with no exceptions?The government is accountable not just to recognized parties in the House, but also to all those elected by Canadians. This is set out very clearly in the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, on page 61: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.Members of non-recognized parties are 34th in the order of speaking, and the leader has announced that the number of closure motions will increase. This means that we will never get a turn to speak. This will permanently silence small minority political parties, as well as voters. It is an unacceptable attack on the freedom of speech of the members of the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party. Mr. Speaker, in the next few weeks, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs will debate the the reform of Parliament, its procedures, and its Standing Orders. It will establish the new parliamentary rules that you will have to enforce. I would like to bring to your attention that as a result of the defeat of our motion of April 5, these changes will be discussed and amended without our being able to fully participate in the discussions. It was the government that defeated our motion. We are barred from all committees. This practice is discriminatory and unfair for non-recognized parties. These rules and procedures discriminate against non-recognized parties and run counter to the principle that the privileges protect the rights of every voter.Mr. Speaker, we are asking you to defend minority elected officials so that the majority does not crush them. I will repeat the quote: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.In your speech of December 3, 2015, you clearly stated that you wanted to reform parliamentary procedure. You said: I believe the Speaker should lead discussions about how to reform our procedures to achieve these things and to have measures that ensure that members are better able to focus on their work and carry out their duties.On page 89 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, we read: By far, the most important right accorded to members of the House is the exercise of freedom of speech in parliamentary proceedings. A little further on, it is described as a fundamental right without which they would be hampered in the performance of their duties.The Speaker's role in protecting this privilege in particular is set out on page 308. The duty of the Speaker is to ensure that the right of members to free speech is protected....Therefore, Mr. Speaker, as the custodian of our privileges, it is your duty to intervene to ensure that the elected members of non-recognized parliamentary groups are not deprived of their most fundamental right, the right to speak, and the right to vote in committee and in the House on behalf of their constituents.I am asking you today to guide us as to how to reform our procedures so that you can protect the rights and privileges of parliamentarians belonging to non-recognized parties. In fact, we hold that there are four breaches of our parliamentary privileges. First, the procedure put forward by the government to reform House procedures and practices without the participation of all parliamentary groups, who are excluded from the committee on parliamentary reform, is not in keeping with the principle of fairness that must guide the Speaker's rulings and infringes on our freedom of speech.Second, the government's expressed intent to use its parliamentary majority rather than seeking a consensus among elected officials to make changes to the Standing Orders and procedures is not in keeping with the practices and customs in that regard.Third, the government's expressed intent to use time allocation more frequently inordinately violates the freedom of speech of non-recognized parties, especially since it has announced that it will use its parliamentary majority to push through its reforms.Fourth, the fact that elected members of non-recognized parties were not informed of the government's intentions regarding the procedural amendments at the same time as the recognized parties is a clear indication that parliamentarians from non-recognized parties are not being treated equitably.We are counting on you, Mr. Speaker, and we await your wise judgment.
Mr. Speaker, what the Minister of National Defence did was not a mistake, and he cannot solve the problem by trying to avoid the storm. On at least two occasions, he embellished his record and took credit for the work of others. He did so to look good as a Liberal politician. This is inexcusable, particularly for a member of the armed forces. He simply cannot keep his portfolio after what he did. Why are the minister and the Prime Minister having such a hard time understanding this?
Mr. Speaker, a few years ago, an opposition member asked the parliamentary budget officer to have a look at the true cost of the F-35s, and did we ever learn a lot. Who was it who had asked? It was the current Minister of Fisheries.Unfortunately, under the changes his government wants to make, the PBO would no longer be able to study such things. The minister wants to prevent us from having the same opportunities that he himself had. He also wants to prevent the parliamentary budget officer from undertaking any studies that were not already planned at the beginning of the year.Why do the Liberals want to put the government spending watchdog in a straitjacket?
Mr. Speaker, I do have the usual Thursday question. As you well know, I get up every Thursday, and I ask the government House leader what the government agenda is for the rest of the week and the week following. The government House leader tells us what the agenda is, and then we go and prepare. The only thing we have to go on is what the government House leader tells us. We are always responding to what the government is doing and to its agenda, but we get one day a week when we have an opposition day. Well, it amounts to about one day a week.The last time I asked the government House leader this question, she told me and this House what the schedule would be. It included an opposition day, which was supposed to happen today. There are extremely timely issues that are going on right now in the House of Commons. There is a huge degree of frustration here on this side of the House, but even more so, there is a lot going on in the Canadian military, and they are feeling a sense of betrayal and frustration.When our opposition day is taken away, when it is changed around, when games are played with our opposition day so that we cannot address these very serious concerns, I think that contributes to the level of frustration on this side of the House.I am going to ask the government House leader if she would tell us what the business of the House is for this week and for next week, and if we could please stick to that plan, it would be very much appreciated.
Mr. Speaker, today the Prime Minister met with his youth council, a body made up of 26 young people from interesting backgrounds, to discuss a very sensitive topic, namely reconciliation with indigenous peoples.Will the Prime Minister share the council's thoughts with us? No, because he refuses to talk to the media. Will the young people be able to publish their work at the end of the consultations? No, because they do not have permission from the Privy Council to do so . Can they talk about this on Facebook Live? Yes, but only in the presence of a chaperone.Talk about transparency and confidence in young people!Can the government tell me if any of the Prime Minister's other councils have so many constraints?
Mr. Speaker, as Minister of National Defence, I will always ensure we have all the necessary tools. We have conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review. We have been making sure that we look at all the analysis to ensure where all the gaps are within our funding system, where all the cuts were made, so we can have a sustainable, predictable funding model for our Canadian Armed Forces so they can plan. We are making sure all the right benefits are there, the right equipment is there and all the tools necessary for all their training and operational missions.
Mr. Speaker, one might think that the hon. member for Hamilton WestAncasterDundas and I had a simultaneous sense of a point of order. I ask for your indulgence for just a moment. It has been six years since those of us elected on May 2, 2011, have served. I recall distinctly the opening of the 41st Parliament, in which most parties in this place took a pledge never to heckle. The initiative was led by the late Jack Layton on behalf of the New Democrats. Stephen Harper endorsed it, and for comic relief, my entire caucus pledged never to heckle. Since that time, the disappointed group in this corner, led by interim leader Bob Rae, said that they were not so sure, that they might need to heckle. At this point I need to turn for reference to a quote from the great A.A. Milne in the poem of good bears and bad bears: And then quite suddenly (just like Us) One got Better and the other got Wuss.The NDP members, over the last few weeks, have hardly been heckling at all. The Liberals have hardly heckled at all. However, it seems the Conservatives feel there is a void and they must fill it with more noise than I have ever heard in this place. I urge them, as individuals and collectively, to please honour Standing Order 16 and 18 and find a way to tone down the violence
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I gave a speech on the announcement of the defence policy review, where we are actually giving a non-partisan analysis, making sure that we have the current state of affairs. We talked about the cuts.I thought the Leader of the Opposition would be happy to understand that we have a certain state of affairs, so we can actually now create a plan to move forward. That is what the defence policy is actually going to do.We are going to make sure our men and women have all the right tools. They need sustainable and predictable funding, and that is exactly what we are going to do.
Mr. Speaker, it has been almost two weeks since the U.S. decided to apply duties of up to 24% on Canadian softwood lumber. It has been six months since President Trump's election and 18 months since the Liberals came to office, and the Liberals failed to see this coming. They failed to come up with a concrete plan to deal with this emerging crisis and to help the hundreds of thousands of families impacted.Can the minister confirm that she walked away from negotiations with Obama, thinking she could get a better deal with Trump?
Mr. Speaker, I will always honour the service of our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces, the ones I have not met and the ones with whom I have even served.As the Minister of National Defence, it is my responsibility and our government's responsibility to make sure our Canadian Armed Forces have all the right and necessary equipment, and have the right benefits.We conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review in which all members of Parliament had an opportunity to take part. This is exactly what this defence policy will do: set the Canadian Armed Forces on the right funded track for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, since we formed government, we have maintained the spending levels and planned increases while conducting the defence policy review, and we are developing a new policy for Canada, a rigorously costed plan that will put the Canadian Armed Forces on a sustainable footing.The Conservative rhetoric simply does not match up with the facts. After years of cuts and underspending, we are now in a troubling position where even the status quo of spending on defence will not maintain the status quo of capability. Our new defence policy is going to fix that.
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured and privileged to serve with so many members of our caucus who have had military service. I also consider them mentors as well.As Minister of National Defence, it is a privilege to be able to serve in this role. I will work extremely hard, as our government does, to ensure our troops have all the necessary tools. I will come for advice for all the folks who have served in the military and as members of Parliament. I have opened up to all for service of any other party
Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Department of Commerce levelled a direct attack on our forestry producers last month with new tariffs on softwood lumber. According to Michael Froman, the former U.S. trade representative, the Liberal government had an opportunity to sign an agreement last year with an offer from the Obama administration, but it chose to wait, thinking it would get a better deal with the Trump government.What is up now?
Mr. Speaker, we know that communities in Quebec and Ontario have been dealing with flooding over the past few days. Some people have had to leave their homes and they know that they are going to have to deal with the damage when they return. There is a direct link between the flooding and climate change, and we know that these events will occur more often over the next few years.Can the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness tell us how he will work with the provinces to help these people?
Mr. Speaker, soldiers deployed in the fight against ISIS are saying that they feel despair after the minister betrayed them by not fully restoring their danger pay. This is in addition to the Minister of National Defence's already established casual relationship with the truth that is demoralizing our troops.A 27-year veteran stated, The Defence Minister cannot continue to lead the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, having lost the respect and trust in this way.Will the minister listen to the voices of those who have served, do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, the approach of the previous Conservative government was to set up the parliamentary budget officer in a fashion that was independent, one of the reasons of which was to allow him or her to examine political party platforms before elections were called to determine if they were in fact costed properly.We know there has been a very severe problem with the Liberal costing in its last platform. In fact, it is about a $25 billion problem. Could it be that the Liberals are trying to shut down the independence of the parliamentary budget officer before their next political platform can be costed?
Mr. Speaker, it has been 11 days since the crippling tariffs have been levied on our small and medium producers. On this side of the House, we are hearing from concerned producers, manufacturers, and fearful forestry workers. The minister says we should expect job losses. This is unacceptable, and Canadians deserve better.What is the minister doing to reassure the over one million Canadians who depend on the forestry industry for their livelihoods, and what is the plan for our communities that depend on forestry?
Mr. Speaker, at Vimy Ridge, I thought of the brave Canadians who fought to defend our freedom; those soldiers had partners, parents, and siblings. It is true that when members serve, their entire family serves along with them. The families are the strength behind the uniform. In budget 2017, we announced a centre of excellence on mental health and PTSD, to advance research, education, and outreach services. This would lead to better mental health outcomes for our veterans and their families.
Mr. Speaker, last month I had the honour of travelling to France for the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge. It was an immense privilege to stand where, 100 years ago, four Canadian divisions came together to claim their place in the history books. I was humbled to speak to the family members of soldiers who came home from that battle that changed men. While they may not have had the words at the time, mental health injuries and PTSD were a reality then, and they are, unfortunately, the reality for many of our men and women in uniform today. What is the Minister of Veterans Affairs doing to address the mental health needs of veterans and their families?
Mr. Speaker, why is the minister in California when she should be in Calgary?The Prime Minister should be listening to Jocelyn Bamford of the Coalition of Concerned Manufacturers, who said that we are standing on a beach with a tidal wave called cap-and-trade barrelling down upon us, and our government still doesn't realize that this tsunami will destroy manufacturing in Ontario. She said that businesses are terrified of what the federal government is doing and that government is supposed to help us, but its policies are causing us to consider moving our growth to other jurisdictions. What is up
Mr. Speaker, throughout our military operations in Afghanistan, Canada has committed to ensuring the individuals detained by the Canadian Armed Forces were handled and transferred and released in accordance with our obligations under international law. Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subject to significant scrutiny, including an external review by the Federal Court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations.I will be happy to make myself available to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner should she choose to revisit the issue.
Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege to rise on this traditional territory and to acknowledge that the work of this feminist government is making a real impact in the lives of women and girls across the country, with $100 million invested in a gender-based violence strategy, $11 billion invested in housing, a poverty reduction strategy, investments in supporting women entrepreneurs, investments in women in STEM, $90 million in a network of shelters across the country, $7 billion in child care, flexibility and more choice in EI and caregiving benefits, I could go on.I hope the member opposite asks me again.
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to be a government that is actually engaging the next generation. To hear from youth, to have them at the table to hear their constructive feedback, and to ensure that they are supportive of the ideas for change for the way this country works is very important. That is why the government took the initiative of having a youth council. Not only does the Prime Minister have a youth council, he encourages every member in this place to also have a youth council to get ideas from their local constituencies to ensure that we are serving in the best interests of all Canadians, Canadians of today and Canadians of tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, I was actually very pleased to be in Calgary just a month ago talking to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce. There were 300 people there to listen to how we are planning to create jobs, grow our economy, and innovate.I was in California because I am as much a minister of economy as I am a minister of environment. I am attracting investment so that we can create good jobs for companies like CarbonCure Technologies Inc. from Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, which has new processes that will take the carbon dioxide that we do not want, inject it into cement
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Montcalm. He stated his position, and I completely agree with him.As members, we are all equals here in this place. Our constituents, the people who live in our ridings, are equals, and it is only fair that we all have the same rights and freedoms here in the House. We are treated differently only because of a law that was passed in 1963. I think that was the year that Parliament passed the law that granted money to parties with more than 12 members.In 1963, it was about giving parties with more than 12 members some money. Over time it has morphed, without any specific law ever passing, to say that members of legitimate elected parties, in my case a party that runs nationally, and in the case of the Bloc a party that runs very strongly in one province, should have, and would have in other parliaments within the commonwealth system, the same rights. For the matter, independents should have the same rights, as their voters have the same rights.In this case, we do not have those rights, because as we know, over the years we have adopted traditions in which parties with more than 12 members have more rights. It has not been reassessed since 1963. In the early 1990s, a former member of Parliament for WinnipegTranscona at the time, the hon. Bill Blaikie, made a brilliant argument as to why the NDP, with nine seats, should have the right to sit on committees. At the time, with all due respect to my colleague from the Bloc, that was objected to by the Bloc, because it had more than 12 members, and they were mad, because when they had fewer than 12, the NDP had not supported them. It would be wonderful to review what has happened by accretion, without any actual decision ever rendered in this place, and go back to the question of why members of Parliament who happen to be in parties with fewer than 12 members should have fewer rights. I set aside the issue of money. Why should we have fewer rights than any other MP?
Mr. Speaker, as I was just trying to say, we believe that when it comes to the important work the parliamentary budget officer does, the office should have its independence. It should have more effectiveness and more independence, and that is why we have introduced legislation to make this happen. We are open to amendments and we welcome them.When it comes to the member's referral to omnibus legislation, what we are proposing is to ensure there is not an abuse of omnibus legislation, like was the case under the Stephen Harper Conservative government. We are saying we can improve the way this place works. Let us have that conversation.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his service. When I visited Kuwait for the first time, I was able to learn about the tax-free exemption and to learn directly about this issue, which we were able to immediately fix. Unfortunately, much more work needs to be done, and that is what our government is doing right now. We are reviewing all compensation. We are also making sure we can actually have a long-term solution to this problem.
Mr. Speaker, since becoming Minister of National Defence, we took an extensive defence policy into making sure that we looked after our Canadian Armed Forces. That is exactly what we have done. We spoke to Canadians all across this country who had MP consultations to make sure that we have a thorough analysis, to make sure that we have a model that is going to look after our Canadian Armed Forces. I look forward to presenting our new defence policy that is going to look after our troops long into the future.
Mr. Speaker, my responsibility and our government's responsibility is to make sure that we look after our troops, to make sure they have all the appropriate tools and equipment. That is exactly what our defence policy is doing. It is making sure that we have a fully funded and rigorously costed policy that is going to look out into the next 20 years, a policy that is going to make sure they have all the right tools, a policy that is going to make sure that, when we send them out on missions, they have everything they need.
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-44, Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1, is currently before the House.Tomorrow morning, we will consider the Senate amendments to Bill C-4 on unions, and then move on to Bill C-44 after question period. Next week, we have the pleasure of having two allotted days, one on Monday and one on Thursday.Ideally, I would like to finish debate on the budget legislation next Tuesday in order to send the bill to committee for in-depth study. Bill C-4 will be considered on Wednesday, with the hope of sending it back to the Senate that day.I do my best to provide a calendar that is as accurate as possible so that all members can prepare. From time to time, things need to change. As members know, we have had some important conversations in this place. We will always ensure that members have the ability to have those important conversations. That is why I would ask that we all continue working better together.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I honour the service of all Canadian Armed Forces members who are currently serving and have served before.As the Minister of National Defence and as part of this government, my job is to ensure we look after the Canadian Armed Forces as we send them on training missions or any operations abroad. That is what our new defence policy for Canada will do. It is a fully funded and fully costed defence policy that will provide predictable funding for our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces to be able to plan and carry out their missions.
Mr. Speaker, Statistics Canada reports that now Canada's seniors outnumber its children for the first time in history. The accelerated pace of aging in the population carries profound implications. We need to prepare for proper housing and home care and have a long-term plan.Given that we have known about this trend for years, it is surprising to see how little is in this year's Liberal budget for our seniors. Will the government react to this news and finally implement a national seniors strategy?
Mr. Speaker, in order to achieve this greater independence from the parliamentary budget officer, the Liberals have given the Speaker of the Senate veto power over his work plan. Who appoints the Speaker of the Senate? According to section 34 of the Constitution, it is the Prime Minister. Therefore, by independence, the Prime Minister means that the parliamentary budget officer will have to get prior approval to do his work from someone who is hand-picked by the Prime Minister. Is that the member's definition of independence?
Yes, Mr. Speaker. On this point of order, my colleague opposite has actually not cited a specific Standing Order, so I would beg that it is not a point of order. However, since the matter of heckling has become relevant, I would ask
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the service of every Canadian Armed Forces member and also every veteran, our government is focused on making sure our troops have all the necessary benefits to look after their families in making sure we have all the right capabilities. Last year we conducted a thorough defence policy review that had a very good analysis and gave us a good area for us to work on by making sure we have a fully costed, fully funded defence policy that will look after the Canadian Armed Forces for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, the current situation has been monitored from the very beginning by the Government Operations Centre. We have indicated to all the provincial governments that we are on standby, ready to assist as required, and if a provincial government should make a request for assistance from the Government of Canada, we will respond very, very quickly.In terms of the future in dealing with climate change, I advise the hon. member to examine very carefully the budget, because it includes $2.6 billion for this very purpose.
Mr. Speaker, I want to assure my colleague that, ever since Canada restored funding to this UN agency for Palestinian refugees, we have been following it very closely, and Canada's presence at the table is making a difference. We are ensuring that background checks are done on all financial services employees. We have helped train 3,000 employees so far, including executives and teachers, on the importance of web independence, and we are reviewing the educational materials. I would rather see those children in that UN school than on the street.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons.Our government welcomes suggestions on how to improve the bill and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget office. We appreciate the work he does, and I look forward to working with the member opposite.
Mr. Speaker, we understand that we need to take action to tackle climate change and we need to create good jobs. That is exactly what we are doing. We are making polluters pay and at the same time attracting investment in our innovative industries. I was just in California, and I was very pleased to meet with venture capitalists, private equity firms, investors, and innovators who are looking at Canada as a great place to invest. The party opposite may not care about creating jobs, but that is exactly what we are focused on.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subjected to scrutiny, including an external review by the federal court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations. I would be happy to make myself available to the Commissioner of Conflict of Interest and Ethics if she chooses to revisit this issue.
Mr. Speaker, residents of Yamachiche want clear answers to explain why two-metre waves damaged their homes. Damage could run into the thousands of dollars and someone has to be held responsible.The Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard says that an investigation is under way. However, the Minister of Transport will not confirm that.Can someone tell us in no uncertain terms whether an investigation has been launched? If so, what is the timeline and when will the results be made public?
Mr. Speaker, as the member is well aware, we are committed to a pension-for-life option for our veterans. We made that announcement this year, and those details will be forthcoming. Further to that point, we have augmented and strengthened financial security for our veterans. In budget 2016, we raised the ELB to 90% of a soldier's pre-release salary and we raised the disability award. The veterans' ombudsman and many veterans were highly supportive of these changes. It meant more money in veterans' pockets, for them and their families.
Mr. Speaker, we will make sure that our troops have all the necessary benefits to carry out their duties. It is our government that dealt with the immediate inequity for the soldiers who lost their tax-free status in operation Impact. It is our government that is working hard to review the compensation rules and find a long-term solution needed to fix the mess we inherited, to ensure a fair and equitable process for all.
Mr. Speaker, earlier today, during the members' statements, we heard a beautifully orated speech in a language that 98% of us were unable to comprehend. I wonder if, as a matter of courtesy, if members choose to do that, they could provide prior translation to our interpreters so that we would be able to enjoy the content of their statement and also provide the appropriate support and response.
Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to our colleague for this opportunity to express how proud we are of our record of helping seniors.Last year we put into place a measure which is taking 13,000 seniors out of poverty, 90% of whom are women, through an increase in the guaranteed income supplement of up to $1,000 per year. We are also investing significantly in housing, health care, and support in communities to help our seniors live in a dignified and secure environment.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, our government has taken significant steps to make the judicial appointments process transparent and accountable and to ensure that there is more diversity on the bench. That includes appointing four new judges in Quebec. Our government is very proud that 60% of the appointments are women. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our justice system, and that is good news for all members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the parliamentary budget officer, this government believes
Mr. Speaker, rail transportation is crucial to our economy, and provides us with an efficient system of moving people and goods through this great and vast country of ours. Nothing is more important than rail safety, which is paramount to users, to railway workers, and most of all, to all the communities across Canada that have rail lines passing through them.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport tell us what our government is doing to ensure that Canada has the strictest rail safety standards?
Mr. Speaker, I call them like I see them.Special access to the
Mr. Speaker, our government has taken significant steps to ensure that the appointment process for judges is transparent and responsible and fosters more diversity, among other things. To date, the Minister of Justice has appointed 55 judges and 22 deputy judges across the country, including four new appointments in Quebec.Our government is very proud of the fact that 60% of the judges appointed are women. That is up 35% compared to the previous government's record. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our judicial system. That is very good news for all members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, northern Ontario is a vast region with communities of all sizes scattered throughout the area. Promoting economic development is a challenge in this region. However, northern Ontario has many advantages and considerable potential.There is a large potential to be unlocked in the region with the many emerging innovative ideas and companies from the region. Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development let us know what steps he has taken to promote local regional economic development in northern Ontario?
Mr. Speaker, I recognize, as we all do, that we are here to represent Canadians, and I say as a new member how impressed I am with how hard working each and every MP in this room is. I appreciate the dedication and commitment. However, over the last couple of days, I want to address the level of heckling and unparliamentary conduct that is taking place in the House. It is unfortunate, because we have welcomed five new members into the House.I thank you for your intervention today, Mr. Speaker, but I want to call on all my colleagues in the House, all of us, from both sides of the House, to start conducting ourselves in ways that we can be proud of, because we are representing Canadians, and we want to stand proud of the way we conduct ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, I will take the opportunity to remind all colleagues that we invested close to $90 million in shelters, and $1 million additionally went to collecting data from across the country to ensure that our investments and our efforts are based on an evidence-based approach.I am sure the hon. member agrees that restoring the right to advocacy to women's organizations across the country is essential to a healthy and vibrant women's movement too, and that is exactly what we have done.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for LaurentidesLabelle for his question.Rail safety remains the minister's top priority. That is why we regularly review the Railway Safety Act to ensure that it reflects what the industry needs and what the population needs. We are very pleased to be able to begin this review one year earlier than planned, and we look forward to receiving the committee's recommendations.
Mr. Speaker, the government has been working for many months across many departments in the Government of Canada and, just as importantly, with all of the ministers from the provinces. We know that it is our first responsibility to help the workers who might be displaced, the producers whose companies are at risk, and the communities that will be affected. Not only is it important to look at the short term, but also the long term, and we are also very active on that front, by an expansion of export markets and diversification. We are very focused on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, we are going to make sure that all our troops have all the right benefits. There is a difference between a tax-free allowance and the hardship allowance benefits.We have fixed the immediate problem. We are conducting a much more thorough review to look at the wider compensation package, to make sure we have a fair and equitable solution for all those who serve.
Mr. Speaker, our government is taking real action to be more open and transparent with Canadians. That is why my new mandate involves introducing a bill to make political fundraising more open and transparent. If that bill passes, it will apply to events attended by the Prime Minister, ministers, party leaders, and party leadership candidates. It is always possible to raise the bar, and we will continue to take action to make the government more transparent.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member understands the intent of this government in that we believe the parliamentary budget officer should have independence so he can serve Parliament in the best way possible. We believe we can improve the way and the resources to that office. As I have also said, we are open to amendments. We welcome constructive feedback. It is a very different approach than the previous government, obviously.
Mr. Speaker, I already answered that question. Our plan is to strengthen the position of the parliamentary budget officer so that he can properly serve Parliament. He will have a meaningful mandate and be called upon to consider the economic and financial impacts of the issues submitted to him. As I also said, our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill. We are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate all of the work that he does.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for the question.Our government recognizes the importance of safe and environmentally sound navigation. We are aware of the situation in Yamachiche and can confirm that we have received complaints about this incident. We are currently assessing the factors that may have contributed to this incident.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to giving more independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and that is the primary objective of the bill recently introduced in the House of Commons. Our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill, and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate the work he does.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Sudbury for his question.He and his colleagues from the region are staunch supporters of northern Ontario.I was excited to be in northern Ontario to announce an increase of $25 million for FedNor. Along with the launch of this, we also put forward the prosperity and growth strategy for northern Ontario. This will help the community; this will help indigenous communities; this will help diversify the economy; and, in particular, this will help small businesses grow and scale up, which will create good-quality jobs in northern Ontario.
Mr. Speaker, we thank the parliamentary budget officer for his analysis of the provisions of Bill C-44. We look forward to working with him and others to improve the bill to ensure we accomplish the objective of having an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. Our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons. We believe that it should be an officer who reports to Parliament, unlike the previous government, which felt that he should report to the Library of Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, UN Watch is now reporting, ...UNRWA hires and employs racist staff, and places the education of impressionable Palestinian youth in their hands. Canada would never tolerate the employment of racist teachers in its own schools. Why are the Liberals funding this UN organization when there is clear evidence that it employs racist anti-Semites and terrorist sympathizers?
Let us try this again. A rose by any other name, Mr. Speaker. The answer we just heard is total nonsense. The PBO itself is saying that Liberals are restricting its ability to do its job.The Liberal omnibus bill will allow the government to shut down any PBO work that is not to the government's liking. It will give the Senate veto over the parliamentary budget officer's work and stop Canadians from getting the answers they so rightly deserve.These changes are clearly not designed to help accountability. They are designed to help the Liberal Party in governing. Why do the Liberals keep pursuing these unaccountable changes? When will they finally turn a corner and do what they promised to do for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the cash for access scandal, the Liberals have somehow conveniently managed to miss the entire point. They keep polishing that turd, but it is still a turd somehow.The same special access to the Prime Minister and his cabinet
Mr. Speaker, the four fundamental values of the Canadian Armed Forces are duty, integrity, loyalty, and courage. Distorting reality is not on the list.With all his mistruths, the minister has lost all credibility. Spokesperson Charles McCabe of the Armed Forces Pensioners'/Annuitants' Association of Canada said, It is disgusting. Everyone is disgusted. He has lost the confidence of everyone who wears or has worn the uniform.When will he step down?
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we are taught in the army is to lead by example.Ever since the Minister of National Defence joined the Liberal ranks, that lesson has been lost on him. He misled Canadians on withdrawing CF-18s from Iraq, on the capabilities of our Royal Canadian Air Force, on the danger pay for our troops fighting ISIS, and on his involvement in Operation Medusa. The minister is a complete joke. No one believes him any more.When will he step down?
Mr. Speaker, the flawed study of the Afghan detainees scandal was cut short by the Conservatives after only reviewing an initial set of documents. Stéphane Dion at that point said, [w]hen you read these documents, you will have questions to ask to your Prime Minister. He also said that the Conservatives were blocking an inquiry because of being afraid of having to answer to Canadians. Therefore, will the Minister of National Defence appear before the defence committee to answer questions about this scandal, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, this is unbelievable. He is actually misleading Canadians again and misleading this House again about this particular issue around compensation for the troops who are fighting the fight against ISIS. Right here, I have a documentI looked at it before question periodsigned by the minister himself that clearly states the exact opposite of what he just said.When is the minister going to stop misleading Canadians and misleading the House and, frankly, step aside?
Mr. Speaker, the Quebec justice minister had only one short comment about the appointment of four judges: we are short 10.In response to the crisis precipitated by the Jordan decision, Quebec appointed 18 new judges and hired about a hundred legal professionals. We do not want any more criminals to go free because their cases have been thrown out. Quebec took action and appointed 18 judges. Ottawa appointed four. That is ridiculous. What is the minister waiting for? When will she appoint judges to fill the 10 vacancies?
Mr. Speaker, Canadian manufacturers can compete with anyone in the world provided they have a level playing field, yet these same manufacturers are at a tipping point as their energy costs and taxes skyrocket while under President Trump their American competitors will pay lower taxes and electricity costs. Instead of helping businesses, the Liberals are increasing taxes on them and strangling them with red tape. Why is the Prime Minister chasing Canada's manufacturing jobs out of Canada with a massive carbon tax?
Mr. Speaker, this self-proclaimed feminist Prime Minister sure talks a good talk, but has failed to do anything meaningful for women in need, like zip for pay equity.The Liberals have no issue padding the pockets of their Liberal friends and wasting taxpayer dollars on their lavish accommodations and vacations, but when it comes to funding shelters for women in need, the Liberals have not made it a priority.Will the minister finally stop wasting taxpayer money and start investing seriously in projects that protect vulnerable women?
Mr. Speaker, I point to your direction in these matters. You do have the ability to, as you have on many occasions, censure different members or remind them of their behaviour. However, it is incumbent upon all of us to manage our own behaviour here. That includes members of the government giving answers, which frankly, many Canadians find repulsive. I think that by all of us raising the point in debate, that includes the government actually being accountable to members of the opposition by providing real, relevant answers, which many of these ministers do not.
Mr. Speaker, the minister's misleading comments about his service record are a direct hit on our men and women in uniform. Yesterday, a parent of a Canadian Armed Forces member wrote me saying that the minister's stolen valour has directly affected the morale and confidence of Canada's front line infantry soldiers. The feelings of our troops and veterans have gone from disappointment and outrage to distrust and dismay. Will the minister do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about that record. In our last year in office, the defence spending was nearly twice what the Liberals spent in any given year. We came in and we bought our men and women proper uniforms for Afghanistan, after the Liberals sent them into a desert with green camouflage. We bought them new planes so they did not have to hitch rides from the Americans. We bought them helicopters, tanks, and new LAVs so they could protect themselves from IEDs.The Liberals sent them to Afghanistan with none of that support, and the minister knows that very well. We are happy to compare our record to the Liberal decade of darkness.
Mr. Speaker, when he was in opposition, the member who is now the Minister of Public Safety accused the Conservative government of wanting to hide the truth when it refused to open an inquiry on Afghan detainees. Now, the Liberal government is the one that is refusing to launch a public inquiry.What has changed? Why have the Liberals once again changed their tune?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to defence issues, the Liberals cannot be trusted. After he cut $12 billion from Canada's defence budget, the finance minister said that our military was appropriately provisioned. Now the defence minister, after he was caught misleading Canadians about his military service record, is promising to restore the funding that his government cut in the first place. The problem is that, now, no one believes what these guys say. The only way for the government to begin to regain the confidence of our troops is for the minister to step aside. When will he?
Mr. Speaker, the 308-page omnibus bill bears the signature of the Minister of Finance. My question is for him.How is it that this man, a dignified, honourable man who has always been steadfast, is now doing the Liberal government's dirty work?
Mr. Speaker, it is a shame that we sometimes cannot hear everything a member has to say.Last fall, after being caught red-handed, the Liberals decided to press pause on their cash for access fundraisers, but as we might have guessed, they decided to press play again. This evening, the Prime Minister will be in Montreal rubbing shoulders with some of the Liberal Party's generous donors. The Liberals seem to think that no one will notice, however. It is though they are trying to play a Jedi mind trick on us by waving their hand and saying, This is not a cash for access fundraiser.Honestly, do the Liberals not realize that Canadians can see right through them?
Mr. Speaker, given what has been said, we would like to review Hansard and we will get back to you in a relatively short time span.
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Quebec says that it needs 14 judges to be appointed in order to avoid lengthy proceedings that result in the release of the accused pursuant to the Jordan ruling. I did say 14. What did the Minister of Justice do? She appointed four judges. Does the minister realize that she may be enabling the release of dangerous criminals, putting Quebeckers at risk, and helping to discredit our justice system?
Mr. Speaker, documents reveal that the Minister of Status of Women spent more money renovating her offices than on supporting shelters for abused women.While the minister was spending over $1 million on her luxury accommodations, she spent less than $700,000 on emergency housing for battered women.How can the minister justify this blatant misuse taxpayer funds while every night women in need are being turned away from emergency shelters across Canada because of the lack of funding?
Mr. Speaker, the previous Conservative government allowed the agreement to expire and did nothing to initiate negotiations. We are now facing the fifth softwood lumber dispute, and our workers and producers have never been found in the wrong. We disagree strongly with the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair and punitive duty. The American accusations are baseless and unfounded. We continue to raise this important issue with the U.S., as the Prime Minister did with the President just last week.
Mr. Speaker, a Canadian citizen, Sun Qian, has been imprisoned in Beijing for her belief in truth, compassion, and tolerance.Canada's new ambassador to China refused to publicly protest this latest case of Chinese extrajudicial detention, but by muting content on the plight of dual citizens unjustly held in China, Iran, Turkey, or any other undemocratic country, Canada is treating these citizens as second-class citizens.Why are the Liberals prioritizing trade and muting Canada's principled voice on the rule of law?
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary budget officer is concerned, and rightfully so. The government is using Bill C-44 to try to take away his power. As the parliamentary budget officer himself said, this will undermine his independence and political impartiality. Why? Because, from now on, the parliamentary budget officer will have to report to the Speaker of the House, and he will have to submit his game plan for the year. I really like you, Mr. Speaker, but you should have nothing to do with the work of the parliamentary budget officer.Why is the Liberal government stooping so low?
Mr. Speaker, if the minister does not have the honour to resign, he should be fired. Instead of choosing to keep the disgraced minister in place, the Prime Minister could choose the member for Orléans, a former army commander. He could choose the MP for KanataCarleton, a former navigator and former squadron commander. He could choose the MP for AuroraOak RidgesRichmond Hill, a former air force captain. He could choose any one of these Liberals who has not been accused of stealing valour.Why will the Prime Minister not fire the minister and replace him with someone worthy of the trust of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence may have apologized for embellishing his service record, but it is not enough. His claim of being the architect of operation Medusa, a claim that he made at least twice, when it was not true, was intended for one thing: to make him look good as a Liberal politician. This is a violation of the honour expected of men and women in uniform. He has now lost their trust and their respect. As a result, he simply cannot continue in the job that he has.After what he has done, does he really think staying on is the best situation for the troops?
Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that a soldier has the right to complain, but the Prime Minister and the defence minister are actively denying that right to our soldiers who were deployed in the fight against ISIS. The defence minister made a promise to give back the benefits he took away from those troops. Now he has broken that promise and he is clamping down on those who dare speak out.Here we have yet another example of the defence minister minister breaking his word to our military. Can he not see why he has lost their confidence?
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important matter for us.However, I want to remind the hon. member of our Prime Minister's repeated confirmation that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian. Unlike the previous government, we have never shied away from defending our Canadian citizens abroad.Consular services are being provided to all citizens who are in need. We are seized by this particular matter that the hon. member has raised. We are providing assistance to the family and we will continue to advocate for our citizens abroad.
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Minister of National Defence cannot escape this quagmire of his own making. He has lost the confidence of the Canadian people, of our allies, and, most important, our men and women in uniform. There are 12 members of the Liberal caucus who have served in the Canadian Forces and only one of them has been accused of stealing valour.When will the Prime Minister fire the Minister of National Defence and replace him with someone worthy of the respect of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, no members of the Canadian Forces should be at a disadvantage because of their service to Canada. The Prime Minister stood with his hand over his heart and he promised, no veteran should have to take their own government to court. The Liberals have not fulfilled their campaign promise to return to lifelong pensions, forcing Equitas veterans to continue to fight in court. So long as the minister continues to delay introducing promised lifelong pensions, our new veterans will remain at a disadvantage. When will the Liberals stop the necessity for the court action and bring back lifelong pensions for veterans, as they promised?
Mr. Speaker, Canada's forestry industry supports hundreds of thousands of good, middle-class jobs. We strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair, punitive tax. Their accusations are unfounded. We will continue to bring the matter up with the United States, just as the Prime Minister did with the U.S. President.The coalition never offered conditions that Canada could accept. We want a good agreement, not just any agreement.
Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, I am addressing you in your capacity as the custodian of our rights and privileges. For weeks, the government has been claiming that all members will be able to fully participate in the parliamentary reform. It said so as recently as yesterday. However, nothing could be further from the truth.The government's proposed parliamentary reform and the approach it is taking to this issue violate the rights and privileges of members who do not belong to recognized parties. Hundreds of thousands of voters are being muzzled.I checked, and I can tell the House that the letter from the Leader of the Government on the changes to electoral reform was sent only to her counterparts in the recognized parties. Not only were we not informed by letter like the other parliamentarians, but we had to learn about the leader's intentions in the newspapers.We did not get the leader's letter until yesterday afternoon. What is worse, she indicated in that letter that the government will now have to use time allocation motions more often. That means we will have even less speaking time. The government's decision will limit our freedom of speech and have a direct impact on our work, the work that hundreds of thousands of Quebeckers elected us to do.How can the government possibly amend the Standing Orders of the House without including every single elected member of the House, with no exceptions?The government is accountable not just to recognized parties in the House, but also to all those elected by Canadians. This is set out very clearly in the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, on page 61: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.Members of non-recognized parties are 34th in the order of speaking, and the leader has announced that the number of closure motions will increase. This means that we will never get a turn to speak. This will permanently silence small minority political parties, as well as voters. It is an unacceptable attack on the freedom of speech of the members of the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party. Mr. Speaker, in the next few weeks, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs will debate the the reform of Parliament, its procedures, and its Standing Orders. It will establish the new parliamentary rules that you will have to enforce. I would like to bring to your attention that as a result of the defeat of our motion of April 5, these changes will be discussed and amended without our being able to fully participate in the discussions. It was the government that defeated our motion. We are barred from all committees. This practice is discriminatory and unfair for non-recognized parties. These rules and procedures discriminate against non-recognized parties and run counter to the principle that the privileges protect the rights of every voter.Mr. Speaker, we are asking you to defend minority elected officials so that the majority does not crush them. I will repeat the quote: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.In your speech of December 3, 2015, you clearly stated that you wanted to reform parliamentary procedure. You said: I believe the Speaker should lead discussions about how to reform our procedures to achieve these things and to have measures that ensure that members are better able to focus on their work and carry out their duties.On page 89 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, we read: By far, the most important right accorded to members of the House is the exercise of freedom of speech in parliamentary proceedings. A little further on, it is described as a fundamental right without which they would be hampered in the performance of their duties.The Speaker's role in protecting this privilege in particular is set out on page 308. The duty of the Speaker is to ensure that the right of members to free speech is protected....Therefore, Mr. Speaker, as the custodian of our privileges, it is your duty to intervene to ensure that the elected members of non-recognized parliamentary groups are not deprived of their most fundamental right, the right to speak, and the right to vote in committee and in the House on behalf of their constituents.I am asking you today to guide us as to how to reform our procedures so that you can protect the rights and privileges of parliamentarians belonging to non-recognized parties. In fact, we hold that there are four breaches of our parliamentary privileges. First, the procedure put forward by the government to reform House procedures and practices without the participation of all parliamentary groups, who are excluded from the committee on parliamentary reform, is not in keeping with the principle of fairness that must guide the Speaker's rulings and infringes on our freedom of speech.Second, the government's expressed intent to use its parliamentary majority rather than seeking a consensus among elected officials to make changes to the Standing Orders and procedures is not in keeping with the practices and customs in that regard.Third, the government's expressed intent to use time allocation more frequently inordinately violates the freedom of speech of non-recognized parties, especially since it has announced that it will use its parliamentary majority to push through its reforms.Fourth, the fact that elected members of non-recognized parties were not informed of the government's intentions regarding the procedural amendments at the same time as the recognized parties is a clear indication that parliamentarians from non-recognized parties are not being treated equitably.We are counting on you, Mr. Speaker, and we await your wise judgment.
Mr. Speaker, what the Minister of National Defence did was not a mistake, and he cannot solve the problem by trying to avoid the storm. On at least two occasions, he embellished his record and took credit for the work of others. He did so to look good as a Liberal politician. This is inexcusable, particularly for a member of the armed forces. He simply cannot keep his portfolio after what he did. Why are the minister and the Prime Minister having such a hard time understanding this?
Mr. Speaker, a few years ago, an opposition member asked the parliamentary budget officer to have a look at the true cost of the F-35s, and did we ever learn a lot. Who was it who had asked? It was the current Minister of Fisheries.Unfortunately, under the changes his government wants to make, the PBO would no longer be able to study such things. The minister wants to prevent us from having the same opportunities that he himself had. He also wants to prevent the parliamentary budget officer from undertaking any studies that were not already planned at the beginning of the year.Why do the Liberals want to put the government spending watchdog in a straitjacket?
Mr. Speaker, I do have the usual Thursday question. As you well know, I get up every Thursday, and I ask the government House leader what the government agenda is for the rest of the week and the week following. The government House leader tells us what the agenda is, and then we go and prepare. The only thing we have to go on is what the government House leader tells us. We are always responding to what the government is doing and to its agenda, but we get one day a week when we have an opposition day. Well, it amounts to about one day a week.The last time I asked the government House leader this question, she told me and this House what the schedule would be. It included an opposition day, which was supposed to happen today. There are extremely timely issues that are going on right now in the House of Commons. There is a huge degree of frustration here on this side of the House, but even more so, there is a lot going on in the Canadian military, and they are feeling a sense of betrayal and frustration.When our opposition day is taken away, when it is changed around, when games are played with our opposition day so that we cannot address these very serious concerns, I think that contributes to the level of frustration on this side of the House.I am going to ask the government House leader if she would tell us what the business of the House is for this week and for next week, and if we could please stick to that plan, it would be very much appreciated.
Mr. Speaker, today the Prime Minister met with his youth council, a body made up of 26 young people from interesting backgrounds, to discuss a very sensitive topic, namely reconciliation with indigenous peoples.Will the Prime Minister share the council's thoughts with us? No, because he refuses to talk to the media. Will the young people be able to publish their work at the end of the consultations? No, because they do not have permission from the Privy Council to do so . Can they talk about this on Facebook Live? Yes, but only in the presence of a chaperone.Talk about transparency and confidence in young people!Can the government tell me if any of the Prime Minister's other councils have so many constraints?
Mr. Speaker, as Minister of National Defence, I will always ensure we have all the necessary tools. We have conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review. We have been making sure that we look at all the analysis to ensure where all the gaps are within our funding system, where all the cuts were made, so we can have a sustainable, predictable funding model for our Canadian Armed Forces so they can plan. We are making sure all the right benefits are there, the right equipment is there and all the tools necessary for all their training and operational missions.
Mr. Speaker, one might think that the hon. member for Hamilton WestAncasterDundas and I had a simultaneous sense of a point of order. I ask for your indulgence for just a moment. It has been six years since those of us elected on May 2, 2011, have served. I recall distinctly the opening of the 41st Parliament, in which most parties in this place took a pledge never to heckle. The initiative was led by the late Jack Layton on behalf of the New Democrats. Stephen Harper endorsed it, and for comic relief, my entire caucus pledged never to heckle. Since that time, the disappointed group in this corner, led by interim leader Bob Rae, said that they were not so sure, that they might need to heckle. At this point I need to turn for reference to a quote from the great A.A. Milne in the poem of good bears and bad bears: And then quite suddenly (just like Us) One got Better and the other got Wuss.The NDP members, over the last few weeks, have hardly been heckling at all. The Liberals have hardly heckled at all. However, it seems the Conservatives feel there is a void and they must fill it with more noise than I have ever heard in this place. I urge them, as individuals and collectively, to please honour Standing Order 16 and 18 and find a way to tone down the violence
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I gave a speech on the announcement of the defence policy review, where we are actually giving a non-partisan analysis, making sure that we have the current state of affairs. We talked about the cuts.I thought the Leader of the Opposition would be happy to understand that we have a certain state of affairs, so we can actually now create a plan to move forward. That is what the defence policy is actually going to do.We are going to make sure our men and women have all the right tools. They need sustainable and predictable funding, and that is exactly what we are going to do.
Mr. Speaker, it has been almost two weeks since the U.S. decided to apply duties of up to 24% on Canadian softwood lumber. It has been six months since President Trump's election and 18 months since the Liberals came to office, and the Liberals failed to see this coming. They failed to come up with a concrete plan to deal with this emerging crisis and to help the hundreds of thousands of families impacted.Can the minister confirm that she walked away from negotiations with Obama, thinking she could get a better deal with Trump?
Mr. Speaker, I will always honour the service of our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces, the ones I have not met and the ones with whom I have even served.As the Minister of National Defence, it is my responsibility and our government's responsibility to make sure our Canadian Armed Forces have all the right and necessary equipment, and have the right benefits.We conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review in which all members of Parliament had an opportunity to take part. This is exactly what this defence policy will do: set the Canadian Armed Forces on the right funded track for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, since we formed government, we have maintained the spending levels and planned increases while conducting the defence policy review, and we are developing a new policy for Canada, a rigorously costed plan that will put the Canadian Armed Forces on a sustainable footing.The Conservative rhetoric simply does not match up with the facts. After years of cuts and underspending, we are now in a troubling position where even the status quo of spending on defence will not maintain the status quo of capability. Our new defence policy is going to fix that.
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured and privileged to serve with so many members of our caucus who have had military service. I also consider them mentors as well.As Minister of National Defence, it is a privilege to be able to serve in this role. I will work extremely hard, as our government does, to ensure our troops have all the necessary tools. I will come for advice for all the folks who have served in the military and as members of Parliament. I have opened up to all for service of any other party
Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Department of Commerce levelled a direct attack on our forestry producers last month with new tariffs on softwood lumber. According to Michael Froman, the former U.S. trade representative, the Liberal government had an opportunity to sign an agreement last year with an offer from the Obama administration, but it chose to wait, thinking it would get a better deal with the Trump government.What is up now?
Mr. Speaker, we know that communities in Quebec and Ontario have been dealing with flooding over the past few days. Some people have had to leave their homes and they know that they are going to have to deal with the damage when they return. There is a direct link between the flooding and climate change, and we know that these events will occur more often over the next few years.Can the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness tell us how he will work with the provinces to help these people?
Mr. Speaker, soldiers deployed in the fight against ISIS are saying that they feel despair after the minister betrayed them by not fully restoring their danger pay. This is in addition to the Minister of National Defence's already established casual relationship with the truth that is demoralizing our troops.A 27-year veteran stated, The Defence Minister cannot continue to lead the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, having lost the respect and trust in this way.Will the minister listen to the voices of those who have served, do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, the approach of the previous Conservative government was to set up the parliamentary budget officer in a fashion that was independent, one of the reasons of which was to allow him or her to examine political party platforms before elections were called to determine if they were in fact costed properly.We know there has been a very severe problem with the Liberal costing in its last platform. In fact, it is about a $25 billion problem. Could it be that the Liberals are trying to shut down the independence of the parliamentary budget officer before their next political platform can be costed?
Mr. Speaker, it has been 11 days since the crippling tariffs have been levied on our small and medium producers. On this side of the House, we are hearing from concerned producers, manufacturers, and fearful forestry workers. The minister says we should expect job losses. This is unacceptable, and Canadians deserve better.What is the minister doing to reassure the over one million Canadians who depend on the forestry industry for their livelihoods, and what is the plan for our communities that depend on forestry?
Mr. Speaker, at Vimy Ridge, I thought of the brave Canadians who fought to defend our freedom; those soldiers had partners, parents, and siblings. It is true that when members serve, their entire family serves along with them. The families are the strength behind the uniform. In budget 2017, we announced a centre of excellence on mental health and PTSD, to advance research, education, and outreach services. This would lead to better mental health outcomes for our veterans and their families.
Mr. Speaker, last month I had the honour of travelling to France for the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge. It was an immense privilege to stand where, 100 years ago, four Canadian divisions came together to claim their place in the history books. I was humbled to speak to the family members of soldiers who came home from that battle that changed men. While they may not have had the words at the time, mental health injuries and PTSD were a reality then, and they are, unfortunately, the reality for many of our men and women in uniform today. What is the Minister of Veterans Affairs doing to address the mental health needs of veterans and their families?
Mr. Speaker, why is the minister in California when she should be in Calgary?The Prime Minister should be listening to Jocelyn Bamford of the Coalition of Concerned Manufacturers, who said that we are standing on a beach with a tidal wave called cap-and-trade barrelling down upon us, and our government still doesn't realize that this tsunami will destroy manufacturing in Ontario. She said that businesses are terrified of what the federal government is doing and that government is supposed to help us, but its policies are causing us to consider moving our growth to other jurisdictions. What is up
Mr. Speaker, throughout our military operations in Afghanistan, Canada has committed to ensuring the individuals detained by the Canadian Armed Forces were handled and transferred and released in accordance with our obligations under international law. Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subject to significant scrutiny, including an external review by the Federal Court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations.I will be happy to make myself available to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner should she choose to revisit the issue.
Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege to rise on this traditional territory and to acknowledge that the work of this feminist government is making a real impact in the lives of women and girls across the country, with $100 million invested in a gender-based violence strategy, $11 billion invested in housing, a poverty reduction strategy, investments in supporting women entrepreneurs, investments in women in STEM, $90 million in a network of shelters across the country, $7 billion in child care, flexibility and more choice in EI and caregiving benefits, I could go on.I hope the member opposite asks me again.
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to be a government that is actually engaging the next generation. To hear from youth, to have them at the table to hear their constructive feedback, and to ensure that they are supportive of the ideas for change for the way this country works is very important. That is why the government took the initiative of having a youth council. Not only does the Prime Minister have a youth council, he encourages every member in this place to also have a youth council to get ideas from their local constituencies to ensure that we are serving in the best interests of all Canadians, Canadians of today and Canadians of tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, I was actually very pleased to be in Calgary just a month ago talking to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce. There were 300 people there to listen to how we are planning to create jobs, grow our economy, and innovate.I was in California because I am as much a minister of economy as I am a minister of environment. I am attracting investment so that we can create good jobs for companies like CarbonCure Technologies Inc. from Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, which has new processes that will take the carbon dioxide that we do not want, inject it into cement
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Montcalm. He stated his position, and I completely agree with him.As members, we are all equals here in this place. Our constituents, the people who live in our ridings, are equals, and it is only fair that we all have the same rights and freedoms here in the House. We are treated differently only because of a law that was passed in 1963. I think that was the year that Parliament passed the law that granted money to parties with more than 12 members.In 1963, it was about giving parties with more than 12 members some money. Over time it has morphed, without any specific law ever passing, to say that members of legitimate elected parties, in my case a party that runs nationally, and in the case of the Bloc a party that runs very strongly in one province, should have, and would have in other parliaments within the commonwealth system, the same rights. For the matter, independents should have the same rights, as their voters have the same rights.In this case, we do not have those rights, because as we know, over the years we have adopted traditions in which parties with more than 12 members have more rights. It has not been reassessed since 1963. In the early 1990s, a former member of Parliament for WinnipegTranscona at the time, the hon. Bill Blaikie, made a brilliant argument as to why the NDP, with nine seats, should have the right to sit on committees. At the time, with all due respect to my colleague from the Bloc, that was objected to by the Bloc, because it had more than 12 members, and they were mad, because when they had fewer than 12, the NDP had not supported them. It would be wonderful to review what has happened by accretion, without any actual decision ever rendered in this place, and go back to the question of why members of Parliament who happen to be in parties with fewer than 12 members should have fewer rights. I set aside the issue of money. Why should we have fewer rights than any other MP?
Mr. Speaker, as I was just trying to say, we believe that when it comes to the important work the parliamentary budget officer does, the office should have its independence. It should have more effectiveness and more independence, and that is why we have introduced legislation to make this happen. We are open to amendments and we welcome them.When it comes to the member's referral to omnibus legislation, what we are proposing is to ensure there is not an abuse of omnibus legislation, like was the case under the Stephen Harper Conservative government. We are saying we can improve the way this place works. Let us have that conversation.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his service. When I visited Kuwait for the first time, I was able to learn about the tax-free exemption and to learn directly about this issue, which we were able to immediately fix. Unfortunately, much more work needs to be done, and that is what our government is doing right now. We are reviewing all compensation. We are also making sure we can actually have a long-term solution to this problem.
Mr. Speaker, since becoming Minister of National Defence, we took an extensive defence policy into making sure that we looked after our Canadian Armed Forces. That is exactly what we have done. We spoke to Canadians all across this country who had MP consultations to make sure that we have a thorough analysis, to make sure that we have a model that is going to look after our Canadian Armed Forces. I look forward to presenting our new defence policy that is going to look after our troops long into the future.
Mr. Speaker, my responsibility and our government's responsibility is to make sure that we look after our troops, to make sure they have all the appropriate tools and equipment. That is exactly what our defence policy is doing. It is making sure that we have a fully funded and rigorously costed policy that is going to look out into the next 20 years, a policy that is going to make sure they have all the right tools, a policy that is going to make sure that, when we send them out on missions, they have everything they need.
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-44, Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1, is currently before the House.Tomorrow morning, we will consider the Senate amendments to Bill C-4 on unions, and then move on to Bill C-44 after question period. Next week, we have the pleasure of having two allotted days, one on Monday and one on Thursday.Ideally, I would like to finish debate on the budget legislation next Tuesday in order to send the bill to committee for in-depth study. Bill C-4 will be considered on Wednesday, with the hope of sending it back to the Senate that day.I do my best to provide a calendar that is as accurate as possible so that all members can prepare. From time to time, things need to change. As members know, we have had some important conversations in this place. We will always ensure that members have the ability to have those important conversations. That is why I would ask that we all continue working better together.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I honour the service of all Canadian Armed Forces members who are currently serving and have served before.As the Minister of National Defence and as part of this government, my job is to ensure we look after the Canadian Armed Forces as we send them on training missions or any operations abroad. That is what our new defence policy for Canada will do. It is a fully funded and fully costed defence policy that will provide predictable funding for our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces to be able to plan and carry out their missions.
Mr. Speaker, Statistics Canada reports that now Canada's seniors outnumber its children for the first time in history. The accelerated pace of aging in the population carries profound implications. We need to prepare for proper housing and home care and have a long-term plan.Given that we have known about this trend for years, it is surprising to see how little is in this year's Liberal budget for our seniors. Will the government react to this news and finally implement a national seniors strategy?
Mr. Speaker, in order to achieve this greater independence from the parliamentary budget officer, the Liberals have given the Speaker of the Senate veto power over his work plan. Who appoints the Speaker of the Senate? According to section 34 of the Constitution, it is the Prime Minister. Therefore, by independence, the Prime Minister means that the parliamentary budget officer will have to get prior approval to do his work from someone who is hand-picked by the Prime Minister. Is that the member's definition of independence?
Yes, Mr. Speaker. On this point of order, my colleague opposite has actually not cited a specific Standing Order, so I would beg that it is not a point of order. However, since the matter of heckling has become relevant, I would ask
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the service of every Canadian Armed Forces member and also every veteran, our government is focused on making sure our troops have all the necessary benefits to look after their families in making sure we have all the right capabilities. Last year we conducted a thorough defence policy review that had a very good analysis and gave us a good area for us to work on by making sure we have a fully costed, fully funded defence policy that will look after the Canadian Armed Forces for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, the current situation has been monitored from the very beginning by the Government Operations Centre. We have indicated to all the provincial governments that we are on standby, ready to assist as required, and if a provincial government should make a request for assistance from the Government of Canada, we will respond very, very quickly.In terms of the future in dealing with climate change, I advise the hon. member to examine very carefully the budget, because it includes $2.6 billion for this very purpose.
Mr. Speaker, I want to assure my colleague that, ever since Canada restored funding to this UN agency for Palestinian refugees, we have been following it very closely, and Canada's presence at the table is making a difference. We are ensuring that background checks are done on all financial services employees. We have helped train 3,000 employees so far, including executives and teachers, on the importance of web independence, and we are reviewing the educational materials. I would rather see those children in that UN school than on the street.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons.Our government welcomes suggestions on how to improve the bill and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget office. We appreciate the work he does, and I look forward to working with the member opposite.
Mr. Speaker, we understand that we need to take action to tackle climate change and we need to create good jobs. That is exactly what we are doing. We are making polluters pay and at the same time attracting investment in our innovative industries. I was just in California, and I was very pleased to meet with venture capitalists, private equity firms, investors, and innovators who are looking at Canada as a great place to invest. The party opposite may not care about creating jobs, but that is exactly what we are focused on.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subjected to scrutiny, including an external review by the federal court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations. I would be happy to make myself available to the Commissioner of Conflict of Interest and Ethics if she chooses to revisit this issue.
Mr. Speaker, residents of Yamachiche want clear answers to explain why two-metre waves damaged their homes. Damage could run into the thousands of dollars and someone has to be held responsible.The Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard says that an investigation is under way. However, the Minister of Transport will not confirm that.Can someone tell us in no uncertain terms whether an investigation has been launched? If so, what is the timeline and when will the results be made public?
Mr. Speaker, as the member is well aware, we are committed to a pension-for-life option for our veterans. We made that announcement this year, and those details will be forthcoming. Further to that point, we have augmented and strengthened financial security for our veterans. In budget 2016, we raised the ELB to 90% of a soldier's pre-release salary and we raised the disability award. The veterans' ombudsman and many veterans were highly supportive of these changes. It meant more money in veterans' pockets, for them and their families.
Mr. Speaker, we will make sure that our troops have all the necessary benefits to carry out their duties. It is our government that dealt with the immediate inequity for the soldiers who lost their tax-free status in operation Impact. It is our government that is working hard to review the compensation rules and find a long-term solution needed to fix the mess we inherited, to ensure a fair and equitable process for all.
Mr. Speaker, earlier today, during the members' statements, we heard a beautifully orated speech in a language that 98% of us were unable to comprehend. I wonder if, as a matter of courtesy, if members choose to do that, they could provide prior translation to our interpreters so that we would be able to enjoy the content of their statement and also provide the appropriate support and response.
Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to our colleague for this opportunity to express how proud we are of our record of helping seniors.Last year we put into place a measure which is taking 13,000 seniors out of poverty, 90% of whom are women, through an increase in the guaranteed income supplement of up to $1,000 per year. We are also investing significantly in housing, health care, and support in communities to help our seniors live in a dignified and secure environment.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, our government has taken significant steps to make the judicial appointments process transparent and accountable and to ensure that there is more diversity on the bench. That includes appointing four new judges in Quebec. Our government is very proud that 60% of the appointments are women. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our justice system, and that is good news for all members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the parliamentary budget officer, this government believes
Mr. Speaker, rail transportation is crucial to our economy, and provides us with an efficient system of moving people and goods through this great and vast country of ours. Nothing is more important than rail safety, which is paramount to users, to railway workers, and most of all, to all the communities across Canada that have rail lines passing through them.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport tell us what our government is doing to ensure that Canada has the strictest rail safety standards?
Mr. Speaker, I call them like I see them.Special access to the
Mr. Speaker, our government has taken significant steps to ensure that the appointment process for judges is transparent and responsible and fosters more diversity, among other things. To date, the Minister of Justice has appointed 55 judges and 22 deputy judges across the country, including four new appointments in Quebec.Our government is very proud of the fact that 60% of the judges appointed are women. That is up 35% compared to the previous government's record. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our judicial system. That is very good news for all members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, northern Ontario is a vast region with communities of all sizes scattered throughout the area. Promoting economic development is a challenge in this region. However, northern Ontario has many advantages and considerable potential.There is a large potential to be unlocked in the region with the many emerging innovative ideas and companies from the region. Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development let us know what steps he has taken to promote local regional economic development in northern Ontario?
Mr. Speaker, I recognize, as we all do, that we are here to represent Canadians, and I say as a new member how impressed I am with how hard working each and every MP in this room is. I appreciate the dedication and commitment. However, over the last couple of days, I want to address the level of heckling and unparliamentary conduct that is taking place in the House. It is unfortunate, because we have welcomed five new members into the House.I thank you for your intervention today, Mr. Speaker, but I want to call on all my colleagues in the House, all of us, from both sides of the House, to start conducting ourselves in ways that we can be proud of, because we are representing Canadians, and we want to stand proud of the way we conduct ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, I will take the opportunity to remind all colleagues that we invested close to $90 million in shelters, and $1 million additionally went to collecting data from across the country to ensure that our investments and our efforts are based on an evidence-based approach.I am sure the hon. member agrees that restoring the right to advocacy to women's organizations across the country is essential to a healthy and vibrant women's movement too, and that is exactly what we have done.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for LaurentidesLabelle for his question.Rail safety remains the minister's top priority. That is why we regularly review the Railway Safety Act to ensure that it reflects what the industry needs and what the population needs. We are very pleased to be able to begin this review one year earlier than planned, and we look forward to receiving the committee's recommendations.
Mr. Speaker, the government has been working for many months across many departments in the Government of Canada and, just as importantly, with all of the ministers from the provinces. We know that it is our first responsibility to help the workers who might be displaced, the producers whose companies are at risk, and the communities that will be affected. Not only is it important to look at the short term, but also the long term, and we are also very active on that front, by an expansion of export markets and diversification. We are very focused on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, we are going to make sure that all our troops have all the right benefits. There is a difference between a tax-free allowance and the hardship allowance benefits.We have fixed the immediate problem. We are conducting a much more thorough review to look at the wider compensation package, to make sure we have a fair and equitable solution for all those who serve.
Mr. Speaker, our government is taking real action to be more open and transparent with Canadians. That is why my new mandate involves introducing a bill to make political fundraising more open and transparent. If that bill passes, it will apply to events attended by the Prime Minister, ministers, party leaders, and party leadership candidates. It is always possible to raise the bar, and we will continue to take action to make the government more transparent.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member understands the intent of this government in that we believe the parliamentary budget officer should have independence so he can serve Parliament in the best way possible. We believe we can improve the way and the resources to that office. As I have also said, we are open to amendments. We welcome constructive feedback. It is a very different approach than the previous government, obviously.
Mr. Speaker, I already answered that question. Our plan is to strengthen the position of the parliamentary budget officer so that he can properly serve Parliament. He will have a meaningful mandate and be called upon to consider the economic and financial impacts of the issues submitted to him. As I also said, our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill. We are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate all of the work that he does.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for the question.Our government recognizes the importance of safe and environmentally sound navigation. We are aware of the situation in Yamachiche and can confirm that we have received complaints about this incident. We are currently assessing the factors that may have contributed to this incident.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to giving more independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and that is the primary objective of the bill recently introduced in the House of Commons. Our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill, and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate the work he does.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Sudbury for his question.He and his colleagues from the region are staunch supporters of northern Ontario.I was excited to be in northern Ontario to announce an increase of $25 million for FedNor. Along with the launch of this, we also put forward the prosperity and growth strategy for northern Ontario. This will help the community; this will help indigenous communities; this will help diversify the economy; and, in particular, this will help small businesses grow and scale up, which will create good-quality jobs in northern Ontario.
Mr. Speaker, we thank the parliamentary budget officer for his analysis of the provisions of Bill C-44. We look forward to working with him and others to improve the bill to ensure we accomplish the objective of having an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. Our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons. We believe that it should be an officer who reports to Parliament, unlike the previous government, which felt that he should report to the Library of Parliament.
Most negative speeches
Mr. Speaker, the four fundamental values of the Canadian Armed Forces are duty, integrity, loyalty, and courage. Distorting reality is not on the list.With all his mistruths, the minister has lost all credibility. Spokesperson Charles McCabe of the Armed Forces Pensioners'/Annuitants' Association of Canada said, It is disgusting. Everyone is disgusted. He has lost the confidence of everyone who wears or has worn the uniform.When will he step down?
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Quebec says that it needs 14 judges to be appointed in order to avoid lengthy proceedings that result in the release of the accused pursuant to the Jordan ruling. I did say 14. What did the Minister of Justice do? She appointed four judges. Does the minister realize that she may be enabling the release of dangerous criminals, putting Quebeckers at risk, and helping to discredit our justice system?
Mr. Speaker, it has been 11 days since the crippling tariffs have been levied on our small and medium producers. On this side of the House, we are hearing from concerned producers, manufacturers, and fearful forestry workers. The minister says we should expect job losses. This is unacceptable, and Canadians deserve better.What is the minister doing to reassure the over one million Canadians who depend on the forestry industry for their livelihoods, and what is the plan for our communities that depend on forestry?
Mr. Speaker, soldiers deployed in the fight against ISIS are saying that they feel despair after the minister betrayed them by not fully restoring their danger pay. This is in addition to the Minister of National Defence's already established casual relationship with the truth that is demoralizing our troops.A 27-year veteran stated, The Defence Minister cannot continue to lead the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, having lost the respect and trust in this way.Will the minister listen to the voices of those who have served, do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, the flawed study of the Afghan detainees scandal was cut short by the Conservatives after only reviewing an initial set of documents. Stéphane Dion at that point said, [w]hen you read these documents, you will have questions to ask to your Prime Minister. He also said that the Conservatives were blocking an inquiry because of being afraid of having to answer to Canadians. Therefore, will the Minister of National Defence appear before the defence committee to answer questions about this scandal, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, why is the minister in California when she should be in Calgary?The Prime Minister should be listening to Jocelyn Bamford of the Coalition of Concerned Manufacturers, who said that we are standing on a beach with a tidal wave called cap-and-trade barrelling down upon us, and our government still doesn't realize that this tsunami will destroy manufacturing in Ontario. She said that businesses are terrified of what the federal government is doing and that government is supposed to help us, but its policies are causing us to consider moving our growth to other jurisdictions. What is up
Mr. Speaker, the minister's misleading comments about his service record are a direct hit on our men and women in uniform. Yesterday, a parent of a Canadian Armed Forces member wrote me saying that the minister's stolen valour has directly affected the morale and confidence of Canada's front line infantry soldiers. The feelings of our troops and veterans have gone from disappointment and outrage to distrust and dismay. Will the minister do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, the 308-page omnibus bill bears the signature of the Minister of Finance. My question is for him.How is it that this man, a dignified, honourable man who has always been steadfast, is now doing the Liberal government's dirty work?
Mr. Speaker, it has been almost two weeks since the U.S. decided to apply duties of up to 24% on Canadian softwood lumber. It has been six months since President Trump's election and 18 months since the Liberals came to office, and the Liberals failed to see this coming. They failed to come up with a concrete plan to deal with this emerging crisis and to help the hundreds of thousands of families impacted.Can the minister confirm that she walked away from negotiations with Obama, thinking she could get a better deal with Trump?
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary budget officer is concerned, and rightfully so. The government is using Bill C-44 to try to take away his power. As the parliamentary budget officer himself said, this will undermine his independence and political impartiality. Why? Because, from now on, the parliamentary budget officer will have to report to the Speaker of the House, and he will have to submit his game plan for the year. I really like you, Mr. Speaker, but you should have nothing to do with the work of the parliamentary budget officer.Why is the Liberal government stooping so low?
Mr. Speaker, the previous Conservative government allowed the agreement to expire and did nothing to initiate negotiations. We are now facing the fifth softwood lumber dispute, and our workers and producers have never been found in the wrong. We disagree strongly with the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair and punitive duty. The American accusations are baseless and unfounded. We continue to raise this important issue with the U.S., as the Prime Minister did with the President just last week.
Mr. Speaker, last month I had the honour of travelling to France for the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge. It was an immense privilege to stand where, 100 years ago, four Canadian divisions came together to claim their place in the history books. I was humbled to speak to the family members of soldiers who came home from that battle that changed men. While they may not have had the words at the time, mental health injuries and PTSD were a reality then, and they are, unfortunately, the reality for many of our men and women in uniform today. What is the Minister of Veterans Affairs doing to address the mental health needs of veterans and their families?
Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that a soldier has the right to complain, but the Prime Minister and the defence minister are actively denying that right to our soldiers who were deployed in the fight against ISIS. The defence minister made a promise to give back the benefits he took away from those troops. Now he has broken that promise and he is clamping down on those who dare speak out.Here we have yet another example of the defence minister minister breaking his word to our military. Can he not see why he has lost their confidence?
Mr. Speaker, documents reveal that the Minister of Status of Women spent more money renovating her offices than on supporting shelters for abused women.While the minister was spending over $1 million on her luxury accommodations, she spent less than $700,000 on emergency housing for battered women.How can the minister justify this blatant misuse taxpayer funds while every night women in need are being turned away from emergency shelters across Canada because of the lack of funding?
Mr. Speaker, the approach of the previous Conservative government was to set up the parliamentary budget officer in a fashion that was independent, one of the reasons of which was to allow him or her to examine political party platforms before elections were called to determine if they were in fact costed properly.We know there has been a very severe problem with the Liberal costing in its last platform. In fact, it is about a $25 billion problem. Could it be that the Liberals are trying to shut down the independence of the parliamentary budget officer before their next political platform can be costed?
Mr. Speaker, we know that communities in Quebec and Ontario have been dealing with flooding over the past few days. Some people have had to leave their homes and they know that they are going to have to deal with the damage when they return. There is a direct link between the flooding and climate change, and we know that these events will occur more often over the next few years.Can the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness tell us how he will work with the provinces to help these people?
Mr. Speaker, I call them like I see them.Special access to the
Mr. Speaker, when he was in opposition, the member who is now the Minister of Public Safety accused the Conservative government of wanting to hide the truth when it refused to open an inquiry on Afghan detainees. Now, the Liberal government is the one that is refusing to launch a public inquiry.What has changed? Why have the Liberals once again changed their tune?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the parliamentary budget officer, this government believes
Mr. Speaker, Canadian manufacturers can compete with anyone in the world provided they have a level playing field, yet these same manufacturers are at a tipping point as their energy costs and taxes skyrocket while under President Trump their American competitors will pay lower taxes and electricity costs. Instead of helping businesses, the Liberals are increasing taxes on them and strangling them with red tape. Why is the Prime Minister chasing Canada's manufacturing jobs out of Canada with a massive carbon tax?
Mr. Speaker, given what has been said, we would like to review Hansard and we will get back to you in a relatively short time span.
Mr. Speaker, I do have the usual Thursday question. As you well know, I get up every Thursday, and I ask the government House leader what the government agenda is for the rest of the week and the week following. The government House leader tells us what the agenda is, and then we go and prepare. The only thing we have to go on is what the government House leader tells us. We are always responding to what the government is doing and to its agenda, but we get one day a week when we have an opposition day. Well, it amounts to about one day a week.The last time I asked the government House leader this question, she told me and this House what the schedule would be. It included an opposition day, which was supposed to happen today. There are extremely timely issues that are going on right now in the House of Commons. There is a huge degree of frustration here on this side of the House, but even more so, there is a lot going on in the Canadian military, and they are feeling a sense of betrayal and frustration.When our opposition day is taken away, when it is changed around, when games are played with our opposition day so that we cannot address these very serious concerns, I think that contributes to the level of frustration on this side of the House.I am going to ask the government House leader if she would tell us what the business of the House is for this week and for next week, and if we could please stick to that plan, it would be very much appreciated.
Mr. Speaker, what the Minister of National Defence did was not a mistake, and he cannot solve the problem by trying to avoid the storm. On at least two occasions, he embellished his record and took credit for the work of others. He did so to look good as a Liberal politician. This is inexcusable, particularly for a member of the armed forces. He simply cannot keep his portfolio after what he did. Why are the minister and the Prime Minister having such a hard time understanding this?
Mr. Speaker, residents of Yamachiche want clear answers to explain why two-metre waves damaged their homes. Damage could run into the thousands of dollars and someone has to be held responsible.The Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard says that an investigation is under way. However, the Minister of Transport will not confirm that.Can someone tell us in no uncertain terms whether an investigation has been launched? If so, what is the timeline and when will the results be made public?
Mr. Speaker, this self-proclaimed feminist Prime Minister sure talks a good talk, but has failed to do anything meaningful for women in need, like zip for pay equity.The Liberals have no issue padding the pockets of their Liberal friends and wasting taxpayer dollars on their lavish accommodations and vacations, but when it comes to funding shelters for women in need, the Liberals have not made it a priority.Will the minister finally stop wasting taxpayer money and start investing seriously in projects that protect vulnerable women?
Mr. Speaker, no members of the Canadian Forces should be at a disadvantage because of their service to Canada. The Prime Minister stood with his hand over his heart and he promised, no veteran should have to take their own government to court. The Liberals have not fulfilled their campaign promise to return to lifelong pensions, forcing Equitas veterans to continue to fight in court. So long as the minister continues to delay introducing promised lifelong pensions, our new veterans will remain at a disadvantage. When will the Liberals stop the necessity for the court action and bring back lifelong pensions for veterans, as they promised?
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured and privileged to serve with so many members of our caucus who have had military service. I also consider them mentors as well.As Minister of National Defence, it is a privilege to be able to serve in this role. I will work extremely hard, as our government does, to ensure our troops have all the necessary tools. I will come for advice for all the folks who have served in the military and as members of Parliament. I have opened up to all for service of any other party
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we are taught in the army is to lead by example.Ever since the Minister of National Defence joined the Liberal ranks, that lesson has been lost on him. He misled Canadians on withdrawing CF-18s from Iraq, on the capabilities of our Royal Canadian Air Force, on the danger pay for our troops fighting ISIS, and on his involvement in Operation Medusa. The minister is a complete joke. No one believes him any more.When will he step down?
Mr. Speaker, if the minister does not have the honour to resign, he should be fired. Instead of choosing to keep the disgraced minister in place, the Prime Minister could choose the member for Orléans, a former army commander. He could choose the MP for KanataCarleton, a former navigator and former squadron commander. He could choose the MP for AuroraOak RidgesRichmond Hill, a former air force captain. He could choose any one of these Liberals who has not been accused of stealing valour.Why will the Prime Minister not fire the minister and replace him with someone worthy of the trust of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, one might think that the hon. member for Hamilton WestAncasterDundas and I had a simultaneous sense of a point of order. I ask for your indulgence for just a moment. It has been six years since those of us elected on May 2, 2011, have served. I recall distinctly the opening of the 41st Parliament, in which most parties in this place took a pledge never to heckle. The initiative was led by the late Jack Layton on behalf of the New Democrats. Stephen Harper endorsed it, and for comic relief, my entire caucus pledged never to heckle. Since that time, the disappointed group in this corner, led by interim leader Bob Rae, said that they were not so sure, that they might need to heckle. At this point I need to turn for reference to a quote from the great A.A. Milne in the poem of good bears and bad bears: And then quite suddenly (just like Us) One got Better and the other got Wuss.The NDP members, over the last few weeks, have hardly been heckling at all. The Liberals have hardly heckled at all. However, it seems the Conservatives feel there is a void and they must fill it with more noise than I have ever heard in this place. I urge them, as individuals and collectively, to please honour Standing Order 16 and 18 and find a way to tone down the violence
Mr. Speaker, this is unbelievable. He is actually misleading Canadians again and misleading this House again about this particular issue around compensation for the troops who are fighting the fight against ISIS. Right here, I have a documentI looked at it before question periodsigned by the minister himself that clearly states the exact opposite of what he just said.When is the minister going to stop misleading Canadians and misleading the House and, frankly, step aside?
Let us try this again. A rose by any other name, Mr. Speaker. The answer we just heard is total nonsense. The PBO itself is saying that Liberals are restricting its ability to do its job.The Liberal omnibus bill will allow the government to shut down any PBO work that is not to the government's liking. It will give the Senate veto over the parliamentary budget officer's work and stop Canadians from getting the answers they so rightly deserve.These changes are clearly not designed to help accountability. They are designed to help the Liberal Party in governing. Why do the Liberals keep pursuing these unaccountable changes? When will they finally turn a corner and do what they promised to do for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, since we formed government, we have maintained the spending levels and planned increases while conducting the defence policy review, and we are developing a new policy for Canada, a rigorously costed plan that will put the Canadian Armed Forces on a sustainable footing.The Conservative rhetoric simply does not match up with the facts. After years of cuts and underspending, we are now in a troubling position where even the status quo of spending on defence will not maintain the status quo of capability. Our new defence policy is going to fix that.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Sudbury for his question.He and his colleagues from the region are staunch supporters of northern Ontario.I was excited to be in northern Ontario to announce an increase of $25 million for FedNor. Along with the launch of this, we also put forward the prosperity and growth strategy for northern Ontario. This will help the community; this will help indigenous communities; this will help diversify the economy; and, in particular, this will help small businesses grow and scale up, which will create good-quality jobs in northern Ontario.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. On this point of order, my colleague opposite has actually not cited a specific Standing Order, so I would beg that it is not a point of order. However, since the matter of heckling has become relevant, I would ask
Mr. Speaker, a Canadian citizen, Sun Qian, has been imprisoned in Beijing for her belief in truth, compassion, and tolerance.Canada's new ambassador to China refused to publicly protest this latest case of Chinese extrajudicial detention, but by muting content on the plight of dual citizens unjustly held in China, Iran, Turkey, or any other undemocratic country, Canada is treating these citizens as second-class citizens.Why are the Liberals prioritizing trade and muting Canada's principled voice on the rule of law?
Mr. Speaker, the current situation has been monitored from the very beginning by the Government Operations Centre. We have indicated to all the provincial governments that we are on standby, ready to assist as required, and if a provincial government should make a request for assistance from the Government of Canada, we will respond very, very quickly.In terms of the future in dealing with climate change, I advise the hon. member to examine very carefully the budget, because it includes $2.6 billion for this very purpose.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I honour the service of all Canadian Armed Forces members who are currently serving and have served before.As the Minister of National Defence and as part of this government, my job is to ensure we look after the Canadian Armed Forces as we send them on training missions or any operations abroad. That is what our new defence policy for Canada will do. It is a fully funded and fully costed defence policy that will provide predictable funding for our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces to be able to plan and carry out their missions.
Mr. Speaker, I want to assure my colleague that, ever since Canada restored funding to this UN agency for Palestinian refugees, we have been following it very closely, and Canada's presence at the table is making a difference. We are ensuring that background checks are done on all financial services employees. We have helped train 3,000 employees so far, including executives and teachers, on the importance of web independence, and we are reviewing the educational materials. I would rather see those children in that UN school than on the street.
Mr. Speaker, the Quebec justice minister had only one short comment about the appointment of four judges: we are short 10.In response to the crisis precipitated by the Jordan decision, Quebec appointed 18 new judges and hired about a hundred legal professionals. We do not want any more criminals to go free because their cases have been thrown out. Quebec took action and appointed 18 judges. Ottawa appointed four. That is ridiculous. What is the minister waiting for? When will she appoint judges to fill the 10 vacancies?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the cash for access scandal, the Liberals have somehow conveniently managed to miss the entire point. They keep polishing that turd, but it is still a turd somehow.The same special access to the Prime Minister and his cabinet
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about that record. In our last year in office, the defence spending was nearly twice what the Liberals spent in any given year. We came in and we bought our men and women proper uniforms for Afghanistan, after the Liberals sent them into a desert with green camouflage. We bought them new planes so they did not have to hitch rides from the Americans. We bought them helicopters, tanks, and new LAVs so they could protect themselves from IEDs.The Liberals sent them to Afghanistan with none of that support, and the minister knows that very well. We are happy to compare our record to the Liberal decade of darkness.
Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Department of Commerce levelled a direct attack on our forestry producers last month with new tariffs on softwood lumber. According to Michael Froman, the former U.S. trade representative, the Liberal government had an opportunity to sign an agreement last year with an offer from the Obama administration, but it chose to wait, thinking it would get a better deal with the Trump government.What is up now?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to defence issues, the Liberals cannot be trusted. After he cut $12 billion from Canada's defence budget, the finance minister said that our military was appropriately provisioned. Now the defence minister, after he was caught misleading Canadians about his military service record, is promising to restore the funding that his government cut in the first place. The problem is that, now, no one believes what these guys say. The only way for the government to begin to regain the confidence of our troops is for the minister to step aside. When will he?
Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, I am addressing you in your capacity as the custodian of our rights and privileges. For weeks, the government has been claiming that all members will be able to fully participate in the parliamentary reform. It said so as recently as yesterday. However, nothing could be further from the truth.The government's proposed parliamentary reform and the approach it is taking to this issue violate the rights and privileges of members who do not belong to recognized parties. Hundreds of thousands of voters are being muzzled.I checked, and I can tell the House that the letter from the Leader of the Government on the changes to electoral reform was sent only to her counterparts in the recognized parties. Not only were we not informed by letter like the other parliamentarians, but we had to learn about the leader's intentions in the newspapers.We did not get the leader's letter until yesterday afternoon. What is worse, she indicated in that letter that the government will now have to use time allocation motions more often. That means we will have even less speaking time. The government's decision will limit our freedom of speech and have a direct impact on our work, the work that hundreds of thousands of Quebeckers elected us to do.How can the government possibly amend the Standing Orders of the House without including every single elected member of the House, with no exceptions?The government is accountable not just to recognized parties in the House, but also to all those elected by Canadians. This is set out very clearly in the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, on page 61: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.Members of non-recognized parties are 34th in the order of speaking, and the leader has announced that the number of closure motions will increase. This means that we will never get a turn to speak. This will permanently silence small minority political parties, as well as voters. It is an unacceptable attack on the freedom of speech of the members of the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party. Mr. Speaker, in the next few weeks, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs will debate the the reform of Parliament, its procedures, and its Standing Orders. It will establish the new parliamentary rules that you will have to enforce. I would like to bring to your attention that as a result of the defeat of our motion of April 5, these changes will be discussed and amended without our being able to fully participate in the discussions. It was the government that defeated our motion. We are barred from all committees. This practice is discriminatory and unfair for non-recognized parties. These rules and procedures discriminate against non-recognized parties and run counter to the principle that the privileges protect the rights of every voter.Mr. Speaker, we are asking you to defend minority elected officials so that the majority does not crush them. I will repeat the quote: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.In your speech of December 3, 2015, you clearly stated that you wanted to reform parliamentary procedure. You said: I believe the Speaker should lead discussions about how to reform our procedures to achieve these things and to have measures that ensure that members are better able to focus on their work and carry out their duties.On page 89 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, we read: By far, the most important right accorded to members of the House is the exercise of freedom of speech in parliamentary proceedings. A little further on, it is described as a fundamental right without which they would be hampered in the performance of their duties.The Speaker's role in protecting this privilege in particular is set out on page 308. The duty of the Speaker is to ensure that the right of members to free speech is protected....Therefore, Mr. Speaker, as the custodian of our privileges, it is your duty to intervene to ensure that the elected members of non-recognized parliamentary groups are not deprived of their most fundamental right, the right to speak, and the right to vote in committee and in the House on behalf of their constituents.I am asking you today to guide us as to how to reform our procedures so that you can protect the rights and privileges of parliamentarians belonging to non-recognized parties. In fact, we hold that there are four breaches of our parliamentary privileges. First, the procedure put forward by the government to reform House procedures and practices without the participation of all parliamentary groups, who are excluded from the committee on parliamentary reform, is not in keeping with the principle of fairness that must guide the Speaker's rulings and infringes on our freedom of speech.Second, the government's expressed intent to use its parliamentary majority rather than seeking a consensus among elected officials to make changes to the Standing Orders and procedures is not in keeping with the practices and customs in that regard.Third, the government's expressed intent to use time allocation more frequently inordinately violates the freedom of speech of non-recognized parties, especially since it has announced that it will use its parliamentary majority to push through its reforms.Fourth, the fact that elected members of non-recognized parties were not informed of the government's intentions regarding the procedural amendments at the same time as the recognized parties is a clear indication that parliamentarians from non-recognized parties are not being treated equitably.We are counting on you, Mr. Speaker, and we await your wise judgment.
Mr. Speaker, a few years ago, an opposition member asked the parliamentary budget officer to have a look at the true cost of the F-35s, and did we ever learn a lot. Who was it who had asked? It was the current Minister of Fisheries.Unfortunately, under the changes his government wants to make, the PBO would no longer be able to study such things. The minister wants to prevent us from having the same opportunities that he himself had. He also wants to prevent the parliamentary budget officer from undertaking any studies that were not already planned at the beginning of the year.Why do the Liberals want to put the government spending watchdog in a straitjacket?
Mr. Speaker, Statistics Canada reports that now Canada's seniors outnumber its children for the first time in history. The accelerated pace of aging in the population carries profound implications. We need to prepare for proper housing and home care and have a long-term plan.Given that we have known about this trend for years, it is surprising to see how little is in this year's Liberal budget for our seniors. Will the government react to this news and finally implement a national seniors strategy?
Mr. Speaker, throughout our military operations in Afghanistan, Canada has committed to ensuring the individuals detained by the Canadian Armed Forces were handled and transferred and released in accordance with our obligations under international law. Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subject to significant scrutiny, including an external review by the Federal Court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations.I will be happy to make myself available to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner should she choose to revisit the issue.
Mr. Speaker, we will make sure that our troops have all the necessary benefits to carry out their duties. It is our government that dealt with the immediate inequity for the soldiers who lost their tax-free status in operation Impact. It is our government that is working hard to review the compensation rules and find a long-term solution needed to fix the mess we inherited, to ensure a fair and equitable process for all.
Mr. Speaker, at Vimy Ridge, I thought of the brave Canadians who fought to defend our freedom; those soldiers had partners, parents, and siblings. It is true that when members serve, their entire family serves along with them. The families are the strength behind the uniform. In budget 2017, we announced a centre of excellence on mental health and PTSD, to advance research, education, and outreach services. This would lead to better mental health outcomes for our veterans and their families.
Mr. Speaker, we thank the parliamentary budget officer for his analysis of the provisions of Bill C-44. We look forward to working with him and others to improve the bill to ensure we accomplish the objective of having an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. Our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons. We believe that it should be an officer who reports to Parliament, unlike the previous government, which felt that he should report to the Library of Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, as Minister of National Defence, I will always ensure we have all the necessary tools. We have conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review. We have been making sure that we look at all the analysis to ensure where all the gaps are within our funding system, where all the cuts were made, so we can have a sustainable, predictable funding model for our Canadian Armed Forces so they can plan. We are making sure all the right benefits are there, the right equipment is there and all the tools necessary for all their training and operational missions.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons.Our government welcomes suggestions on how to improve the bill and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget office. We appreciate the work he does, and I look forward to working with the member opposite.
Mr. Speaker, I already answered that question. Our plan is to strengthen the position of the parliamentary budget officer so that he can properly serve Parliament. He will have a meaningful mandate and be called upon to consider the economic and financial impacts of the issues submitted to him. As I also said, our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill. We are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate all of the work that he does.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence may have apologized for embellishing his service record, but it is not enough. His claim of being the architect of operation Medusa, a claim that he made at least twice, when it was not true, was intended for one thing: to make him look good as a Liberal politician. This is a violation of the honour expected of men and women in uniform. He has now lost their trust and their respect. As a result, he simply cannot continue in the job that he has.After what he has done, does he really think staying on is the best situation for the troops?
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important matter for us.However, I want to remind the hon. member of our Prime Minister's repeated confirmation that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian. Unlike the previous government, we have never shied away from defending our Canadian citizens abroad.Consular services are being provided to all citizens who are in need. We are seized by this particular matter that the hon. member has raised. We are providing assistance to the family and we will continue to advocate for our citizens abroad.
Mr. Speaker, I will always honour the service of our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces, the ones I have not met and the ones with whom I have even served.As the Minister of National Defence, it is my responsibility and our government's responsibility to make sure our Canadian Armed Forces have all the right and necessary equipment, and have the right benefits.We conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review in which all members of Parliament had an opportunity to take part. This is exactly what this defence policy will do: set the Canadian Armed Forces on the right funded track for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to giving more independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and that is the primary objective of the bill recently introduced in the House of Commons. Our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill, and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate the work he does.
Mr. Speaker, our government is taking real action to be more open and transparent with Canadians. That is why my new mandate involves introducing a bill to make political fundraising more open and transparent. If that bill passes, it will apply to events attended by the Prime Minister, ministers, party leaders, and party leadership candidates. It is always possible to raise the bar, and we will continue to take action to make the government more transparent.
Mr. Speaker, today the Prime Minister met with his youth council, a body made up of 26 young people from interesting backgrounds, to discuss a very sensitive topic, namely reconciliation with indigenous peoples.Will the Prime Minister share the council's thoughts with us? No, because he refuses to talk to the media. Will the young people be able to publish their work at the end of the consultations? No, because they do not have permission from the Privy Council to do so . Can they talk about this on Facebook Live? Yes, but only in the presence of a chaperone.Talk about transparency and confidence in young people!Can the government tell me if any of the Prime Minister's other councils have so many constraints?
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Montcalm. He stated his position, and I completely agree with him.As members, we are all equals here in this place. Our constituents, the people who live in our ridings, are equals, and it is only fair that we all have the same rights and freedoms here in the House. We are treated differently only because of a law that was passed in 1963. I think that was the year that Parliament passed the law that granted money to parties with more than 12 members.In 1963, it was about giving parties with more than 12 members some money. Over time it has morphed, without any specific law ever passing, to say that members of legitimate elected parties, in my case a party that runs nationally, and in the case of the Bloc a party that runs very strongly in one province, should have, and would have in other parliaments within the commonwealth system, the same rights. For the matter, independents should have the same rights, as their voters have the same rights.In this case, we do not have those rights, because as we know, over the years we have adopted traditions in which parties with more than 12 members have more rights. It has not been reassessed since 1963. In the early 1990s, a former member of Parliament for WinnipegTranscona at the time, the hon. Bill Blaikie, made a brilliant argument as to why the NDP, with nine seats, should have the right to sit on committees. At the time, with all due respect to my colleague from the Bloc, that was objected to by the Bloc, because it had more than 12 members, and they were mad, because when they had fewer than 12, the NDP had not supported them. It would be wonderful to review what has happened by accretion, without any actual decision ever rendered in this place, and go back to the question of why members of Parliament who happen to be in parties with fewer than 12 members should have fewer rights. I set aside the issue of money. Why should we have fewer rights than any other MP?
Mr. Speaker, the government has been working for many months across many departments in the Government of Canada and, just as importantly, with all of the ministers from the provinces. We know that it is our first responsibility to help the workers who might be displaced, the producers whose companies are at risk, and the communities that will be affected. Not only is it important to look at the short term, but also the long term, and we are also very active on that front, by an expansion of export markets and diversification. We are very focused on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I gave a speech on the announcement of the defence policy review, where we are actually giving a non-partisan analysis, making sure that we have the current state of affairs. We talked about the cuts.I thought the Leader of the Opposition would be happy to understand that we have a certain state of affairs, so we can actually now create a plan to move forward. That is what the defence policy is actually going to do.We are going to make sure our men and women have all the right tools. They need sustainable and predictable funding, and that is exactly what we are going to do.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member understands the intent of this government in that we believe the parliamentary budget officer should have independence so he can serve Parliament in the best way possible. We believe we can improve the way and the resources to that office. As I have also said, we are open to amendments. We welcome constructive feedback. It is a very different approach than the previous government, obviously.
Mr. Speaker, northern Ontario is a vast region with communities of all sizes scattered throughout the area. Promoting economic development is a challenge in this region. However, northern Ontario has many advantages and considerable potential.There is a large potential to be unlocked in the region with the many emerging innovative ideas and companies from the region. Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development let us know what steps he has taken to promote local regional economic development in northern Ontario?
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subjected to scrutiny, including an external review by the federal court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations. I would be happy to make myself available to the Commissioner of Conflict of Interest and Ethics if she chooses to revisit this issue.
Mr. Speaker, in order to achieve this greater independence from the parliamentary budget officer, the Liberals have given the Speaker of the Senate veto power over his work plan. Who appoints the Speaker of the Senate? According to section 34 of the Constitution, it is the Prime Minister. Therefore, by independence, the Prime Minister means that the parliamentary budget officer will have to get prior approval to do his work from someone who is hand-picked by the Prime Minister. Is that the member's definition of independence?
Mr. Speaker, earlier today, during the members' statements, we heard a beautifully orated speech in a language that 98% of us were unable to comprehend. I wonder if, as a matter of courtesy, if members choose to do that, they could provide prior translation to our interpreters so that we would be able to enjoy the content of their statement and also provide the appropriate support and response.
Mr. Speaker, since becoming Minister of National Defence, we took an extensive defence policy into making sure that we looked after our Canadian Armed Forces. That is exactly what we have done. We spoke to Canadians all across this country who had MP consultations to make sure that we have a thorough analysis, to make sure that we have a model that is going to look after our Canadian Armed Forces. I look forward to presenting our new defence policy that is going to look after our troops long into the future.
Mr. Speaker, I recognize, as we all do, that we are here to represent Canadians, and I say as a new member how impressed I am with how hard working each and every MP in this room is. I appreciate the dedication and commitment. However, over the last couple of days, I want to address the level of heckling and unparliamentary conduct that is taking place in the House. It is unfortunate, because we have welcomed five new members into the House.I thank you for your intervention today, Mr. Speaker, but I want to call on all my colleagues in the House, all of us, from both sides of the House, to start conducting ourselves in ways that we can be proud of, because we are representing Canadians, and we want to stand proud of the way we conduct ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-44, Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1, is currently before the House.Tomorrow morning, we will consider the Senate amendments to Bill C-4 on unions, and then move on to Bill C-44 after question period. Next week, we have the pleasure of having two allotted days, one on Monday and one on Thursday.Ideally, I would like to finish debate on the budget legislation next Tuesday in order to send the bill to committee for in-depth study. Bill C-4 will be considered on Wednesday, with the hope of sending it back to the Senate that day.I do my best to provide a calendar that is as accurate as possible so that all members can prepare. From time to time, things need to change. As members know, we have had some important conversations in this place. We will always ensure that members have the ability to have those important conversations. That is why I would ask that we all continue working better together.
Mr. Speaker, I will take the opportunity to remind all colleagues that we invested close to $90 million in shelters, and $1 million additionally went to collecting data from across the country to ensure that our investments and our efforts are based on an evidence-based approach.I am sure the hon. member agrees that restoring the right to advocacy to women's organizations across the country is essential to a healthy and vibrant women's movement too, and that is exactly what we have done.
Mr. Speaker, it is a shame that we sometimes cannot hear everything a member has to say.Last fall, after being caught red-handed, the Liberals decided to press pause on their cash for access fundraisers, but as we might have guessed, they decided to press play again. This evening, the Prime Minister will be in Montreal rubbing shoulders with some of the Liberal Party's generous donors. The Liberals seem to think that no one will notice, however. It is though they are trying to play a Jedi mind trick on us by waving their hand and saying, This is not a cash for access fundraiser.Honestly, do the Liberals not realize that Canadians can see right through them?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for the question.Our government recognizes the importance of safe and environmentally sound navigation. We are aware of the situation in Yamachiche and can confirm that we have received complaints about this incident. We are currently assessing the factors that may have contributed to this incident.
Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege to rise on this traditional territory and to acknowledge that the work of this feminist government is making a real impact in the lives of women and girls across the country, with $100 million invested in a gender-based violence strategy, $11 billion invested in housing, a poverty reduction strategy, investments in supporting women entrepreneurs, investments in women in STEM, $90 million in a network of shelters across the country, $7 billion in child care, flexibility and more choice in EI and caregiving benefits, I could go on.I hope the member opposite asks me again.
Mr. Speaker, as the member is well aware, we are committed to a pension-for-life option for our veterans. We made that announcement this year, and those details will be forthcoming. Further to that point, we have augmented and strengthened financial security for our veterans. In budget 2016, we raised the ELB to 90% of a soldier's pre-release salary and we raised the disability award. The veterans' ombudsman and many veterans were highly supportive of these changes. It meant more money in veterans' pockets, for them and their families.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his service. When I visited Kuwait for the first time, I was able to learn about the tax-free exemption and to learn directly about this issue, which we were able to immediately fix. Unfortunately, much more work needs to be done, and that is what our government is doing right now. We are reviewing all compensation. We are also making sure we can actually have a long-term solution to this problem.
Mr. Speaker, we understand that we need to take action to tackle climate change and we need to create good jobs. That is exactly what we are doing. We are making polluters pay and at the same time attracting investment in our innovative industries. I was just in California, and I was very pleased to meet with venture capitalists, private equity firms, investors, and innovators who are looking at Canada as a great place to invest. The party opposite may not care about creating jobs, but that is exactly what we are focused on.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for LaurentidesLabelle for his question.Rail safety remains the minister's top priority. That is why we regularly review the Railway Safety Act to ensure that it reflects what the industry needs and what the population needs. We are very pleased to be able to begin this review one year earlier than planned, and we look forward to receiving the committee's recommendations.
Mr. Speaker, Canada's forestry industry supports hundreds of thousands of good, middle-class jobs. We strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair, punitive tax. Their accusations are unfounded. We will continue to bring the matter up with the United States, just as the Prime Minister did with the U.S. President.The coalition never offered conditions that Canada could accept. We want a good agreement, not just any agreement.
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the service of every Canadian Armed Forces member and also every veteran, our government is focused on making sure our troops have all the necessary benefits to look after their families in making sure we have all the right capabilities. Last year we conducted a thorough defence policy review that had a very good analysis and gave us a good area for us to work on by making sure we have a fully costed, fully funded defence policy that will look after the Canadian Armed Forces for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Minister of National Defence cannot escape this quagmire of his own making. He has lost the confidence of the Canadian people, of our allies, and, most important, our men and women in uniform. There are 12 members of the Liberal caucus who have served in the Canadian Forces and only one of them has been accused of stealing valour.When will the Prime Minister fire the Minister of National Defence and replace him with someone worthy of the respect of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, UN Watch is now reporting, ...UNRWA hires and employs racist staff, and places the education of impressionable Palestinian youth in their hands. Canada would never tolerate the employment of racist teachers in its own schools. Why are the Liberals funding this UN organization when there is clear evidence that it employs racist anti-Semites and terrorist sympathizers?
Mr. Speaker, our government has taken significant steps to ensure that the appointment process for judges is transparent and responsible and fosters more diversity, among other things. To date, the Minister of Justice has appointed 55 judges and 22 deputy judges across the country, including four new appointments in Quebec.Our government is very proud of the fact that 60% of the judges appointed are women. That is up 35% compared to the previous government's record. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our judicial system. That is very good news for all members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, rail transportation is crucial to our economy, and provides us with an efficient system of moving people and goods through this great and vast country of ours. Nothing is more important than rail safety, which is paramount to users, to railway workers, and most of all, to all the communities across Canada that have rail lines passing through them.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport tell us what our government is doing to ensure that Canada has the strictest rail safety standards?
Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to our colleague for this opportunity to express how proud we are of our record of helping seniors.Last year we put into place a measure which is taking 13,000 seniors out of poverty, 90% of whom are women, through an increase in the guaranteed income supplement of up to $1,000 per year. We are also investing significantly in housing, health care, and support in communities to help our seniors live in a dignified and secure environment.
Mr. Speaker, I point to your direction in these matters. You do have the ability to, as you have on many occasions, censure different members or remind them of their behaviour. However, it is incumbent upon all of us to manage our own behaviour here. That includes members of the government giving answers, which frankly, many Canadians find repulsive. I think that by all of us raising the point in debate, that includes the government actually being accountable to members of the opposition by providing real, relevant answers, which many of these ministers do not.
Mr. Speaker, my responsibility and our government's responsibility is to make sure that we look after our troops, to make sure they have all the appropriate tools and equipment. That is exactly what our defence policy is doing. It is making sure that we have a fully funded and rigorously costed policy that is going to look out into the next 20 years, a policy that is going to make sure they have all the right tools, a policy that is going to make sure that, when we send them out on missions, they have everything they need.
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to be a government that is actually engaging the next generation. To hear from youth, to have them at the table to hear their constructive feedback, and to ensure that they are supportive of the ideas for change for the way this country works is very important. That is why the government took the initiative of having a youth council. Not only does the Prime Minister have a youth council, he encourages every member in this place to also have a youth council to get ideas from their local constituencies to ensure that we are serving in the best interests of all Canadians, Canadians of today and Canadians of tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, I was actually very pleased to be in Calgary just a month ago talking to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce. There were 300 people there to listen to how we are planning to create jobs, grow our economy, and innovate.I was in California because I am as much a minister of economy as I am a minister of environment. I am attracting investment so that we can create good jobs for companies like CarbonCure Technologies Inc. from Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, which has new processes that will take the carbon dioxide that we do not want, inject it into cement
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, we are going to make sure that all our troops have all the right benefits. There is a difference between a tax-free allowance and the hardship allowance benefits.We have fixed the immediate problem. We are conducting a much more thorough review to look at the wider compensation package, to make sure we have a fair and equitable solution for all those who serve.
Mr. Speaker, as I was just trying to say, we believe that when it comes to the important work the parliamentary budget officer does, the office should have its independence. It should have more effectiveness and more independence, and that is why we have introduced legislation to make this happen. We are open to amendments and we welcome them.When it comes to the member's referral to omnibus legislation, what we are proposing is to ensure there is not an abuse of omnibus legislation, like was the case under the Stephen Harper Conservative government. We are saying we can improve the way this place works. Let us have that conversation.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, our government has taken significant steps to make the judicial appointments process transparent and accountable and to ensure that there is more diversity on the bench. That includes appointing four new judges in Quebec. Our government is very proud that 60% of the appointments are women. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our justice system, and that is good news for all members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, the four fundamental values of the Canadian Armed Forces are duty, integrity, loyalty, and courage. Distorting reality is not on the list.With all his mistruths, the minister has lost all credibility. Spokesperson Charles McCabe of the Armed Forces Pensioners'/Annuitants' Association of Canada said, It is disgusting. Everyone is disgusted. He has lost the confidence of everyone who wears or has worn the uniform.When will he step down?
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Quebec says that it needs 14 judges to be appointed in order to avoid lengthy proceedings that result in the release of the accused pursuant to the Jordan ruling. I did say 14. What did the Minister of Justice do? She appointed four judges. Does the minister realize that she may be enabling the release of dangerous criminals, putting Quebeckers at risk, and helping to discredit our justice system?
Mr. Speaker, it has been 11 days since the crippling tariffs have been levied on our small and medium producers. On this side of the House, we are hearing from concerned producers, manufacturers, and fearful forestry workers. The minister says we should expect job losses. This is unacceptable, and Canadians deserve better.What is the minister doing to reassure the over one million Canadians who depend on the forestry industry for their livelihoods, and what is the plan for our communities that depend on forestry?
Mr. Speaker, soldiers deployed in the fight against ISIS are saying that they feel despair after the minister betrayed them by not fully restoring their danger pay. This is in addition to the Minister of National Defence's already established casual relationship with the truth that is demoralizing our troops.A 27-year veteran stated, The Defence Minister cannot continue to lead the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, having lost the respect and trust in this way.Will the minister listen to the voices of those who have served, do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, the flawed study of the Afghan detainees scandal was cut short by the Conservatives after only reviewing an initial set of documents. Stéphane Dion at that point said, [w]hen you read these documents, you will have questions to ask to your Prime Minister. He also said that the Conservatives were blocking an inquiry because of being afraid of having to answer to Canadians. Therefore, will the Minister of National Defence appear before the defence committee to answer questions about this scandal, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, why is the minister in California when she should be in Calgary?The Prime Minister should be listening to Jocelyn Bamford of the Coalition of Concerned Manufacturers, who said that we are standing on a beach with a tidal wave called cap-and-trade barrelling down upon us, and our government still doesn't realize that this tsunami will destroy manufacturing in Ontario. She said that businesses are terrified of what the federal government is doing and that government is supposed to help us, but its policies are causing us to consider moving our growth to other jurisdictions. What is up
Mr. Speaker, the minister's misleading comments about his service record are a direct hit on our men and women in uniform. Yesterday, a parent of a Canadian Armed Forces member wrote me saying that the minister's stolen valour has directly affected the morale and confidence of Canada's front line infantry soldiers. The feelings of our troops and veterans have gone from disappointment and outrage to distrust and dismay. Will the minister do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, the 308-page omnibus bill bears the signature of the Minister of Finance. My question is for him.How is it that this man, a dignified, honourable man who has always been steadfast, is now doing the Liberal government's dirty work?
Mr. Speaker, it has been almost two weeks since the U.S. decided to apply duties of up to 24% on Canadian softwood lumber. It has been six months since President Trump's election and 18 months since the Liberals came to office, and the Liberals failed to see this coming. They failed to come up with a concrete plan to deal with this emerging crisis and to help the hundreds of thousands of families impacted.Can the minister confirm that she walked away from negotiations with Obama, thinking she could get a better deal with Trump?
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary budget officer is concerned, and rightfully so. The government is using Bill C-44 to try to take away his power. As the parliamentary budget officer himself said, this will undermine his independence and political impartiality. Why? Because, from now on, the parliamentary budget officer will have to report to the Speaker of the House, and he will have to submit his game plan for the year. I really like you, Mr. Speaker, but you should have nothing to do with the work of the parliamentary budget officer.Why is the Liberal government stooping so low?
Mr. Speaker, the previous Conservative government allowed the agreement to expire and did nothing to initiate negotiations. We are now facing the fifth softwood lumber dispute, and our workers and producers have never been found in the wrong. We disagree strongly with the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair and punitive duty. The American accusations are baseless and unfounded. We continue to raise this important issue with the U.S., as the Prime Minister did with the President just last week.
Mr. Speaker, last month I had the honour of travelling to France for the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge. It was an immense privilege to stand where, 100 years ago, four Canadian divisions came together to claim their place in the history books. I was humbled to speak to the family members of soldiers who came home from that battle that changed men. While they may not have had the words at the time, mental health injuries and PTSD were a reality then, and they are, unfortunately, the reality for many of our men and women in uniform today. What is the Minister of Veterans Affairs doing to address the mental health needs of veterans and their families?
Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that a soldier has the right to complain, but the Prime Minister and the defence minister are actively denying that right to our soldiers who were deployed in the fight against ISIS. The defence minister made a promise to give back the benefits he took away from those troops. Now he has broken that promise and he is clamping down on those who dare speak out.Here we have yet another example of the defence minister minister breaking his word to our military. Can he not see why he has lost their confidence?
Mr. Speaker, documents reveal that the Minister of Status of Women spent more money renovating her offices than on supporting shelters for abused women.While the minister was spending over $1 million on her luxury accommodations, she spent less than $700,000 on emergency housing for battered women.How can the minister justify this blatant misuse taxpayer funds while every night women in need are being turned away from emergency shelters across Canada because of the lack of funding?
Mr. Speaker, the approach of the previous Conservative government was to set up the parliamentary budget officer in a fashion that was independent, one of the reasons of which was to allow him or her to examine political party platforms before elections were called to determine if they were in fact costed properly.We know there has been a very severe problem with the Liberal costing in its last platform. In fact, it is about a $25 billion problem. Could it be that the Liberals are trying to shut down the independence of the parliamentary budget officer before their next political platform can be costed?
Mr. Speaker, we know that communities in Quebec and Ontario have been dealing with flooding over the past few days. Some people have had to leave their homes and they know that they are going to have to deal with the damage when they return. There is a direct link between the flooding and climate change, and we know that these events will occur more often over the next few years.Can the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness tell us how he will work with the provinces to help these people?
Mr. Speaker, I call them like I see them.Special access to the
Mr. Speaker, when he was in opposition, the member who is now the Minister of Public Safety accused the Conservative government of wanting to hide the truth when it refused to open an inquiry on Afghan detainees. Now, the Liberal government is the one that is refusing to launch a public inquiry.What has changed? Why have the Liberals once again changed their tune?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the parliamentary budget officer, this government believes
Mr. Speaker, Canadian manufacturers can compete with anyone in the world provided they have a level playing field, yet these same manufacturers are at a tipping point as their energy costs and taxes skyrocket while under President Trump their American competitors will pay lower taxes and electricity costs. Instead of helping businesses, the Liberals are increasing taxes on them and strangling them with red tape. Why is the Prime Minister chasing Canada's manufacturing jobs out of Canada with a massive carbon tax?
Mr. Speaker, given what has been said, we would like to review Hansard and we will get back to you in a relatively short time span.
Mr. Speaker, I do have the usual Thursday question. As you well know, I get up every Thursday, and I ask the government House leader what the government agenda is for the rest of the week and the week following. The government House leader tells us what the agenda is, and then we go and prepare. The only thing we have to go on is what the government House leader tells us. We are always responding to what the government is doing and to its agenda, but we get one day a week when we have an opposition day. Well, it amounts to about one day a week.The last time I asked the government House leader this question, she told me and this House what the schedule would be. It included an opposition day, which was supposed to happen today. There are extremely timely issues that are going on right now in the House of Commons. There is a huge degree of frustration here on this side of the House, but even more so, there is a lot going on in the Canadian military, and they are feeling a sense of betrayal and frustration.When our opposition day is taken away, when it is changed around, when games are played with our opposition day so that we cannot address these very serious concerns, I think that contributes to the level of frustration on this side of the House.I am going to ask the government House leader if she would tell us what the business of the House is for this week and for next week, and if we could please stick to that plan, it would be very much appreciated.
Mr. Speaker, what the Minister of National Defence did was not a mistake, and he cannot solve the problem by trying to avoid the storm. On at least two occasions, he embellished his record and took credit for the work of others. He did so to look good as a Liberal politician. This is inexcusable, particularly for a member of the armed forces. He simply cannot keep his portfolio after what he did. Why are the minister and the Prime Minister having such a hard time understanding this?
Mr. Speaker, residents of Yamachiche want clear answers to explain why two-metre waves damaged their homes. Damage could run into the thousands of dollars and someone has to be held responsible.The Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard says that an investigation is under way. However, the Minister of Transport will not confirm that.Can someone tell us in no uncertain terms whether an investigation has been launched? If so, what is the timeline and when will the results be made public?
Mr. Speaker, this self-proclaimed feminist Prime Minister sure talks a good talk, but has failed to do anything meaningful for women in need, like zip for pay equity.The Liberals have no issue padding the pockets of their Liberal friends and wasting taxpayer dollars on their lavish accommodations and vacations, but when it comes to funding shelters for women in need, the Liberals have not made it a priority.Will the minister finally stop wasting taxpayer money and start investing seriously in projects that protect vulnerable women?
Mr. Speaker, no members of the Canadian Forces should be at a disadvantage because of their service to Canada. The Prime Minister stood with his hand over his heart and he promised, no veteran should have to take their own government to court. The Liberals have not fulfilled their campaign promise to return to lifelong pensions, forcing Equitas veterans to continue to fight in court. So long as the minister continues to delay introducing promised lifelong pensions, our new veterans will remain at a disadvantage. When will the Liberals stop the necessity for the court action and bring back lifelong pensions for veterans, as they promised?
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured and privileged to serve with so many members of our caucus who have had military service. I also consider them mentors as well.As Minister of National Defence, it is a privilege to be able to serve in this role. I will work extremely hard, as our government does, to ensure our troops have all the necessary tools. I will come for advice for all the folks who have served in the military and as members of Parliament. I have opened up to all for service of any other party
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we are taught in the army is to lead by example.Ever since the Minister of National Defence joined the Liberal ranks, that lesson has been lost on him. He misled Canadians on withdrawing CF-18s from Iraq, on the capabilities of our Royal Canadian Air Force, on the danger pay for our troops fighting ISIS, and on his involvement in Operation Medusa. The minister is a complete joke. No one believes him any more.When will he step down?
Mr. Speaker, if the minister does not have the honour to resign, he should be fired. Instead of choosing to keep the disgraced minister in place, the Prime Minister could choose the member for Orléans, a former army commander. He could choose the MP for KanataCarleton, a former navigator and former squadron commander. He could choose the MP for AuroraOak RidgesRichmond Hill, a former air force captain. He could choose any one of these Liberals who has not been accused of stealing valour.Why will the Prime Minister not fire the minister and replace him with someone worthy of the trust of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, one might think that the hon. member for Hamilton WestAncasterDundas and I had a simultaneous sense of a point of order. I ask for your indulgence for just a moment. It has been six years since those of us elected on May 2, 2011, have served. I recall distinctly the opening of the 41st Parliament, in which most parties in this place took a pledge never to heckle. The initiative was led by the late Jack Layton on behalf of the New Democrats. Stephen Harper endorsed it, and for comic relief, my entire caucus pledged never to heckle. Since that time, the disappointed group in this corner, led by interim leader Bob Rae, said that they were not so sure, that they might need to heckle. At this point I need to turn for reference to a quote from the great A.A. Milne in the poem of good bears and bad bears: And then quite suddenly (just like Us) One got Better and the other got Wuss.The NDP members, over the last few weeks, have hardly been heckling at all. The Liberals have hardly heckled at all. However, it seems the Conservatives feel there is a void and they must fill it with more noise than I have ever heard in this place. I urge them, as individuals and collectively, to please honour Standing Order 16 and 18 and find a way to tone down the violence
Mr. Speaker, this is unbelievable. He is actually misleading Canadians again and misleading this House again about this particular issue around compensation for the troops who are fighting the fight against ISIS. Right here, I have a documentI looked at it before question periodsigned by the minister himself that clearly states the exact opposite of what he just said.When is the minister going to stop misleading Canadians and misleading the House and, frankly, step aside?
Let us try this again. A rose by any other name, Mr. Speaker. The answer we just heard is total nonsense. The PBO itself is saying that Liberals are restricting its ability to do its job.The Liberal omnibus bill will allow the government to shut down any PBO work that is not to the government's liking. It will give the Senate veto over the parliamentary budget officer's work and stop Canadians from getting the answers they so rightly deserve.These changes are clearly not designed to help accountability. They are designed to help the Liberal Party in governing. Why do the Liberals keep pursuing these unaccountable changes? When will they finally turn a corner and do what they promised to do for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, since we formed government, we have maintained the spending levels and planned increases while conducting the defence policy review, and we are developing a new policy for Canada, a rigorously costed plan that will put the Canadian Armed Forces on a sustainable footing.The Conservative rhetoric simply does not match up with the facts. After years of cuts and underspending, we are now in a troubling position where even the status quo of spending on defence will not maintain the status quo of capability. Our new defence policy is going to fix that.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Sudbury for his question.He and his colleagues from the region are staunch supporters of northern Ontario.I was excited to be in northern Ontario to announce an increase of $25 million for FedNor. Along with the launch of this, we also put forward the prosperity and growth strategy for northern Ontario. This will help the community; this will help indigenous communities; this will help diversify the economy; and, in particular, this will help small businesses grow and scale up, which will create good-quality jobs in northern Ontario.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. On this point of order, my colleague opposite has actually not cited a specific Standing Order, so I would beg that it is not a point of order. However, since the matter of heckling has become relevant, I would ask
Mr. Speaker, a Canadian citizen, Sun Qian, has been imprisoned in Beijing for her belief in truth, compassion, and tolerance.Canada's new ambassador to China refused to publicly protest this latest case of Chinese extrajudicial detention, but by muting content on the plight of dual citizens unjustly held in China, Iran, Turkey, or any other undemocratic country, Canada is treating these citizens as second-class citizens.Why are the Liberals prioritizing trade and muting Canada's principled voice on the rule of law?
Mr. Speaker, the current situation has been monitored from the very beginning by the Government Operations Centre. We have indicated to all the provincial governments that we are on standby, ready to assist as required, and if a provincial government should make a request for assistance from the Government of Canada, we will respond very, very quickly.In terms of the future in dealing with climate change, I advise the hon. member to examine very carefully the budget, because it includes $2.6 billion for this very purpose.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I honour the service of all Canadian Armed Forces members who are currently serving and have served before.As the Minister of National Defence and as part of this government, my job is to ensure we look after the Canadian Armed Forces as we send them on training missions or any operations abroad. That is what our new defence policy for Canada will do. It is a fully funded and fully costed defence policy that will provide predictable funding for our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces to be able to plan and carry out their missions.
Mr. Speaker, I want to assure my colleague that, ever since Canada restored funding to this UN agency for Palestinian refugees, we have been following it very closely, and Canada's presence at the table is making a difference. We are ensuring that background checks are done on all financial services employees. We have helped train 3,000 employees so far, including executives and teachers, on the importance of web independence, and we are reviewing the educational materials. I would rather see those children in that UN school than on the street.
Mr. Speaker, the Quebec justice minister had only one short comment about the appointment of four judges: we are short 10.In response to the crisis precipitated by the Jordan decision, Quebec appointed 18 new judges and hired about a hundred legal professionals. We do not want any more criminals to go free because their cases have been thrown out. Quebec took action and appointed 18 judges. Ottawa appointed four. That is ridiculous. What is the minister waiting for? When will she appoint judges to fill the 10 vacancies?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the cash for access scandal, the Liberals have somehow conveniently managed to miss the entire point. They keep polishing that turd, but it is still a turd somehow.The same special access to the Prime Minister and his cabinet
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about that record. In our last year in office, the defence spending was nearly twice what the Liberals spent in any given year. We came in and we bought our men and women proper uniforms for Afghanistan, after the Liberals sent them into a desert with green camouflage. We bought them new planes so they did not have to hitch rides from the Americans. We bought them helicopters, tanks, and new LAVs so they could protect themselves from IEDs.The Liberals sent them to Afghanistan with none of that support, and the minister knows that very well. We are happy to compare our record to the Liberal decade of darkness.
Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Department of Commerce levelled a direct attack on our forestry producers last month with new tariffs on softwood lumber. According to Michael Froman, the former U.S. trade representative, the Liberal government had an opportunity to sign an agreement last year with an offer from the Obama administration, but it chose to wait, thinking it would get a better deal with the Trump government.What is up now?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to defence issues, the Liberals cannot be trusted. After he cut $12 billion from Canada's defence budget, the finance minister said that our military was appropriately provisioned. Now the defence minister, after he was caught misleading Canadians about his military service record, is promising to restore the funding that his government cut in the first place. The problem is that, now, no one believes what these guys say. The only way for the government to begin to regain the confidence of our troops is for the minister to step aside. When will he?
Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, I am addressing you in your capacity as the custodian of our rights and privileges. For weeks, the government has been claiming that all members will be able to fully participate in the parliamentary reform. It said so as recently as yesterday. However, nothing could be further from the truth.The government's proposed parliamentary reform and the approach it is taking to this issue violate the rights and privileges of members who do not belong to recognized parties. Hundreds of thousands of voters are being muzzled.I checked, and I can tell the House that the letter from the Leader of the Government on the changes to electoral reform was sent only to her counterparts in the recognized parties. Not only were we not informed by letter like the other parliamentarians, but we had to learn about the leader's intentions in the newspapers.We did not get the leader's letter until yesterday afternoon. What is worse, she indicated in that letter that the government will now have to use time allocation motions more often. That means we will have even less speaking time. The government's decision will limit our freedom of speech and have a direct impact on our work, the work that hundreds of thousands of Quebeckers elected us to do.How can the government possibly amend the Standing Orders of the House without including every single elected member of the House, with no exceptions?The government is accountable not just to recognized parties in the House, but also to all those elected by Canadians. This is set out very clearly in the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, on page 61: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.Members of non-recognized parties are 34th in the order of speaking, and the leader has announced that the number of closure motions will increase. This means that we will never get a turn to speak. This will permanently silence small minority political parties, as well as voters. It is an unacceptable attack on the freedom of speech of the members of the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party. Mr. Speaker, in the next few weeks, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs will debate the the reform of Parliament, its procedures, and its Standing Orders. It will establish the new parliamentary rules that you will have to enforce. I would like to bring to your attention that as a result of the defeat of our motion of April 5, these changes will be discussed and amended without our being able to fully participate in the discussions. It was the government that defeated our motion. We are barred from all committees. This practice is discriminatory and unfair for non-recognized parties. These rules and procedures discriminate against non-recognized parties and run counter to the principle that the privileges protect the rights of every voter.Mr. Speaker, we are asking you to defend minority elected officials so that the majority does not crush them. I will repeat the quote: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.In your speech of December 3, 2015, you clearly stated that you wanted to reform parliamentary procedure. You said: I believe the Speaker should lead discussions about how to reform our procedures to achieve these things and to have measures that ensure that members are better able to focus on their work and carry out their duties.On page 89 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, we read: By far, the most important right accorded to members of the House is the exercise of freedom of speech in parliamentary proceedings. A little further on, it is described as a fundamental right without which they would be hampered in the performance of their duties.The Speaker's role in protecting this privilege in particular is set out on page 308. The duty of the Speaker is to ensure that the right of members to free speech is protected....Therefore, Mr. Speaker, as the custodian of our privileges, it is your duty to intervene to ensure that the elected members of non-recognized parliamentary groups are not deprived of their most fundamental right, the right to speak, and the right to vote in committee and in the House on behalf of their constituents.I am asking you today to guide us as to how to reform our procedures so that you can protect the rights and privileges of parliamentarians belonging to non-recognized parties. In fact, we hold that there are four breaches of our parliamentary privileges. First, the procedure put forward by the government to reform House procedures and practices without the participation of all parliamentary groups, who are excluded from the committee on parliamentary reform, is not in keeping with the principle of fairness that must guide the Speaker's rulings and infringes on our freedom of speech.Second, the government's expressed intent to use its parliamentary majority rather than seeking a consensus among elected officials to make changes to the Standing Orders and procedures is not in keeping with the practices and customs in that regard.Third, the government's expressed intent to use time allocation more frequently inordinately violates the freedom of speech of non-recognized parties, especially since it has announced that it will use its parliamentary majority to push through its reforms.Fourth, the fact that elected members of non-recognized parties were not informed of the government's intentions regarding the procedural amendments at the same time as the recognized parties is a clear indication that parliamentarians from non-recognized parties are not being treated equitably.We are counting on you, Mr. Speaker, and we await your wise judgment.
Mr. Speaker, a few years ago, an opposition member asked the parliamentary budget officer to have a look at the true cost of the F-35s, and did we ever learn a lot. Who was it who had asked? It was the current Minister of Fisheries.Unfortunately, under the changes his government wants to make, the PBO would no longer be able to study such things. The minister wants to prevent us from having the same opportunities that he himself had. He also wants to prevent the parliamentary budget officer from undertaking any studies that were not already planned at the beginning of the year.Why do the Liberals want to put the government spending watchdog in a straitjacket?
Mr. Speaker, Statistics Canada reports that now Canada's seniors outnumber its children for the first time in history. The accelerated pace of aging in the population carries profound implications. We need to prepare for proper housing and home care and have a long-term plan.Given that we have known about this trend for years, it is surprising to see how little is in this year's Liberal budget for our seniors. Will the government react to this news and finally implement a national seniors strategy?
Mr. Speaker, throughout our military operations in Afghanistan, Canada has committed to ensuring the individuals detained by the Canadian Armed Forces were handled and transferred and released in accordance with our obligations under international law. Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subject to significant scrutiny, including an external review by the Federal Court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations.I will be happy to make myself available to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner should she choose to revisit the issue.
Mr. Speaker, we will make sure that our troops have all the necessary benefits to carry out their duties. It is our government that dealt with the immediate inequity for the soldiers who lost their tax-free status in operation Impact. It is our government that is working hard to review the compensation rules and find a long-term solution needed to fix the mess we inherited, to ensure a fair and equitable process for all.
Mr. Speaker, at Vimy Ridge, I thought of the brave Canadians who fought to defend our freedom; those soldiers had partners, parents, and siblings. It is true that when members serve, their entire family serves along with them. The families are the strength behind the uniform. In budget 2017, we announced a centre of excellence on mental health and PTSD, to advance research, education, and outreach services. This would lead to better mental health outcomes for our veterans and their families.
Mr. Speaker, we thank the parliamentary budget officer for his analysis of the provisions of Bill C-44. We look forward to working with him and others to improve the bill to ensure we accomplish the objective of having an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. Our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons. We believe that it should be an officer who reports to Parliament, unlike the previous government, which felt that he should report to the Library of Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, as Minister of National Defence, I will always ensure we have all the necessary tools. We have conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review. We have been making sure that we look at all the analysis to ensure where all the gaps are within our funding system, where all the cuts were made, so we can have a sustainable, predictable funding model for our Canadian Armed Forces so they can plan. We are making sure all the right benefits are there, the right equipment is there and all the tools necessary for all their training and operational missions.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons.Our government welcomes suggestions on how to improve the bill and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget office. We appreciate the work he does, and I look forward to working with the member opposite.
Mr. Speaker, I already answered that question. Our plan is to strengthen the position of the parliamentary budget officer so that he can properly serve Parliament. He will have a meaningful mandate and be called upon to consider the economic and financial impacts of the issues submitted to him. As I also said, our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill. We are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate all of the work that he does.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence may have apologized for embellishing his service record, but it is not enough. His claim of being the architect of operation Medusa, a claim that he made at least twice, when it was not true, was intended for one thing: to make him look good as a Liberal politician. This is a violation of the honour expected of men and women in uniform. He has now lost their trust and their respect. As a result, he simply cannot continue in the job that he has.After what he has done, does he really think staying on is the best situation for the troops?
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important matter for us.However, I want to remind the hon. member of our Prime Minister's repeated confirmation that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian. Unlike the previous government, we have never shied away from defending our Canadian citizens abroad.Consular services are being provided to all citizens who are in need. We are seized by this particular matter that the hon. member has raised. We are providing assistance to the family and we will continue to advocate for our citizens abroad.
Mr. Speaker, I will always honour the service of our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces, the ones I have not met and the ones with whom I have even served.As the Minister of National Defence, it is my responsibility and our government's responsibility to make sure our Canadian Armed Forces have all the right and necessary equipment, and have the right benefits.We conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review in which all members of Parliament had an opportunity to take part. This is exactly what this defence policy will do: set the Canadian Armed Forces on the right funded track for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to giving more independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and that is the primary objective of the bill recently introduced in the House of Commons. Our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill, and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate the work he does.
Mr. Speaker, our government is taking real action to be more open and transparent with Canadians. That is why my new mandate involves introducing a bill to make political fundraising more open and transparent. If that bill passes, it will apply to events attended by the Prime Minister, ministers, party leaders, and party leadership candidates. It is always possible to raise the bar, and we will continue to take action to make the government more transparent.
Mr. Speaker, today the Prime Minister met with his youth council, a body made up of 26 young people from interesting backgrounds, to discuss a very sensitive topic, namely reconciliation with indigenous peoples.Will the Prime Minister share the council's thoughts with us? No, because he refuses to talk to the media. Will the young people be able to publish their work at the end of the consultations? No, because they do not have permission from the Privy Council to do so . Can they talk about this on Facebook Live? Yes, but only in the presence of a chaperone.Talk about transparency and confidence in young people!Can the government tell me if any of the Prime Minister's other councils have so many constraints?
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Montcalm. He stated his position, and I completely agree with him.As members, we are all equals here in this place. Our constituents, the people who live in our ridings, are equals, and it is only fair that we all have the same rights and freedoms here in the House. We are treated differently only because of a law that was passed in 1963. I think that was the year that Parliament passed the law that granted money to parties with more than 12 members.In 1963, it was about giving parties with more than 12 members some money. Over time it has morphed, without any specific law ever passing, to say that members of legitimate elected parties, in my case a party that runs nationally, and in the case of the Bloc a party that runs very strongly in one province, should have, and would have in other parliaments within the commonwealth system, the same rights. For the matter, independents should have the same rights, as their voters have the same rights.In this case, we do not have those rights, because as we know, over the years we have adopted traditions in which parties with more than 12 members have more rights. It has not been reassessed since 1963. In the early 1990s, a former member of Parliament for WinnipegTranscona at the time, the hon. Bill Blaikie, made a brilliant argument as to why the NDP, with nine seats, should have the right to sit on committees. At the time, with all due respect to my colleague from the Bloc, that was objected to by the Bloc, because it had more than 12 members, and they were mad, because when they had fewer than 12, the NDP had not supported them. It would be wonderful to review what has happened by accretion, without any actual decision ever rendered in this place, and go back to the question of why members of Parliament who happen to be in parties with fewer than 12 members should have fewer rights. I set aside the issue of money. Why should we have fewer rights than any other MP?
Mr. Speaker, the government has been working for many months across many departments in the Government of Canada and, just as importantly, with all of the ministers from the provinces. We know that it is our first responsibility to help the workers who might be displaced, the producers whose companies are at risk, and the communities that will be affected. Not only is it important to look at the short term, but also the long term, and we are also very active on that front, by an expansion of export markets and diversification. We are very focused on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I gave a speech on the announcement of the defence policy review, where we are actually giving a non-partisan analysis, making sure that we have the current state of affairs. We talked about the cuts.I thought the Leader of the Opposition would be happy to understand that we have a certain state of affairs, so we can actually now create a plan to move forward. That is what the defence policy is actually going to do.We are going to make sure our men and women have all the right tools. They need sustainable and predictable funding, and that is exactly what we are going to do.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member understands the intent of this government in that we believe the parliamentary budget officer should have independence so he can serve Parliament in the best way possible. We believe we can improve the way and the resources to that office. As I have also said, we are open to amendments. We welcome constructive feedback. It is a very different approach than the previous government, obviously.
Mr. Speaker, northern Ontario is a vast region with communities of all sizes scattered throughout the area. Promoting economic development is a challenge in this region. However, northern Ontario has many advantages and considerable potential.There is a large potential to be unlocked in the region with the many emerging innovative ideas and companies from the region. Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development let us know what steps he has taken to promote local regional economic development in northern Ontario?
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subjected to scrutiny, including an external review by the federal court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations. I would be happy to make myself available to the Commissioner of Conflict of Interest and Ethics if she chooses to revisit this issue.
Mr. Speaker, in order to achieve this greater independence from the parliamentary budget officer, the Liberals have given the Speaker of the Senate veto power over his work plan. Who appoints the Speaker of the Senate? According to section 34 of the Constitution, it is the Prime Minister. Therefore, by independence, the Prime Minister means that the parliamentary budget officer will have to get prior approval to do his work from someone who is hand-picked by the Prime Minister. Is that the member's definition of independence?
Mr. Speaker, earlier today, during the members' statements, we heard a beautifully orated speech in a language that 98% of us were unable to comprehend. I wonder if, as a matter of courtesy, if members choose to do that, they could provide prior translation to our interpreters so that we would be able to enjoy the content of their statement and also provide the appropriate support and response.
Mr. Speaker, since becoming Minister of National Defence, we took an extensive defence policy into making sure that we looked after our Canadian Armed Forces. That is exactly what we have done. We spoke to Canadians all across this country who had MP consultations to make sure that we have a thorough analysis, to make sure that we have a model that is going to look after our Canadian Armed Forces. I look forward to presenting our new defence policy that is going to look after our troops long into the future.
Mr. Speaker, I recognize, as we all do, that we are here to represent Canadians, and I say as a new member how impressed I am with how hard working each and every MP in this room is. I appreciate the dedication and commitment. However, over the last couple of days, I want to address the level of heckling and unparliamentary conduct that is taking place in the House. It is unfortunate, because we have welcomed five new members into the House.I thank you for your intervention today, Mr. Speaker, but I want to call on all my colleagues in the House, all of us, from both sides of the House, to start conducting ourselves in ways that we can be proud of, because we are representing Canadians, and we want to stand proud of the way we conduct ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-44, Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1, is currently before the House.Tomorrow morning, we will consider the Senate amendments to Bill C-4 on unions, and then move on to Bill C-44 after question period. Next week, we have the pleasure of having two allotted days, one on Monday and one on Thursday.Ideally, I would like to finish debate on the budget legislation next Tuesday in order to send the bill to committee for in-depth study. Bill C-4 will be considered on Wednesday, with the hope of sending it back to the Senate that day.I do my best to provide a calendar that is as accurate as possible so that all members can prepare. From time to time, things need to change. As members know, we have had some important conversations in this place. We will always ensure that members have the ability to have those important conversations. That is why I would ask that we all continue working better together.
Mr. Speaker, I will take the opportunity to remind all colleagues that we invested close to $90 million in shelters, and $1 million additionally went to collecting data from across the country to ensure that our investments and our efforts are based on an evidence-based approach.I am sure the hon. member agrees that restoring the right to advocacy to women's organizations across the country is essential to a healthy and vibrant women's movement too, and that is exactly what we have done.
Mr. Speaker, it is a shame that we sometimes cannot hear everything a member has to say.Last fall, after being caught red-handed, the Liberals decided to press pause on their cash for access fundraisers, but as we might have guessed, they decided to press play again. This evening, the Prime Minister will be in Montreal rubbing shoulders with some of the Liberal Party's generous donors. The Liberals seem to think that no one will notice, however. It is though they are trying to play a Jedi mind trick on us by waving their hand and saying, This is not a cash for access fundraiser.Honestly, do the Liberals not realize that Canadians can see right through them?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for the question.Our government recognizes the importance of safe and environmentally sound navigation. We are aware of the situation in Yamachiche and can confirm that we have received complaints about this incident. We are currently assessing the factors that may have contributed to this incident.
Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege to rise on this traditional territory and to acknowledge that the work of this feminist government is making a real impact in the lives of women and girls across the country, with $100 million invested in a gender-based violence strategy, $11 billion invested in housing, a poverty reduction strategy, investments in supporting women entrepreneurs, investments in women in STEM, $90 million in a network of shelters across the country, $7 billion in child care, flexibility and more choice in EI and caregiving benefits, I could go on.I hope the member opposite asks me again.
Mr. Speaker, as the member is well aware, we are committed to a pension-for-life option for our veterans. We made that announcement this year, and those details will be forthcoming. Further to that point, we have augmented and strengthened financial security for our veterans. In budget 2016, we raised the ELB to 90% of a soldier's pre-release salary and we raised the disability award. The veterans' ombudsman and many veterans were highly supportive of these changes. It meant more money in veterans' pockets, for them and their families.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his service. When I visited Kuwait for the first time, I was able to learn about the tax-free exemption and to learn directly about this issue, which we were able to immediately fix. Unfortunately, much more work needs to be done, and that is what our government is doing right now. We are reviewing all compensation. We are also making sure we can actually have a long-term solution to this problem.
Mr. Speaker, we understand that we need to take action to tackle climate change and we need to create good jobs. That is exactly what we are doing. We are making polluters pay and at the same time attracting investment in our innovative industries. I was just in California, and I was very pleased to meet with venture capitalists, private equity firms, investors, and innovators who are looking at Canada as a great place to invest. The party opposite may not care about creating jobs, but that is exactly what we are focused on.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for LaurentidesLabelle for his question.Rail safety remains the minister's top priority. That is why we regularly review the Railway Safety Act to ensure that it reflects what the industry needs and what the population needs. We are very pleased to be able to begin this review one year earlier than planned, and we look forward to receiving the committee's recommendations.
Mr. Speaker, Canada's forestry industry supports hundreds of thousands of good, middle-class jobs. We strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair, punitive tax. Their accusations are unfounded. We will continue to bring the matter up with the United States, just as the Prime Minister did with the U.S. President.The coalition never offered conditions that Canada could accept. We want a good agreement, not just any agreement.
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the service of every Canadian Armed Forces member and also every veteran, our government is focused on making sure our troops have all the necessary benefits to look after their families in making sure we have all the right capabilities. Last year we conducted a thorough defence policy review that had a very good analysis and gave us a good area for us to work on by making sure we have a fully costed, fully funded defence policy that will look after the Canadian Armed Forces for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Minister of National Defence cannot escape this quagmire of his own making. He has lost the confidence of the Canadian people, of our allies, and, most important, our men and women in uniform. There are 12 members of the Liberal caucus who have served in the Canadian Forces and only one of them has been accused of stealing valour.When will the Prime Minister fire the Minister of National Defence and replace him with someone worthy of the respect of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, UN Watch is now reporting, ...UNRWA hires and employs racist staff, and places the education of impressionable Palestinian youth in their hands. Canada would never tolerate the employment of racist teachers in its own schools. Why are the Liberals funding this UN organization when there is clear evidence that it employs racist anti-Semites and terrorist sympathizers?
Mr. Speaker, our government has taken significant steps to ensure that the appointment process for judges is transparent and responsible and fosters more diversity, among other things. To date, the Minister of Justice has appointed 55 judges and 22 deputy judges across the country, including four new appointments in Quebec.Our government is very proud of the fact that 60% of the judges appointed are women. That is up 35% compared to the previous government's record. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our judicial system. That is very good news for all members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, rail transportation is crucial to our economy, and provides us with an efficient system of moving people and goods through this great and vast country of ours. Nothing is more important than rail safety, which is paramount to users, to railway workers, and most of all, to all the communities across Canada that have rail lines passing through them.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport tell us what our government is doing to ensure that Canada has the strictest rail safety standards?
Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to our colleague for this opportunity to express how proud we are of our record of helping seniors.Last year we put into place a measure which is taking 13,000 seniors out of poverty, 90% of whom are women, through an increase in the guaranteed income supplement of up to $1,000 per year. We are also investing significantly in housing, health care, and support in communities to help our seniors live in a dignified and secure environment.
Mr. Speaker, I point to your direction in these matters. You do have the ability to, as you have on many occasions, censure different members or remind them of their behaviour. However, it is incumbent upon all of us to manage our own behaviour here. That includes members of the government giving answers, which frankly, many Canadians find repulsive. I think that by all of us raising the point in debate, that includes the government actually being accountable to members of the opposition by providing real, relevant answers, which many of these ministers do not.
Mr. Speaker, my responsibility and our government's responsibility is to make sure that we look after our troops, to make sure they have all the appropriate tools and equipment. That is exactly what our defence policy is doing. It is making sure that we have a fully funded and rigorously costed policy that is going to look out into the next 20 years, a policy that is going to make sure they have all the right tools, a policy that is going to make sure that, when we send them out on missions, they have everything they need.
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to be a government that is actually engaging the next generation. To hear from youth, to have them at the table to hear their constructive feedback, and to ensure that they are supportive of the ideas for change for the way this country works is very important. That is why the government took the initiative of having a youth council. Not only does the Prime Minister have a youth council, he encourages every member in this place to also have a youth council to get ideas from their local constituencies to ensure that we are serving in the best interests of all Canadians, Canadians of today and Canadians of tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, I was actually very pleased to be in Calgary just a month ago talking to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce. There were 300 people there to listen to how we are planning to create jobs, grow our economy, and innovate.I was in California because I am as much a minister of economy as I am a minister of environment. I am attracting investment so that we can create good jobs for companies like CarbonCure Technologies Inc. from Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, which has new processes that will take the carbon dioxide that we do not want, inject it into cement
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, we are going to make sure that all our troops have all the right benefits. There is a difference between a tax-free allowance and the hardship allowance benefits.We have fixed the immediate problem. We are conducting a much more thorough review to look at the wider compensation package, to make sure we have a fair and equitable solution for all those who serve.
Mr. Speaker, as I was just trying to say, we believe that when it comes to the important work the parliamentary budget officer does, the office should have its independence. It should have more effectiveness and more independence, and that is why we have introduced legislation to make this happen. We are open to amendments and we welcome them.When it comes to the member's referral to omnibus legislation, what we are proposing is to ensure there is not an abuse of omnibus legislation, like was the case under the Stephen Harper Conservative government. We are saying we can improve the way this place works. Let us have that conversation.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, our government has taken significant steps to make the judicial appointments process transparent and accountable and to ensure that there is more diversity on the bench. That includes appointing four new judges in Quebec. Our government is very proud that 60% of the appointments are women. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our justice system, and that is good news for all members of the House.
Most positive speeches
Mr. Speaker, as I said, our government has taken significant steps to make the judicial appointments process transparent and accountable and to ensure that there is more diversity on the bench. That includes appointing four new judges in Quebec. Our government is very proud that 60% of the appointments are women. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our justice system, and that is good news for all members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, as I was just trying to say, we believe that when it comes to the important work the parliamentary budget officer does, the office should have its independence. It should have more effectiveness and more independence, and that is why we have introduced legislation to make this happen. We are open to amendments and we welcome them.When it comes to the member's referral to omnibus legislation, what we are proposing is to ensure there is not an abuse of omnibus legislation, like was the case under the Stephen Harper Conservative government. We are saying we can improve the way this place works. Let us have that conversation.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, we are going to make sure that all our troops have all the right benefits. There is a difference between a tax-free allowance and the hardship allowance benefits.We have fixed the immediate problem. We are conducting a much more thorough review to look at the wider compensation package, to make sure we have a fair and equitable solution for all those who serve.
Mr. Speaker, I was actually very pleased to be in Calgary just a month ago talking to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce. There were 300 people there to listen to how we are planning to create jobs, grow our economy, and innovate.I was in California because I am as much a minister of economy as I am a minister of environment. I am attracting investment so that we can create good jobs for companies like CarbonCure Technologies Inc. from Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, which has new processes that will take the carbon dioxide that we do not want, inject it into cement
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to be a government that is actually engaging the next generation. To hear from youth, to have them at the table to hear their constructive feedback, and to ensure that they are supportive of the ideas for change for the way this country works is very important. That is why the government took the initiative of having a youth council. Not only does the Prime Minister have a youth council, he encourages every member in this place to also have a youth council to get ideas from their local constituencies to ensure that we are serving in the best interests of all Canadians, Canadians of today and Canadians of tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, my responsibility and our government's responsibility is to make sure that we look after our troops, to make sure they have all the appropriate tools and equipment. That is exactly what our defence policy is doing. It is making sure that we have a fully funded and rigorously costed policy that is going to look out into the next 20 years, a policy that is going to make sure they have all the right tools, a policy that is going to make sure that, when we send them out on missions, they have everything they need.
Mr. Speaker, I point to your direction in these matters. You do have the ability to, as you have on many occasions, censure different members or remind them of their behaviour. However, it is incumbent upon all of us to manage our own behaviour here. That includes members of the government giving answers, which frankly, many Canadians find repulsive. I think that by all of us raising the point in debate, that includes the government actually being accountable to members of the opposition by providing real, relevant answers, which many of these ministers do not.
Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to our colleague for this opportunity to express how proud we are of our record of helping seniors.Last year we put into place a measure which is taking 13,000 seniors out of poverty, 90% of whom are women, through an increase in the guaranteed income supplement of up to $1,000 per year. We are also investing significantly in housing, health care, and support in communities to help our seniors live in a dignified and secure environment.
Mr. Speaker, rail transportation is crucial to our economy, and provides us with an efficient system of moving people and goods through this great and vast country of ours. Nothing is more important than rail safety, which is paramount to users, to railway workers, and most of all, to all the communities across Canada that have rail lines passing through them.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport tell us what our government is doing to ensure that Canada has the strictest rail safety standards?
Mr. Speaker, our government has taken significant steps to ensure that the appointment process for judges is transparent and responsible and fosters more diversity, among other things. To date, the Minister of Justice has appointed 55 judges and 22 deputy judges across the country, including four new appointments in Quebec.Our government is very proud of the fact that 60% of the judges appointed are women. That is up 35% compared to the previous government's record. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our judicial system. That is very good news for all members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, UN Watch is now reporting, ...UNRWA hires and employs racist staff, and places the education of impressionable Palestinian youth in their hands. Canada would never tolerate the employment of racist teachers in its own schools. Why are the Liberals funding this UN organization when there is clear evidence that it employs racist anti-Semites and terrorist sympathizers?
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Minister of National Defence cannot escape this quagmire of his own making. He has lost the confidence of the Canadian people, of our allies, and, most important, our men and women in uniform. There are 12 members of the Liberal caucus who have served in the Canadian Forces and only one of them has been accused of stealing valour.When will the Prime Minister fire the Minister of National Defence and replace him with someone worthy of the respect of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the service of every Canadian Armed Forces member and also every veteran, our government is focused on making sure our troops have all the necessary benefits to look after their families in making sure we have all the right capabilities. Last year we conducted a thorough defence policy review that had a very good analysis and gave us a good area for us to work on by making sure we have a fully costed, fully funded defence policy that will look after the Canadian Armed Forces for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, Canada's forestry industry supports hundreds of thousands of good, middle-class jobs. We strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair, punitive tax. Their accusations are unfounded. We will continue to bring the matter up with the United States, just as the Prime Minister did with the U.S. President.The coalition never offered conditions that Canada could accept. We want a good agreement, not just any agreement.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for LaurentidesLabelle for his question.Rail safety remains the minister's top priority. That is why we regularly review the Railway Safety Act to ensure that it reflects what the industry needs and what the population needs. We are very pleased to be able to begin this review one year earlier than planned, and we look forward to receiving the committee's recommendations.
Mr. Speaker, we understand that we need to take action to tackle climate change and we need to create good jobs. That is exactly what we are doing. We are making polluters pay and at the same time attracting investment in our innovative industries. I was just in California, and I was very pleased to meet with venture capitalists, private equity firms, investors, and innovators who are looking at Canada as a great place to invest. The party opposite may not care about creating jobs, but that is exactly what we are focused on.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his service. When I visited Kuwait for the first time, I was able to learn about the tax-free exemption and to learn directly about this issue, which we were able to immediately fix. Unfortunately, much more work needs to be done, and that is what our government is doing right now. We are reviewing all compensation. We are also making sure we can actually have a long-term solution to this problem.
Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege to rise on this traditional territory and to acknowledge that the work of this feminist government is making a real impact in the lives of women and girls across the country, with $100 million invested in a gender-based violence strategy, $11 billion invested in housing, a poverty reduction strategy, investments in supporting women entrepreneurs, investments in women in STEM, $90 million in a network of shelters across the country, $7 billion in child care, flexibility and more choice in EI and caregiving benefits, I could go on.I hope the member opposite asks me again.
Mr. Speaker, as the member is well aware, we are committed to a pension-for-life option for our veterans. We made that announcement this year, and those details will be forthcoming. Further to that point, we have augmented and strengthened financial security for our veterans. In budget 2016, we raised the ELB to 90% of a soldier's pre-release salary and we raised the disability award. The veterans' ombudsman and many veterans were highly supportive of these changes. It meant more money in veterans' pockets, for them and their families.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for the question.Our government recognizes the importance of safe and environmentally sound navigation. We are aware of the situation in Yamachiche and can confirm that we have received complaints about this incident. We are currently assessing the factors that may have contributed to this incident.
Mr. Speaker, it is a shame that we sometimes cannot hear everything a member has to say.Last fall, after being caught red-handed, the Liberals decided to press pause on their cash for access fundraisers, but as we might have guessed, they decided to press play again. This evening, the Prime Minister will be in Montreal rubbing shoulders with some of the Liberal Party's generous donors. The Liberals seem to think that no one will notice, however. It is though they are trying to play a Jedi mind trick on us by waving their hand and saying, This is not a cash for access fundraiser.Honestly, do the Liberals not realize that Canadians can see right through them?
Mr. Speaker, I will take the opportunity to remind all colleagues that we invested close to $90 million in shelters, and $1 million additionally went to collecting data from across the country to ensure that our investments and our efforts are based on an evidence-based approach.I am sure the hon. member agrees that restoring the right to advocacy to women's organizations across the country is essential to a healthy and vibrant women's movement too, and that is exactly what we have done.
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-44, Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1, is currently before the House.Tomorrow morning, we will consider the Senate amendments to Bill C-4 on unions, and then move on to Bill C-44 after question period. Next week, we have the pleasure of having two allotted days, one on Monday and one on Thursday.Ideally, I would like to finish debate on the budget legislation next Tuesday in order to send the bill to committee for in-depth study. Bill C-4 will be considered on Wednesday, with the hope of sending it back to the Senate that day.I do my best to provide a calendar that is as accurate as possible so that all members can prepare. From time to time, things need to change. As members know, we have had some important conversations in this place. We will always ensure that members have the ability to have those important conversations. That is why I would ask that we all continue working better together.
Mr. Speaker, I recognize, as we all do, that we are here to represent Canadians, and I say as a new member how impressed I am with how hard working each and every MP in this room is. I appreciate the dedication and commitment. However, over the last couple of days, I want to address the level of heckling and unparliamentary conduct that is taking place in the House. It is unfortunate, because we have welcomed five new members into the House.I thank you for your intervention today, Mr. Speaker, but I want to call on all my colleagues in the House, all of us, from both sides of the House, to start conducting ourselves in ways that we can be proud of, because we are representing Canadians, and we want to stand proud of the way we conduct ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, since becoming Minister of National Defence, we took an extensive defence policy into making sure that we looked after our Canadian Armed Forces. That is exactly what we have done. We spoke to Canadians all across this country who had MP consultations to make sure that we have a thorough analysis, to make sure that we have a model that is going to look after our Canadian Armed Forces. I look forward to presenting our new defence policy that is going to look after our troops long into the future.
Mr. Speaker, in order to achieve this greater independence from the parliamentary budget officer, the Liberals have given the Speaker of the Senate veto power over his work plan. Who appoints the Speaker of the Senate? According to section 34 of the Constitution, it is the Prime Minister. Therefore, by independence, the Prime Minister means that the parliamentary budget officer will have to get prior approval to do his work from someone who is hand-picked by the Prime Minister. Is that the member's definition of independence?
Mr. Speaker, earlier today, during the members' statements, we heard a beautifully orated speech in a language that 98% of us were unable to comprehend. I wonder if, as a matter of courtesy, if members choose to do that, they could provide prior translation to our interpreters so that we would be able to enjoy the content of their statement and also provide the appropriate support and response.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subjected to scrutiny, including an external review by the federal court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations. I would be happy to make myself available to the Commissioner of Conflict of Interest and Ethics if she chooses to revisit this issue.
Mr. Speaker, northern Ontario is a vast region with communities of all sizes scattered throughout the area. Promoting economic development is a challenge in this region. However, northern Ontario has many advantages and considerable potential.There is a large potential to be unlocked in the region with the many emerging innovative ideas and companies from the region. Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development let us know what steps he has taken to promote local regional economic development in northern Ontario?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member understands the intent of this government in that we believe the parliamentary budget officer should have independence so he can serve Parliament in the best way possible. We believe we can improve the way and the resources to that office. As I have also said, we are open to amendments. We welcome constructive feedback. It is a very different approach than the previous government, obviously.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I gave a speech on the announcement of the defence policy review, where we are actually giving a non-partisan analysis, making sure that we have the current state of affairs. We talked about the cuts.I thought the Leader of the Opposition would be happy to understand that we have a certain state of affairs, so we can actually now create a plan to move forward. That is what the defence policy is actually going to do.We are going to make sure our men and women have all the right tools. They need sustainable and predictable funding, and that is exactly what we are going to do.
Mr. Speaker, the government has been working for many months across many departments in the Government of Canada and, just as importantly, with all of the ministers from the provinces. We know that it is our first responsibility to help the workers who might be displaced, the producers whose companies are at risk, and the communities that will be affected. Not only is it important to look at the short term, but also the long term, and we are also very active on that front, by an expansion of export markets and diversification. We are very focused on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Montcalm. He stated his position, and I completely agree with him.As members, we are all equals here in this place. Our constituents, the people who live in our ridings, are equals, and it is only fair that we all have the same rights and freedoms here in the House. We are treated differently only because of a law that was passed in 1963. I think that was the year that Parliament passed the law that granted money to parties with more than 12 members.In 1963, it was about giving parties with more than 12 members some money. Over time it has morphed, without any specific law ever passing, to say that members of legitimate elected parties, in my case a party that runs nationally, and in the case of the Bloc a party that runs very strongly in one province, should have, and would have in other parliaments within the commonwealth system, the same rights. For the matter, independents should have the same rights, as their voters have the same rights.In this case, we do not have those rights, because as we know, over the years we have adopted traditions in which parties with more than 12 members have more rights. It has not been reassessed since 1963. In the early 1990s, a former member of Parliament for WinnipegTranscona at the time, the hon. Bill Blaikie, made a brilliant argument as to why the NDP, with nine seats, should have the right to sit on committees. At the time, with all due respect to my colleague from the Bloc, that was objected to by the Bloc, because it had more than 12 members, and they were mad, because when they had fewer than 12, the NDP had not supported them. It would be wonderful to review what has happened by accretion, without any actual decision ever rendered in this place, and go back to the question of why members of Parliament who happen to be in parties with fewer than 12 members should have fewer rights. I set aside the issue of money. Why should we have fewer rights than any other MP?
Mr. Speaker, today the Prime Minister met with his youth council, a body made up of 26 young people from interesting backgrounds, to discuss a very sensitive topic, namely reconciliation with indigenous peoples.Will the Prime Minister share the council's thoughts with us? No, because he refuses to talk to the media. Will the young people be able to publish their work at the end of the consultations? No, because they do not have permission from the Privy Council to do so . Can they talk about this on Facebook Live? Yes, but only in the presence of a chaperone.Talk about transparency and confidence in young people!Can the government tell me if any of the Prime Minister's other councils have so many constraints?
Mr. Speaker, our government is taking real action to be more open and transparent with Canadians. That is why my new mandate involves introducing a bill to make political fundraising more open and transparent. If that bill passes, it will apply to events attended by the Prime Minister, ministers, party leaders, and party leadership candidates. It is always possible to raise the bar, and we will continue to take action to make the government more transparent.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to giving more independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and that is the primary objective of the bill recently introduced in the House of Commons. Our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill, and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate the work he does.
Mr. Speaker, I will always honour the service of our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces, the ones I have not met and the ones with whom I have even served.As the Minister of National Defence, it is my responsibility and our government's responsibility to make sure our Canadian Armed Forces have all the right and necessary equipment, and have the right benefits.We conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review in which all members of Parliament had an opportunity to take part. This is exactly what this defence policy will do: set the Canadian Armed Forces on the right funded track for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important matter for us.However, I want to remind the hon. member of our Prime Minister's repeated confirmation that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian. Unlike the previous government, we have never shied away from defending our Canadian citizens abroad.Consular services are being provided to all citizens who are in need. We are seized by this particular matter that the hon. member has raised. We are providing assistance to the family and we will continue to advocate for our citizens abroad.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence may have apologized for embellishing his service record, but it is not enough. His claim of being the architect of operation Medusa, a claim that he made at least twice, when it was not true, was intended for one thing: to make him look good as a Liberal politician. This is a violation of the honour expected of men and women in uniform. He has now lost their trust and their respect. As a result, he simply cannot continue in the job that he has.After what he has done, does he really think staying on is the best situation for the troops?
Mr. Speaker, I already answered that question. Our plan is to strengthen the position of the parliamentary budget officer so that he can properly serve Parliament. He will have a meaningful mandate and be called upon to consider the economic and financial impacts of the issues submitted to him. As I also said, our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill. We are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate all of the work that he does.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons.Our government welcomes suggestions on how to improve the bill and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget office. We appreciate the work he does, and I look forward to working with the member opposite.
Mr. Speaker, as Minister of National Defence, I will always ensure we have all the necessary tools. We have conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review. We have been making sure that we look at all the analysis to ensure where all the gaps are within our funding system, where all the cuts were made, so we can have a sustainable, predictable funding model for our Canadian Armed Forces so they can plan. We are making sure all the right benefits are there, the right equipment is there and all the tools necessary for all their training and operational missions.
Mr. Speaker, we thank the parliamentary budget officer for his analysis of the provisions of Bill C-44. We look forward to working with him and others to improve the bill to ensure we accomplish the objective of having an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. Our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons. We believe that it should be an officer who reports to Parliament, unlike the previous government, which felt that he should report to the Library of Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, at Vimy Ridge, I thought of the brave Canadians who fought to defend our freedom; those soldiers had partners, parents, and siblings. It is true that when members serve, their entire family serves along with them. The families are the strength behind the uniform. In budget 2017, we announced a centre of excellence on mental health and PTSD, to advance research, education, and outreach services. This would lead to better mental health outcomes for our veterans and their families.
Mr. Speaker, we will make sure that our troops have all the necessary benefits to carry out their duties. It is our government that dealt with the immediate inequity for the soldiers who lost their tax-free status in operation Impact. It is our government that is working hard to review the compensation rules and find a long-term solution needed to fix the mess we inherited, to ensure a fair and equitable process for all.
Mr. Speaker, throughout our military operations in Afghanistan, Canada has committed to ensuring the individuals detained by the Canadian Armed Forces were handled and transferred and released in accordance with our obligations under international law. Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subject to significant scrutiny, including an external review by the Federal Court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations.I will be happy to make myself available to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner should she choose to revisit the issue.
Mr. Speaker, Statistics Canada reports that now Canada's seniors outnumber its children for the first time in history. The accelerated pace of aging in the population carries profound implications. We need to prepare for proper housing and home care and have a long-term plan.Given that we have known about this trend for years, it is surprising to see how little is in this year's Liberal budget for our seniors. Will the government react to this news and finally implement a national seniors strategy?
Mr. Speaker, a few years ago, an opposition member asked the parliamentary budget officer to have a look at the true cost of the F-35s, and did we ever learn a lot. Who was it who had asked? It was the current Minister of Fisheries.Unfortunately, under the changes his government wants to make, the PBO would no longer be able to study such things. The minister wants to prevent us from having the same opportunities that he himself had. He also wants to prevent the parliamentary budget officer from undertaking any studies that were not already planned at the beginning of the year.Why do the Liberals want to put the government spending watchdog in a straitjacket?
Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, I am addressing you in your capacity as the custodian of our rights and privileges. For weeks, the government has been claiming that all members will be able to fully participate in the parliamentary reform. It said so as recently as yesterday. However, nothing could be further from the truth.The government's proposed parliamentary reform and the approach it is taking to this issue violate the rights and privileges of members who do not belong to recognized parties. Hundreds of thousands of voters are being muzzled.I checked, and I can tell the House that the letter from the Leader of the Government on the changes to electoral reform was sent only to her counterparts in the recognized parties. Not only were we not informed by letter like the other parliamentarians, but we had to learn about the leader's intentions in the newspapers.We did not get the leader's letter until yesterday afternoon. What is worse, she indicated in that letter that the government will now have to use time allocation motions more often. That means we will have even less speaking time. The government's decision will limit our freedom of speech and have a direct impact on our work, the work that hundreds of thousands of Quebeckers elected us to do.How can the government possibly amend the Standing Orders of the House without including every single elected member of the House, with no exceptions?The government is accountable not just to recognized parties in the House, but also to all those elected by Canadians. This is set out very clearly in the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, on page 61: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.Members of non-recognized parties are 34th in the order of speaking, and the leader has announced that the number of closure motions will increase. This means that we will never get a turn to speak. This will permanently silence small minority political parties, as well as voters. It is an unacceptable attack on the freedom of speech of the members of the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party. Mr. Speaker, in the next few weeks, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs will debate the the reform of Parliament, its procedures, and its Standing Orders. It will establish the new parliamentary rules that you will have to enforce. I would like to bring to your attention that as a result of the defeat of our motion of April 5, these changes will be discussed and amended without our being able to fully participate in the discussions. It was the government that defeated our motion. We are barred from all committees. This practice is discriminatory and unfair for non-recognized parties. These rules and procedures discriminate against non-recognized parties and run counter to the principle that the privileges protect the rights of every voter.Mr. Speaker, we are asking you to defend minority elected officials so that the majority does not crush them. I will repeat the quote: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.In your speech of December 3, 2015, you clearly stated that you wanted to reform parliamentary procedure. You said: I believe the Speaker should lead discussions about how to reform our procedures to achieve these things and to have measures that ensure that members are better able to focus on their work and carry out their duties.On page 89 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, we read: By far, the most important right accorded to members of the House is the exercise of freedom of speech in parliamentary proceedings. A little further on, it is described as a fundamental right without which they would be hampered in the performance of their duties.The Speaker's role in protecting this privilege in particular is set out on page 308. The duty of the Speaker is to ensure that the right of members to free speech is protected....Therefore, Mr. Speaker, as the custodian of our privileges, it is your duty to intervene to ensure that the elected members of non-recognized parliamentary groups are not deprived of their most fundamental right, the right to speak, and the right to vote in committee and in the House on behalf of their constituents.I am asking you today to guide us as to how to reform our procedures so that you can protect the rights and privileges of parliamentarians belonging to non-recognized parties. In fact, we hold that there are four breaches of our parliamentary privileges. First, the procedure put forward by the government to reform House procedures and practices without the participation of all parliamentary groups, who are excluded from the committee on parliamentary reform, is not in keeping with the principle of fairness that must guide the Speaker's rulings and infringes on our freedom of speech.Second, the government's expressed intent to use its parliamentary majority rather than seeking a consensus among elected officials to make changes to the Standing Orders and procedures is not in keeping with the practices and customs in that regard.Third, the government's expressed intent to use time allocation more frequently inordinately violates the freedom of speech of non-recognized parties, especially since it has announced that it will use its parliamentary majority to push through its reforms.Fourth, the fact that elected members of non-recognized parties were not informed of the government's intentions regarding the procedural amendments at the same time as the recognized parties is a clear indication that parliamentarians from non-recognized parties are not being treated equitably.We are counting on you, Mr. Speaker, and we await your wise judgment.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to defence issues, the Liberals cannot be trusted. After he cut $12 billion from Canada's defence budget, the finance minister said that our military was appropriately provisioned. Now the defence minister, after he was caught misleading Canadians about his military service record, is promising to restore the funding that his government cut in the first place. The problem is that, now, no one believes what these guys say. The only way for the government to begin to regain the confidence of our troops is for the minister to step aside. When will he?
Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Department of Commerce levelled a direct attack on our forestry producers last month with new tariffs on softwood lumber. According to Michael Froman, the former U.S. trade representative, the Liberal government had an opportunity to sign an agreement last year with an offer from the Obama administration, but it chose to wait, thinking it would get a better deal with the Trump government.What is up now?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about that record. In our last year in office, the defence spending was nearly twice what the Liberals spent in any given year. We came in and we bought our men and women proper uniforms for Afghanistan, after the Liberals sent them into a desert with green camouflage. We bought them new planes so they did not have to hitch rides from the Americans. We bought them helicopters, tanks, and new LAVs so they could protect themselves from IEDs.The Liberals sent them to Afghanistan with none of that support, and the minister knows that very well. We are happy to compare our record to the Liberal decade of darkness.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the cash for access scandal, the Liberals have somehow conveniently managed to miss the entire point. They keep polishing that turd, but it is still a turd somehow.The same special access to the Prime Minister and his cabinet
Mr. Speaker, the Quebec justice minister had only one short comment about the appointment of four judges: we are short 10.In response to the crisis precipitated by the Jordan decision, Quebec appointed 18 new judges and hired about a hundred legal professionals. We do not want any more criminals to go free because their cases have been thrown out. Quebec took action and appointed 18 judges. Ottawa appointed four. That is ridiculous. What is the minister waiting for? When will she appoint judges to fill the 10 vacancies?
Mr. Speaker, I want to assure my colleague that, ever since Canada restored funding to this UN agency for Palestinian refugees, we have been following it very closely, and Canada's presence at the table is making a difference. We are ensuring that background checks are done on all financial services employees. We have helped train 3,000 employees so far, including executives and teachers, on the importance of web independence, and we are reviewing the educational materials. I would rather see those children in that UN school than on the street.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I honour the service of all Canadian Armed Forces members who are currently serving and have served before.As the Minister of National Defence and as part of this government, my job is to ensure we look after the Canadian Armed Forces as we send them on training missions or any operations abroad. That is what our new defence policy for Canada will do. It is a fully funded and fully costed defence policy that will provide predictable funding for our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces to be able to plan and carry out their missions.
Mr. Speaker, the current situation has been monitored from the very beginning by the Government Operations Centre. We have indicated to all the provincial governments that we are on standby, ready to assist as required, and if a provincial government should make a request for assistance from the Government of Canada, we will respond very, very quickly.In terms of the future in dealing with climate change, I advise the hon. member to examine very carefully the budget, because it includes $2.6 billion for this very purpose.
Mr. Speaker, a Canadian citizen, Sun Qian, has been imprisoned in Beijing for her belief in truth, compassion, and tolerance.Canada's new ambassador to China refused to publicly protest this latest case of Chinese extrajudicial detention, but by muting content on the plight of dual citizens unjustly held in China, Iran, Turkey, or any other undemocratic country, Canada is treating these citizens as second-class citizens.Why are the Liberals prioritizing trade and muting Canada's principled voice on the rule of law?
Yes, Mr. Speaker. On this point of order, my colleague opposite has actually not cited a specific Standing Order, so I would beg that it is not a point of order. However, since the matter of heckling has become relevant, I would ask
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Sudbury for his question.He and his colleagues from the region are staunch supporters of northern Ontario.I was excited to be in northern Ontario to announce an increase of $25 million for FedNor. Along with the launch of this, we also put forward the prosperity and growth strategy for northern Ontario. This will help the community; this will help indigenous communities; this will help diversify the economy; and, in particular, this will help small businesses grow and scale up, which will create good-quality jobs in northern Ontario.
Mr. Speaker, since we formed government, we have maintained the spending levels and planned increases while conducting the defence policy review, and we are developing a new policy for Canada, a rigorously costed plan that will put the Canadian Armed Forces on a sustainable footing.The Conservative rhetoric simply does not match up with the facts. After years of cuts and underspending, we are now in a troubling position where even the status quo of spending on defence will not maintain the status quo of capability. Our new defence policy is going to fix that.
Let us try this again. A rose by any other name, Mr. Speaker. The answer we just heard is total nonsense. The PBO itself is saying that Liberals are restricting its ability to do its job.The Liberal omnibus bill will allow the government to shut down any PBO work that is not to the government's liking. It will give the Senate veto over the parliamentary budget officer's work and stop Canadians from getting the answers they so rightly deserve.These changes are clearly not designed to help accountability. They are designed to help the Liberal Party in governing. Why do the Liberals keep pursuing these unaccountable changes? When will they finally turn a corner and do what they promised to do for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, this is unbelievable. He is actually misleading Canadians again and misleading this House again about this particular issue around compensation for the troops who are fighting the fight against ISIS. Right here, I have a documentI looked at it before question periodsigned by the minister himself that clearly states the exact opposite of what he just said.When is the minister going to stop misleading Canadians and misleading the House and, frankly, step aside?
Mr. Speaker, one might think that the hon. member for Hamilton WestAncasterDundas and I had a simultaneous sense of a point of order. I ask for your indulgence for just a moment. It has been six years since those of us elected on May 2, 2011, have served. I recall distinctly the opening of the 41st Parliament, in which most parties in this place took a pledge never to heckle. The initiative was led by the late Jack Layton on behalf of the New Democrats. Stephen Harper endorsed it, and for comic relief, my entire caucus pledged never to heckle. Since that time, the disappointed group in this corner, led by interim leader Bob Rae, said that they were not so sure, that they might need to heckle. At this point I need to turn for reference to a quote from the great A.A. Milne in the poem of good bears and bad bears: And then quite suddenly (just like Us) One got Better and the other got Wuss.The NDP members, over the last few weeks, have hardly been heckling at all. The Liberals have hardly heckled at all. However, it seems the Conservatives feel there is a void and they must fill it with more noise than I have ever heard in this place. I urge them, as individuals and collectively, to please honour Standing Order 16 and 18 and find a way to tone down the violence
Mr. Speaker, if the minister does not have the honour to resign, he should be fired. Instead of choosing to keep the disgraced minister in place, the Prime Minister could choose the member for Orléans, a former army commander. He could choose the MP for KanataCarleton, a former navigator and former squadron commander. He could choose the MP for AuroraOak RidgesRichmond Hill, a former air force captain. He could choose any one of these Liberals who has not been accused of stealing valour.Why will the Prime Minister not fire the minister and replace him with someone worthy of the trust of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we are taught in the army is to lead by example.Ever since the Minister of National Defence joined the Liberal ranks, that lesson has been lost on him. He misled Canadians on withdrawing CF-18s from Iraq, on the capabilities of our Royal Canadian Air Force, on the danger pay for our troops fighting ISIS, and on his involvement in Operation Medusa. The minister is a complete joke. No one believes him any more.When will he step down?
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured and privileged to serve with so many members of our caucus who have had military service. I also consider them mentors as well.As Minister of National Defence, it is a privilege to be able to serve in this role. I will work extremely hard, as our government does, to ensure our troops have all the necessary tools. I will come for advice for all the folks who have served in the military and as members of Parliament. I have opened up to all for service of any other party
Mr. Speaker, no members of the Canadian Forces should be at a disadvantage because of their service to Canada. The Prime Minister stood with his hand over his heart and he promised, no veteran should have to take their own government to court. The Liberals have not fulfilled their campaign promise to return to lifelong pensions, forcing Equitas veterans to continue to fight in court. So long as the minister continues to delay introducing promised lifelong pensions, our new veterans will remain at a disadvantage. When will the Liberals stop the necessity for the court action and bring back lifelong pensions for veterans, as they promised?
Mr. Speaker, this self-proclaimed feminist Prime Minister sure talks a good talk, but has failed to do anything meaningful for women in need, like zip for pay equity.The Liberals have no issue padding the pockets of their Liberal friends and wasting taxpayer dollars on their lavish accommodations and vacations, but when it comes to funding shelters for women in need, the Liberals have not made it a priority.Will the minister finally stop wasting taxpayer money and start investing seriously in projects that protect vulnerable women?
Mr. Speaker, residents of Yamachiche want clear answers to explain why two-metre waves damaged their homes. Damage could run into the thousands of dollars and someone has to be held responsible.The Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard says that an investigation is under way. However, the Minister of Transport will not confirm that.Can someone tell us in no uncertain terms whether an investigation has been launched? If so, what is the timeline and when will the results be made public?
Mr. Speaker, what the Minister of National Defence did was not a mistake, and he cannot solve the problem by trying to avoid the storm. On at least two occasions, he embellished his record and took credit for the work of others. He did so to look good as a Liberal politician. This is inexcusable, particularly for a member of the armed forces. He simply cannot keep his portfolio after what he did. Why are the minister and the Prime Minister having such a hard time understanding this?
Mr. Speaker, I do have the usual Thursday question. As you well know, I get up every Thursday, and I ask the government House leader what the government agenda is for the rest of the week and the week following. The government House leader tells us what the agenda is, and then we go and prepare. The only thing we have to go on is what the government House leader tells us. We are always responding to what the government is doing and to its agenda, but we get one day a week when we have an opposition day. Well, it amounts to about one day a week.The last time I asked the government House leader this question, she told me and this House what the schedule would be. It included an opposition day, which was supposed to happen today. There are extremely timely issues that are going on right now in the House of Commons. There is a huge degree of frustration here on this side of the House, but even more so, there is a lot going on in the Canadian military, and they are feeling a sense of betrayal and frustration.When our opposition day is taken away, when it is changed around, when games are played with our opposition day so that we cannot address these very serious concerns, I think that contributes to the level of frustration on this side of the House.I am going to ask the government House leader if she would tell us what the business of the House is for this week and for next week, and if we could please stick to that plan, it would be very much appreciated.
Mr. Speaker, I call them like I see them.Special access to the
Mr. Speaker, when he was in opposition, the member who is now the Minister of Public Safety accused the Conservative government of wanting to hide the truth when it refused to open an inquiry on Afghan detainees. Now, the Liberal government is the one that is refusing to launch a public inquiry.What has changed? Why have the Liberals once again changed their tune?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the parliamentary budget officer, this government believes
Mr. Speaker, Canadian manufacturers can compete with anyone in the world provided they have a level playing field, yet these same manufacturers are at a tipping point as their energy costs and taxes skyrocket while under President Trump their American competitors will pay lower taxes and electricity costs. Instead of helping businesses, the Liberals are increasing taxes on them and strangling them with red tape. Why is the Prime Minister chasing Canada's manufacturing jobs out of Canada with a massive carbon tax?
Mr. Speaker, given what has been said, we would like to review Hansard and we will get back to you in a relatively short time span.
Mr. Speaker, we know that communities in Quebec and Ontario have been dealing with flooding over the past few days. Some people have had to leave their homes and they know that they are going to have to deal with the damage when they return. There is a direct link between the flooding and climate change, and we know that these events will occur more often over the next few years.Can the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness tell us how he will work with the provinces to help these people?
Mr. Speaker, the approach of the previous Conservative government was to set up the parliamentary budget officer in a fashion that was independent, one of the reasons of which was to allow him or her to examine political party platforms before elections were called to determine if they were in fact costed properly.We know there has been a very severe problem with the Liberal costing in its last platform. In fact, it is about a $25 billion problem. Could it be that the Liberals are trying to shut down the independence of the parliamentary budget officer before their next political platform can be costed?
Mr. Speaker, documents reveal that the Minister of Status of Women spent more money renovating her offices than on supporting shelters for abused women.While the minister was spending over $1 million on her luxury accommodations, she spent less than $700,000 on emergency housing for battered women.How can the minister justify this blatant misuse taxpayer funds while every night women in need are being turned away from emergency shelters across Canada because of the lack of funding?
Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that a soldier has the right to complain, but the Prime Minister and the defence minister are actively denying that right to our soldiers who were deployed in the fight against ISIS. The defence minister made a promise to give back the benefits he took away from those troops. Now he has broken that promise and he is clamping down on those who dare speak out.Here we have yet another example of the defence minister minister breaking his word to our military. Can he not see why he has lost their confidence?
Mr. Speaker, last month I had the honour of travelling to France for the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge. It was an immense privilege to stand where, 100 years ago, four Canadian divisions came together to claim their place in the history books. I was humbled to speak to the family members of soldiers who came home from that battle that changed men. While they may not have had the words at the time, mental health injuries and PTSD were a reality then, and they are, unfortunately, the reality for many of our men and women in uniform today. What is the Minister of Veterans Affairs doing to address the mental health needs of veterans and their families?
Mr. Speaker, the previous Conservative government allowed the agreement to expire and did nothing to initiate negotiations. We are now facing the fifth softwood lumber dispute, and our workers and producers have never been found in the wrong. We disagree strongly with the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair and punitive duty. The American accusations are baseless and unfounded. We continue to raise this important issue with the U.S., as the Prime Minister did with the President just last week.
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary budget officer is concerned, and rightfully so. The government is using Bill C-44 to try to take away his power. As the parliamentary budget officer himself said, this will undermine his independence and political impartiality. Why? Because, from now on, the parliamentary budget officer will have to report to the Speaker of the House, and he will have to submit his game plan for the year. I really like you, Mr. Speaker, but you should have nothing to do with the work of the parliamentary budget officer.Why is the Liberal government stooping so low?
Mr. Speaker, it has been almost two weeks since the U.S. decided to apply duties of up to 24% on Canadian softwood lumber. It has been six months since President Trump's election and 18 months since the Liberals came to office, and the Liberals failed to see this coming. They failed to come up with a concrete plan to deal with this emerging crisis and to help the hundreds of thousands of families impacted.Can the minister confirm that she walked away from negotiations with Obama, thinking she could get a better deal with Trump?
Mr. Speaker, the 308-page omnibus bill bears the signature of the Minister of Finance. My question is for him.How is it that this man, a dignified, honourable man who has always been steadfast, is now doing the Liberal government's dirty work?
Mr. Speaker, the minister's misleading comments about his service record are a direct hit on our men and women in uniform. Yesterday, a parent of a Canadian Armed Forces member wrote me saying that the minister's stolen valour has directly affected the morale and confidence of Canada's front line infantry soldiers. The feelings of our troops and veterans have gone from disappointment and outrage to distrust and dismay. Will the minister do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, why is the minister in California when she should be in Calgary?The Prime Minister should be listening to Jocelyn Bamford of the Coalition of Concerned Manufacturers, who said that we are standing on a beach with a tidal wave called cap-and-trade barrelling down upon us, and our government still doesn't realize that this tsunami will destroy manufacturing in Ontario. She said that businesses are terrified of what the federal government is doing and that government is supposed to help us, but its policies are causing us to consider moving our growth to other jurisdictions. What is up
Mr. Speaker, the flawed study of the Afghan detainees scandal was cut short by the Conservatives after only reviewing an initial set of documents. Stéphane Dion at that point said, [w]hen you read these documents, you will have questions to ask to your Prime Minister. He also said that the Conservatives were blocking an inquiry because of being afraid of having to answer to Canadians. Therefore, will the Minister of National Defence appear before the defence committee to answer questions about this scandal, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, soldiers deployed in the fight against ISIS are saying that they feel despair after the minister betrayed them by not fully restoring their danger pay. This is in addition to the Minister of National Defence's already established casual relationship with the truth that is demoralizing our troops.A 27-year veteran stated, The Defence Minister cannot continue to lead the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, having lost the respect and trust in this way.Will the minister listen to the voices of those who have served, do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, it has been 11 days since the crippling tariffs have been levied on our small and medium producers. On this side of the House, we are hearing from concerned producers, manufacturers, and fearful forestry workers. The minister says we should expect job losses. This is unacceptable, and Canadians deserve better.What is the minister doing to reassure the over one million Canadians who depend on the forestry industry for their livelihoods, and what is the plan for our communities that depend on forestry?
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Quebec says that it needs 14 judges to be appointed in order to avoid lengthy proceedings that result in the release of the accused pursuant to the Jordan ruling. I did say 14. What did the Minister of Justice do? She appointed four judges. Does the minister realize that she may be enabling the release of dangerous criminals, putting Quebeckers at risk, and helping to discredit our justice system?
Mr. Speaker, the four fundamental values of the Canadian Armed Forces are duty, integrity, loyalty, and courage. Distorting reality is not on the list.With all his mistruths, the minister has lost all credibility. Spokesperson Charles McCabe of the Armed Forces Pensioners'/Annuitants' Association of Canada said, It is disgusting. Everyone is disgusted. He has lost the confidence of everyone who wears or has worn the uniform.When will he step down?
Mr. Speaker, as I said, our government has taken significant steps to make the judicial appointments process transparent and accountable and to ensure that there is more diversity on the bench. That includes appointing four new judges in Quebec. Our government is very proud that 60% of the appointments are women. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our justice system, and that is good news for all members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, as I was just trying to say, we believe that when it comes to the important work the parliamentary budget officer does, the office should have its independence. It should have more effectiveness and more independence, and that is why we have introduced legislation to make this happen. We are open to amendments and we welcome them.When it comes to the member's referral to omnibus legislation, what we are proposing is to ensure there is not an abuse of omnibus legislation, like was the case under the Stephen Harper Conservative government. We are saying we can improve the way this place works. Let us have that conversation.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, we are going to make sure that all our troops have all the right benefits. There is a difference between a tax-free allowance and the hardship allowance benefits.We have fixed the immediate problem. We are conducting a much more thorough review to look at the wider compensation package, to make sure we have a fair and equitable solution for all those who serve.
Mr. Speaker, I was actually very pleased to be in Calgary just a month ago talking to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce. There were 300 people there to listen to how we are planning to create jobs, grow our economy, and innovate.I was in California because I am as much a minister of economy as I am a minister of environment. I am attracting investment so that we can create good jobs for companies like CarbonCure Technologies Inc. from Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, which has new processes that will take the carbon dioxide that we do not want, inject it into cement
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to be a government that is actually engaging the next generation. To hear from youth, to have them at the table to hear their constructive feedback, and to ensure that they are supportive of the ideas for change for the way this country works is very important. That is why the government took the initiative of having a youth council. Not only does the Prime Minister have a youth council, he encourages every member in this place to also have a youth council to get ideas from their local constituencies to ensure that we are serving in the best interests of all Canadians, Canadians of today and Canadians of tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, my responsibility and our government's responsibility is to make sure that we look after our troops, to make sure they have all the appropriate tools and equipment. That is exactly what our defence policy is doing. It is making sure that we have a fully funded and rigorously costed policy that is going to look out into the next 20 years, a policy that is going to make sure they have all the right tools, a policy that is going to make sure that, when we send them out on missions, they have everything they need.
Mr. Speaker, I point to your direction in these matters. You do have the ability to, as you have on many occasions, censure different members or remind them of their behaviour. However, it is incumbent upon all of us to manage our own behaviour here. That includes members of the government giving answers, which frankly, many Canadians find repulsive. I think that by all of us raising the point in debate, that includes the government actually being accountable to members of the opposition by providing real, relevant answers, which many of these ministers do not.
Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to our colleague for this opportunity to express how proud we are of our record of helping seniors.Last year we put into place a measure which is taking 13,000 seniors out of poverty, 90% of whom are women, through an increase in the guaranteed income supplement of up to $1,000 per year. We are also investing significantly in housing, health care, and support in communities to help our seniors live in a dignified and secure environment.
Mr. Speaker, rail transportation is crucial to our economy, and provides us with an efficient system of moving people and goods through this great and vast country of ours. Nothing is more important than rail safety, which is paramount to users, to railway workers, and most of all, to all the communities across Canada that have rail lines passing through them.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport tell us what our government is doing to ensure that Canada has the strictest rail safety standards?
Mr. Speaker, our government has taken significant steps to ensure that the appointment process for judges is transparent and responsible and fosters more diversity, among other things. To date, the Minister of Justice has appointed 55 judges and 22 deputy judges across the country, including four new appointments in Quebec.Our government is very proud of the fact that 60% of the judges appointed are women. That is up 35% compared to the previous government's record. We are committed to continuing to strengthen our judicial system. That is very good news for all members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, UN Watch is now reporting, ...UNRWA hires and employs racist staff, and places the education of impressionable Palestinian youth in their hands. Canada would never tolerate the employment of racist teachers in its own schools. Why are the Liberals funding this UN organization when there is clear evidence that it employs racist anti-Semites and terrorist sympathizers?
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Minister of National Defence cannot escape this quagmire of his own making. He has lost the confidence of the Canadian people, of our allies, and, most important, our men and women in uniform. There are 12 members of the Liberal caucus who have served in the Canadian Forces and only one of them has been accused of stealing valour.When will the Prime Minister fire the Minister of National Defence and replace him with someone worthy of the respect of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the service of every Canadian Armed Forces member and also every veteran, our government is focused on making sure our troops have all the necessary benefits to look after their families in making sure we have all the right capabilities. Last year we conducted a thorough defence policy review that had a very good analysis and gave us a good area for us to work on by making sure we have a fully costed, fully funded defence policy that will look after the Canadian Armed Forces for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, Canada's forestry industry supports hundreds of thousands of good, middle-class jobs. We strongly oppose the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair, punitive tax. Their accusations are unfounded. We will continue to bring the matter up with the United States, just as the Prime Minister did with the U.S. President.The coalition never offered conditions that Canada could accept. We want a good agreement, not just any agreement.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for LaurentidesLabelle for his question.Rail safety remains the minister's top priority. That is why we regularly review the Railway Safety Act to ensure that it reflects what the industry needs and what the population needs. We are very pleased to be able to begin this review one year earlier than planned, and we look forward to receiving the committee's recommendations.
Mr. Speaker, we understand that we need to take action to tackle climate change and we need to create good jobs. That is exactly what we are doing. We are making polluters pay and at the same time attracting investment in our innovative industries. I was just in California, and I was very pleased to meet with venture capitalists, private equity firms, investors, and innovators who are looking at Canada as a great place to invest. The party opposite may not care about creating jobs, but that is exactly what we are focused on.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his service. When I visited Kuwait for the first time, I was able to learn about the tax-free exemption and to learn directly about this issue, which we were able to immediately fix. Unfortunately, much more work needs to be done, and that is what our government is doing right now. We are reviewing all compensation. We are also making sure we can actually have a long-term solution to this problem.
Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege to rise on this traditional territory and to acknowledge that the work of this feminist government is making a real impact in the lives of women and girls across the country, with $100 million invested in a gender-based violence strategy, $11 billion invested in housing, a poverty reduction strategy, investments in supporting women entrepreneurs, investments in women in STEM, $90 million in a network of shelters across the country, $7 billion in child care, flexibility and more choice in EI and caregiving benefits, I could go on.I hope the member opposite asks me again.
Mr. Speaker, as the member is well aware, we are committed to a pension-for-life option for our veterans. We made that announcement this year, and those details will be forthcoming. Further to that point, we have augmented and strengthened financial security for our veterans. In budget 2016, we raised the ELB to 90% of a soldier's pre-release salary and we raised the disability award. The veterans' ombudsman and many veterans were highly supportive of these changes. It meant more money in veterans' pockets, for them and their families.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for the question.Our government recognizes the importance of safe and environmentally sound navigation. We are aware of the situation in Yamachiche and can confirm that we have received complaints about this incident. We are currently assessing the factors that may have contributed to this incident.
Mr. Speaker, it is a shame that we sometimes cannot hear everything a member has to say.Last fall, after being caught red-handed, the Liberals decided to press pause on their cash for access fundraisers, but as we might have guessed, they decided to press play again. This evening, the Prime Minister will be in Montreal rubbing shoulders with some of the Liberal Party's generous donors. The Liberals seem to think that no one will notice, however. It is though they are trying to play a Jedi mind trick on us by waving their hand and saying, This is not a cash for access fundraiser.Honestly, do the Liberals not realize that Canadians can see right through them?
Mr. Speaker, I will take the opportunity to remind all colleagues that we invested close to $90 million in shelters, and $1 million additionally went to collecting data from across the country to ensure that our investments and our efforts are based on an evidence-based approach.I am sure the hon. member agrees that restoring the right to advocacy to women's organizations across the country is essential to a healthy and vibrant women's movement too, and that is exactly what we have done.
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-44, Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1, is currently before the House.Tomorrow morning, we will consider the Senate amendments to Bill C-4 on unions, and then move on to Bill C-44 after question period. Next week, we have the pleasure of having two allotted days, one on Monday and one on Thursday.Ideally, I would like to finish debate on the budget legislation next Tuesday in order to send the bill to committee for in-depth study. Bill C-4 will be considered on Wednesday, with the hope of sending it back to the Senate that day.I do my best to provide a calendar that is as accurate as possible so that all members can prepare. From time to time, things need to change. As members know, we have had some important conversations in this place. We will always ensure that members have the ability to have those important conversations. That is why I would ask that we all continue working better together.
Mr. Speaker, I recognize, as we all do, that we are here to represent Canadians, and I say as a new member how impressed I am with how hard working each and every MP in this room is. I appreciate the dedication and commitment. However, over the last couple of days, I want to address the level of heckling and unparliamentary conduct that is taking place in the House. It is unfortunate, because we have welcomed five new members into the House.I thank you for your intervention today, Mr. Speaker, but I want to call on all my colleagues in the House, all of us, from both sides of the House, to start conducting ourselves in ways that we can be proud of, because we are representing Canadians, and we want to stand proud of the way we conduct ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, since becoming Minister of National Defence, we took an extensive defence policy into making sure that we looked after our Canadian Armed Forces. That is exactly what we have done. We spoke to Canadians all across this country who had MP consultations to make sure that we have a thorough analysis, to make sure that we have a model that is going to look after our Canadian Armed Forces. I look forward to presenting our new defence policy that is going to look after our troops long into the future.
Mr. Speaker, in order to achieve this greater independence from the parliamentary budget officer, the Liberals have given the Speaker of the Senate veto power over his work plan. Who appoints the Speaker of the Senate? According to section 34 of the Constitution, it is the Prime Minister. Therefore, by independence, the Prime Minister means that the parliamentary budget officer will have to get prior approval to do his work from someone who is hand-picked by the Prime Minister. Is that the member's definition of independence?
Mr. Speaker, earlier today, during the members' statements, we heard a beautifully orated speech in a language that 98% of us were unable to comprehend. I wonder if, as a matter of courtesy, if members choose to do that, they could provide prior translation to our interpreters so that we would be able to enjoy the content of their statement and also provide the appropriate support and response.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subjected to scrutiny, including an external review by the federal court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations. I would be happy to make myself available to the Commissioner of Conflict of Interest and Ethics if she chooses to revisit this issue.
Mr. Speaker, northern Ontario is a vast region with communities of all sizes scattered throughout the area. Promoting economic development is a challenge in this region. However, northern Ontario has many advantages and considerable potential.There is a large potential to be unlocked in the region with the many emerging innovative ideas and companies from the region. Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development let us know what steps he has taken to promote local regional economic development in northern Ontario?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member understands the intent of this government in that we believe the parliamentary budget officer should have independence so he can serve Parliament in the best way possible. We believe we can improve the way and the resources to that office. As I have also said, we are open to amendments. We welcome constructive feedback. It is a very different approach than the previous government, obviously.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I gave a speech on the announcement of the defence policy review, where we are actually giving a non-partisan analysis, making sure that we have the current state of affairs. We talked about the cuts.I thought the Leader of the Opposition would be happy to understand that we have a certain state of affairs, so we can actually now create a plan to move forward. That is what the defence policy is actually going to do.We are going to make sure our men and women have all the right tools. They need sustainable and predictable funding, and that is exactly what we are going to do.
Mr. Speaker, the government has been working for many months across many departments in the Government of Canada and, just as importantly, with all of the ministers from the provinces. We know that it is our first responsibility to help the workers who might be displaced, the producers whose companies are at risk, and the communities that will be affected. Not only is it important to look at the short term, but also the long term, and we are also very active on that front, by an expansion of export markets and diversification. We are very focused on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Montcalm. He stated his position, and I completely agree with him.As members, we are all equals here in this place. Our constituents, the people who live in our ridings, are equals, and it is only fair that we all have the same rights and freedoms here in the House. We are treated differently only because of a law that was passed in 1963. I think that was the year that Parliament passed the law that granted money to parties with more than 12 members.In 1963, it was about giving parties with more than 12 members some money. Over time it has morphed, without any specific law ever passing, to say that members of legitimate elected parties, in my case a party that runs nationally, and in the case of the Bloc a party that runs very strongly in one province, should have, and would have in other parliaments within the commonwealth system, the same rights. For the matter, independents should have the same rights, as their voters have the same rights.In this case, we do not have those rights, because as we know, over the years we have adopted traditions in which parties with more than 12 members have more rights. It has not been reassessed since 1963. In the early 1990s, a former member of Parliament for WinnipegTranscona at the time, the hon. Bill Blaikie, made a brilliant argument as to why the NDP, with nine seats, should have the right to sit on committees. At the time, with all due respect to my colleague from the Bloc, that was objected to by the Bloc, because it had more than 12 members, and they were mad, because when they had fewer than 12, the NDP had not supported them. It would be wonderful to review what has happened by accretion, without any actual decision ever rendered in this place, and go back to the question of why members of Parliament who happen to be in parties with fewer than 12 members should have fewer rights. I set aside the issue of money. Why should we have fewer rights than any other MP?
Mr. Speaker, today the Prime Minister met with his youth council, a body made up of 26 young people from interesting backgrounds, to discuss a very sensitive topic, namely reconciliation with indigenous peoples.Will the Prime Minister share the council's thoughts with us? No, because he refuses to talk to the media. Will the young people be able to publish their work at the end of the consultations? No, because they do not have permission from the Privy Council to do so . Can they talk about this on Facebook Live? Yes, but only in the presence of a chaperone.Talk about transparency and confidence in young people!Can the government tell me if any of the Prime Minister's other councils have so many constraints?
Mr. Speaker, our government is taking real action to be more open and transparent with Canadians. That is why my new mandate involves introducing a bill to make political fundraising more open and transparent. If that bill passes, it will apply to events attended by the Prime Minister, ministers, party leaders, and party leadership candidates. It is always possible to raise the bar, and we will continue to take action to make the government more transparent.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to giving more independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and that is the primary objective of the bill recently introduced in the House of Commons. Our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill, and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate the work he does.
Mr. Speaker, I will always honour the service of our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces, the ones I have not met and the ones with whom I have even served.As the Minister of National Defence, it is my responsibility and our government's responsibility to make sure our Canadian Armed Forces have all the right and necessary equipment, and have the right benefits.We conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review in which all members of Parliament had an opportunity to take part. This is exactly what this defence policy will do: set the Canadian Armed Forces on the right funded track for the next 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important matter for us.However, I want to remind the hon. member of our Prime Minister's repeated confirmation that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian. Unlike the previous government, we have never shied away from defending our Canadian citizens abroad.Consular services are being provided to all citizens who are in need. We are seized by this particular matter that the hon. member has raised. We are providing assistance to the family and we will continue to advocate for our citizens abroad.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence may have apologized for embellishing his service record, but it is not enough. His claim of being the architect of operation Medusa, a claim that he made at least twice, when it was not true, was intended for one thing: to make him look good as a Liberal politician. This is a violation of the honour expected of men and women in uniform. He has now lost their trust and their respect. As a result, he simply cannot continue in the job that he has.After what he has done, does he really think staying on is the best situation for the troops?
Mr. Speaker, I already answered that question. Our plan is to strengthen the position of the parliamentary budget officer so that he can properly serve Parliament. He will have a meaningful mandate and be called upon to consider the economic and financial impacts of the issues submitted to him. As I also said, our government welcomes suggestions on ways to improve the bill. We are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. We appreciate all of the work that he does.
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons.Our government welcomes suggestions on how to improve the bill and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent parliamentary budget office. We appreciate the work he does, and I look forward to working with the member opposite.
Mr. Speaker, as Minister of National Defence, I will always ensure we have all the necessary tools. We have conducted an extremely thorough defence policy review. We have been making sure that we look at all the analysis to ensure where all the gaps are within our funding system, where all the cuts were made, so we can have a sustainable, predictable funding model for our Canadian Armed Forces so they can plan. We are making sure all the right benefits are there, the right equipment is there and all the tools necessary for all their training and operational missions.
Mr. Speaker, we thank the parliamentary budget officer for his analysis of the provisions of Bill C-44. We look forward to working with him and others to improve the bill to ensure we accomplish the objective of having an effective and independent parliamentary budget officer. Our government is committed to providing greater independence to the parliamentary budget officer, and this is the overriding intent of the legislation recently introduced in the House of Commons. We believe that it should be an officer who reports to Parliament, unlike the previous government, which felt that he should report to the Library of Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, at Vimy Ridge, I thought of the brave Canadians who fought to defend our freedom; those soldiers had partners, parents, and siblings. It is true that when members serve, their entire family serves along with them. The families are the strength behind the uniform. In budget 2017, we announced a centre of excellence on mental health and PTSD, to advance research, education, and outreach services. This would lead to better mental health outcomes for our veterans and their families.
Mr. Speaker, we will make sure that our troops have all the necessary benefits to carry out their duties. It is our government that dealt with the immediate inequity for the soldiers who lost their tax-free status in operation Impact. It is our government that is working hard to review the compensation rules and find a long-term solution needed to fix the mess we inherited, to ensure a fair and equitable process for all.
Mr. Speaker, throughout our military operations in Afghanistan, Canada has committed to ensuring the individuals detained by the Canadian Armed Forces were handled and transferred and released in accordance with our obligations under international law. Canada's policies and procedures regarding detainees have already been subject to significant scrutiny, including an external review by the Federal Court, MPCC, and an internal review through multiple administrative investigations.I will be happy to make myself available to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner should she choose to revisit the issue.
Mr. Speaker, Statistics Canada reports that now Canada's seniors outnumber its children for the first time in history. The accelerated pace of aging in the population carries profound implications. We need to prepare for proper housing and home care and have a long-term plan.Given that we have known about this trend for years, it is surprising to see how little is in this year's Liberal budget for our seniors. Will the government react to this news and finally implement a national seniors strategy?
Mr. Speaker, a few years ago, an opposition member asked the parliamentary budget officer to have a look at the true cost of the F-35s, and did we ever learn a lot. Who was it who had asked? It was the current Minister of Fisheries.Unfortunately, under the changes his government wants to make, the PBO would no longer be able to study such things. The minister wants to prevent us from having the same opportunities that he himself had. He also wants to prevent the parliamentary budget officer from undertaking any studies that were not already planned at the beginning of the year.Why do the Liberals want to put the government spending watchdog in a straitjacket?
Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, I am addressing you in your capacity as the custodian of our rights and privileges. For weeks, the government has been claiming that all members will be able to fully participate in the parliamentary reform. It said so as recently as yesterday. However, nothing could be further from the truth.The government's proposed parliamentary reform and the approach it is taking to this issue violate the rights and privileges of members who do not belong to recognized parties. Hundreds of thousands of voters are being muzzled.I checked, and I can tell the House that the letter from the Leader of the Government on the changes to electoral reform was sent only to her counterparts in the recognized parties. Not only were we not informed by letter like the other parliamentarians, but we had to learn about the leader's intentions in the newspapers.We did not get the leader's letter until yesterday afternoon. What is worse, she indicated in that letter that the government will now have to use time allocation motions more often. That means we will have even less speaking time. The government's decision will limit our freedom of speech and have a direct impact on our work, the work that hundreds of thousands of Quebeckers elected us to do.How can the government possibly amend the Standing Orders of the House without including every single elected member of the House, with no exceptions?The government is accountable not just to recognized parties in the House, but also to all those elected by Canadians. This is set out very clearly in the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, on page 61: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.Members of non-recognized parties are 34th in the order of speaking, and the leader has announced that the number of closure motions will increase. This means that we will never get a turn to speak. This will permanently silence small minority political parties, as well as voters. It is an unacceptable attack on the freedom of speech of the members of the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party. Mr. Speaker, in the next few weeks, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs will debate the the reform of Parliament, its procedures, and its Standing Orders. It will establish the new parliamentary rules that you will have to enforce. I would like to bring to your attention that as a result of the defeat of our motion of April 5, these changes will be discussed and amended without our being able to fully participate in the discussions. It was the government that defeated our motion. We are barred from all committees. This practice is discriminatory and unfair for non-recognized parties. These rules and procedures discriminate against non-recognized parties and run counter to the principle that the privileges protect the rights of every voter.Mr. Speaker, we are asking you to defend minority elected officials so that the majority does not crush them. I will repeat the quote: The privileges of the Commons are designed to safeguard the rights of each and every elector.In your speech of December 3, 2015, you clearly stated that you wanted to reform parliamentary procedure. You said: I believe the Speaker should lead discussions about how to reform our procedures to achieve these things and to have measures that ensure that members are better able to focus on their work and carry out their duties.On page 89 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, we read: By far, the most important right accorded to members of the House is the exercise of freedom of speech in parliamentary proceedings. A little further on, it is described as a fundamental right without which they would be hampered in the performance of their duties.The Speaker's role in protecting this privilege in particular is set out on page 308. The duty of the Speaker is to ensure that the right of members to free speech is protected....Therefore, Mr. Speaker, as the custodian of our privileges, it is your duty to intervene to ensure that the elected members of non-recognized parliamentary groups are not deprived of their most fundamental right, the right to speak, and the right to vote in committee and in the House on behalf of their constituents.I am asking you today to guide us as to how to reform our procedures so that you can protect the rights and privileges of parliamentarians belonging to non-recognized parties. In fact, we hold that there are four breaches of our parliamentary privileges. First, the procedure put forward by the government to reform House procedures and practices without the participation of all parliamentary groups, who are excluded from the committee on parliamentary reform, is not in keeping with the principle of fairness that must guide the Speaker's rulings and infringes on our freedom of speech.Second, the government's expressed intent to use its parliamentary majority rather than seeking a consensus among elected officials to make changes to the Standing Orders and procedures is not in keeping with the practices and customs in that regard.Third, the government's expressed intent to use time allocation more frequently inordinately violates the freedom of speech of non-recognized parties, especially since it has announced that it will use its parliamentary majority to push through its reforms.Fourth, the fact that elected members of non-recognized parties were not informed of the government's intentions regarding the procedural amendments at the same time as the recognized parties is a clear indication that parliamentarians from non-recognized parties are not being treated equitably.We are counting on you, Mr. Speaker, and we await your wise judgment.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to defence issues, the Liberals cannot be trusted. After he cut $12 billion from Canada's defence budget, the finance minister said that our military was appropriately provisioned. Now the defence minister, after he was caught misleading Canadians about his military service record, is promising to restore the funding that his government cut in the first place. The problem is that, now, no one believes what these guys say. The only way for the government to begin to regain the confidence of our troops is for the minister to step aside. When will he?
Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Department of Commerce levelled a direct attack on our forestry producers last month with new tariffs on softwood lumber. According to Michael Froman, the former U.S. trade representative, the Liberal government had an opportunity to sign an agreement last year with an offer from the Obama administration, but it chose to wait, thinking it would get a better deal with the Trump government.What is up now?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about that record. In our last year in office, the defence spending was nearly twice what the Liberals spent in any given year. We came in and we bought our men and women proper uniforms for Afghanistan, after the Liberals sent them into a desert with green camouflage. We bought them new planes so they did not have to hitch rides from the Americans. We bought them helicopters, tanks, and new LAVs so they could protect themselves from IEDs.The Liberals sent them to Afghanistan with none of that support, and the minister knows that very well. We are happy to compare our record to the Liberal decade of darkness.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the cash for access scandal, the Liberals have somehow conveniently managed to miss the entire point. They keep polishing that turd, but it is still a turd somehow.The same special access to the Prime Minister and his cabinet
Mr. Speaker, the Quebec justice minister had only one short comment about the appointment of four judges: we are short 10.In response to the crisis precipitated by the Jordan decision, Quebec appointed 18 new judges and hired about a hundred legal professionals. We do not want any more criminals to go free because their cases have been thrown out. Quebec took action and appointed 18 judges. Ottawa appointed four. That is ridiculous. What is the minister waiting for? When will she appoint judges to fill the 10 vacancies?
Mr. Speaker, I want to assure my colleague that, ever since Canada restored funding to this UN agency for Palestinian refugees, we have been following it very closely, and Canada's presence at the table is making a difference. We are ensuring that background checks are done on all financial services employees. We have helped train 3,000 employees so far, including executives and teachers, on the importance of web independence, and we are reviewing the educational materials. I would rather see those children in that UN school than on the street.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I honour the service of all Canadian Armed Forces members who are currently serving and have served before.As the Minister of National Defence and as part of this government, my job is to ensure we look after the Canadian Armed Forces as we send them on training missions or any operations abroad. That is what our new defence policy for Canada will do. It is a fully funded and fully costed defence policy that will provide predictable funding for our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces to be able to plan and carry out their missions.
Mr. Speaker, the current situation has been monitored from the very beginning by the Government Operations Centre. We have indicated to all the provincial governments that we are on standby, ready to assist as required, and if a provincial government should make a request for assistance from the Government of Canada, we will respond very, very quickly.In terms of the future in dealing with climate change, I advise the hon. member to examine very carefully the budget, because it includes $2.6 billion for this very purpose.
Mr. Speaker, a Canadian citizen, Sun Qian, has been imprisoned in Beijing for her belief in truth, compassion, and tolerance.Canada's new ambassador to China refused to publicly protest this latest case of Chinese extrajudicial detention, but by muting content on the plight of dual citizens unjustly held in China, Iran, Turkey, or any other undemocratic country, Canada is treating these citizens as second-class citizens.Why are the Liberals prioritizing trade and muting Canada's principled voice on the rule of law?
Yes, Mr. Speaker. On this point of order, my colleague opposite has actually not cited a specific Standing Order, so I would beg that it is not a point of order. However, since the matter of heckling has become relevant, I would ask
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Sudbury for his question.He and his colleagues from the region are staunch supporters of northern Ontario.I was excited to be in northern Ontario to announce an increase of $25 million for FedNor. Along with the launch of this, we also put forward the prosperity and growth strategy for northern Ontario. This will help the community; this will help indigenous communities; this will help diversify the economy; and, in particular, this will help small businesses grow and scale up, which will create good-quality jobs in northern Ontario.
Mr. Speaker, since we formed government, we have maintained the spending levels and planned increases while conducting the defence policy review, and we are developing a new policy for Canada, a rigorously costed plan that will put the Canadian Armed Forces on a sustainable footing.The Conservative rhetoric simply does not match up with the facts. After years of cuts and underspending, we are now in a troubling position where even the status quo of spending on defence will not maintain the status quo of capability. Our new defence policy is going to fix that.
Let us try this again. A rose by any other name, Mr. Speaker. The answer we just heard is total nonsense. The PBO itself is saying that Liberals are restricting its ability to do its job.The Liberal omnibus bill will allow the government to shut down any PBO work that is not to the government's liking. It will give the Senate veto over the parliamentary budget officer's work and stop Canadians from getting the answers they so rightly deserve.These changes are clearly not designed to help accountability. They are designed to help the Liberal Party in governing. Why do the Liberals keep pursuing these unaccountable changes? When will they finally turn a corner and do what they promised to do for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, this is unbelievable. He is actually misleading Canadians again and misleading this House again about this particular issue around compensation for the troops who are fighting the fight against ISIS. Right here, I have a documentI looked at it before question periodsigned by the minister himself that clearly states the exact opposite of what he just said.When is the minister going to stop misleading Canadians and misleading the House and, frankly, step aside?
Mr. Speaker, one might think that the hon. member for Hamilton WestAncasterDundas and I had a simultaneous sense of a point of order. I ask for your indulgence for just a moment. It has been six years since those of us elected on May 2, 2011, have served. I recall distinctly the opening of the 41st Parliament, in which most parties in this place took a pledge never to heckle. The initiative was led by the late Jack Layton on behalf of the New Democrats. Stephen Harper endorsed it, and for comic relief, my entire caucus pledged never to heckle. Since that time, the disappointed group in this corner, led by interim leader Bob Rae, said that they were not so sure, that they might need to heckle. At this point I need to turn for reference to a quote from the great A.A. Milne in the poem of good bears and bad bears: And then quite suddenly (just like Us) One got Better and the other got Wuss.The NDP members, over the last few weeks, have hardly been heckling at all. The Liberals have hardly heckled at all. However, it seems the Conservatives feel there is a void and they must fill it with more noise than I have ever heard in this place. I urge them, as individuals and collectively, to please honour Standing Order 16 and 18 and find a way to tone down the violence
Mr. Speaker, if the minister does not have the honour to resign, he should be fired. Instead of choosing to keep the disgraced minister in place, the Prime Minister could choose the member for Orléans, a former army commander. He could choose the MP for KanataCarleton, a former navigator and former squadron commander. He could choose the MP for AuroraOak RidgesRichmond Hill, a former air force captain. He could choose any one of these Liberals who has not been accused of stealing valour.Why will the Prime Minister not fire the minister and replace him with someone worthy of the trust of our men and women in uniform?
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things we are taught in the army is to lead by example.Ever since the Minister of National Defence joined the Liberal ranks, that lesson has been lost on him. He misled Canadians on withdrawing CF-18s from Iraq, on the capabilities of our Royal Canadian Air Force, on the danger pay for our troops fighting ISIS, and on his involvement in Operation Medusa. The minister is a complete joke. No one believes him any more.When will he step down?
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured and privileged to serve with so many members of our caucus who have had military service. I also consider them mentors as well.As Minister of National Defence, it is a privilege to be able to serve in this role. I will work extremely hard, as our government does, to ensure our troops have all the necessary tools. I will come for advice for all the folks who have served in the military and as members of Parliament. I have opened up to all for service of any other party
Mr. Speaker, no members of the Canadian Forces should be at a disadvantage because of their service to Canada. The Prime Minister stood with his hand over his heart and he promised, no veteran should have to take their own government to court. The Liberals have not fulfilled their campaign promise to return to lifelong pensions, forcing Equitas veterans to continue to fight in court. So long as the minister continues to delay introducing promised lifelong pensions, our new veterans will remain at a disadvantage. When will the Liberals stop the necessity for the court action and bring back lifelong pensions for veterans, as they promised?
Mr. Speaker, this self-proclaimed feminist Prime Minister sure talks a good talk, but has failed to do anything meaningful for women in need, like zip for pay equity.The Liberals have no issue padding the pockets of their Liberal friends and wasting taxpayer dollars on their lavish accommodations and vacations, but when it comes to funding shelters for women in need, the Liberals have not made it a priority.Will the minister finally stop wasting taxpayer money and start investing seriously in projects that protect vulnerable women?
Mr. Speaker, residents of Yamachiche want clear answers to explain why two-metre waves damaged their homes. Damage could run into the thousands of dollars and someone has to be held responsible.The Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard says that an investigation is under way. However, the Minister of Transport will not confirm that.Can someone tell us in no uncertain terms whether an investigation has been launched? If so, what is the timeline and when will the results be made public?
Mr. Speaker, what the Minister of National Defence did was not a mistake, and he cannot solve the problem by trying to avoid the storm. On at least two occasions, he embellished his record and took credit for the work of others. He did so to look good as a Liberal politician. This is inexcusable, particularly for a member of the armed forces. He simply cannot keep his portfolio after what he did. Why are the minister and the Prime Minister having such a hard time understanding this?
Mr. Speaker, I do have the usual Thursday question. As you well know, I get up every Thursday, and I ask the government House leader what the government agenda is for the rest of the week and the week following. The government House leader tells us what the agenda is, and then we go and prepare. The only thing we have to go on is what the government House leader tells us. We are always responding to what the government is doing and to its agenda, but we get one day a week when we have an opposition day. Well, it amounts to about one day a week.The last time I asked the government House leader this question, she told me and this House what the schedule would be. It included an opposition day, which was supposed to happen today. There are extremely timely issues that are going on right now in the House of Commons. There is a huge degree of frustration here on this side of the House, but even more so, there is a lot going on in the Canadian military, and they are feeling a sense of betrayal and frustration.When our opposition day is taken away, when it is changed around, when games are played with our opposition day so that we cannot address these very serious concerns, I think that contributes to the level of frustration on this side of the House.I am going to ask the government House leader if she would tell us what the business of the House is for this week and for next week, and if we could please stick to that plan, it would be very much appreciated.
Mr. Speaker, I call them like I see them.Special access to the
Mr. Speaker, when he was in opposition, the member who is now the Minister of Public Safety accused the Conservative government of wanting to hide the truth when it refused to open an inquiry on Afghan detainees. Now, the Liberal government is the one that is refusing to launch a public inquiry.What has changed? Why have the Liberals once again changed their tune?
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the parliamentary budget officer, this government believes
Mr. Speaker, Canadian manufacturers can compete with anyone in the world provided they have a level playing field, yet these same manufacturers are at a tipping point as their energy costs and taxes skyrocket while under President Trump their American competitors will pay lower taxes and electricity costs. Instead of helping businesses, the Liberals are increasing taxes on them and strangling them with red tape. Why is the Prime Minister chasing Canada's manufacturing jobs out of Canada with a massive carbon tax?
Mr. Speaker, given what has been said, we would like to review Hansard and we will get back to you in a relatively short time span.
Mr. Speaker, we know that communities in Quebec and Ontario have been dealing with flooding over the past few days. Some people have had to leave their homes and they know that they are going to have to deal with the damage when they return. There is a direct link between the flooding and climate change, and we know that these events will occur more often over the next few years.Can the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness tell us how he will work with the provinces to help these people?
Mr. Speaker, the approach of the previous Conservative government was to set up the parliamentary budget officer in a fashion that was independent, one of the reasons of which was to allow him or her to examine political party platforms before elections were called to determine if they were in fact costed properly.We know there has been a very severe problem with the Liberal costing in its last platform. In fact, it is about a $25 billion problem. Could it be that the Liberals are trying to shut down the independence of the parliamentary budget officer before their next political platform can be costed?
Mr. Speaker, documents reveal that the Minister of Status of Women spent more money renovating her offices than on supporting shelters for abused women.While the minister was spending over $1 million on her luxury accommodations, she spent less than $700,000 on emergency housing for battered women.How can the minister justify this blatant misuse taxpayer funds while every night women in need are being turned away from emergency shelters across Canada because of the lack of funding?
Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that a soldier has the right to complain, but the Prime Minister and the defence minister are actively denying that right to our soldiers who were deployed in the fight against ISIS. The defence minister made a promise to give back the benefits he took away from those troops. Now he has broken that promise and he is clamping down on those who dare speak out.Here we have yet another example of the defence minister minister breaking his word to our military. Can he not see why he has lost their confidence?
Mr. Speaker, last month I had the honour of travelling to France for the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge. It was an immense privilege to stand where, 100 years ago, four Canadian divisions came together to claim their place in the history books. I was humbled to speak to the family members of soldiers who came home from that battle that changed men. While they may not have had the words at the time, mental health injuries and PTSD were a reality then, and they are, unfortunately, the reality for many of our men and women in uniform today. What is the Minister of Veterans Affairs doing to address the mental health needs of veterans and their families?
Mr. Speaker, the previous Conservative government allowed the agreement to expire and did nothing to initiate negotiations. We are now facing the fifth softwood lumber dispute, and our workers and producers have never been found in the wrong. We disagree strongly with the U.S. Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair and punitive duty. The American accusations are baseless and unfounded. We continue to raise this important issue with the U.S., as the Prime Minister did with the President just last week.
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary budget officer is concerned, and rightfully so. The government is using Bill C-44 to try to take away his power. As the parliamentary budget officer himself said, this will undermine his independence and political impartiality. Why? Because, from now on, the parliamentary budget officer will have to report to the Speaker of the House, and he will have to submit his game plan for the year. I really like you, Mr. Speaker, but you should have nothing to do with the work of the parliamentary budget officer.Why is the Liberal government stooping so low?
Mr. Speaker, it has been almost two weeks since the U.S. decided to apply duties of up to 24% on Canadian softwood lumber. It has been six months since President Trump's election and 18 months since the Liberals came to office, and the Liberals failed to see this coming. They failed to come up with a concrete plan to deal with this emerging crisis and to help the hundreds of thousands of families impacted.Can the minister confirm that she walked away from negotiations with Obama, thinking she could get a better deal with Trump?
Mr. Speaker, the 308-page omnibus bill bears the signature of the Minister of Finance. My question is for him.How is it that this man, a dignified, honourable man who has always been steadfast, is now doing the Liberal government's dirty work?
Mr. Speaker, the minister's misleading comments about his service record are a direct hit on our men and women in uniform. Yesterday, a parent of a Canadian Armed Forces member wrote me saying that the minister's stolen valour has directly affected the morale and confidence of Canada's front line infantry soldiers. The feelings of our troops and veterans have gone from disappointment and outrage to distrust and dismay. Will the minister do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, why is the minister in California when she should be in Calgary?The Prime Minister should be listening to Jocelyn Bamford of the Coalition of Concerned Manufacturers, who said that we are standing on a beach with a tidal wave called cap-and-trade barrelling down upon us, and our government still doesn't realize that this tsunami will destroy manufacturing in Ontario. She said that businesses are terrified of what the federal government is doing and that government is supposed to help us, but its policies are causing us to consider moving our growth to other jurisdictions. What is up
Mr. Speaker, the flawed study of the Afghan detainees scandal was cut short by the Conservatives after only reviewing an initial set of documents. Stéphane Dion at that point said, [w]hen you read these documents, you will have questions to ask to your Prime Minister. He also said that the Conservatives were blocking an inquiry because of being afraid of having to answer to Canadians. Therefore, will the Minister of National Defence appear before the defence committee to answer questions about this scandal, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, soldiers deployed in the fight against ISIS are saying that they feel despair after the minister betrayed them by not fully restoring their danger pay. This is in addition to the Minister of National Defence's already established casual relationship with the truth that is demoralizing our troops.A 27-year veteran stated, The Defence Minister cannot continue to lead the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, having lost the respect and trust in this way.Will the minister listen to the voices of those who have served, do the honourable thing and resign?
Mr. Speaker, it has been 11 days since the crippling tariffs have been levied on our small and medium producers. On this side of the House, we are hearing from concerned producers, manufacturers, and fearful forestry workers. The minister says we should expect job losses. This is unacceptable, and Canadians deserve better.What is the minister doing to reassure the over one million Canadians who depend on the forestry industry for their livelihoods, and what is the plan for our communities that depend on forestry?
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Quebec says that it needs 14 judges to be appointed in order to avoid lengthy proceedings that result in the release of the accused pursuant to the Jordan ruling. I did say 14. What did the Minister of Justice do? She appointed four judges. Does the minister realize that she may be enabling the release of dangerous criminals, putting Quebeckers at risk, and helping to discredit our justice system?
Mr. Speaker, the four fundamental values of the Canadian Armed Forces are duty, integrity, loyalty, and courage. Distorting reality is not on the list.With all his mistruths, the minister has lost all credibility. Spokesperson Charles McCabe of the Armed Forces Pensioners'/Annuitants' Association of Canada said, It is disgusting. Everyone is disgusted. He has lost the confidence of everyone who wears or has worn the uniform.When will he step down?