2018-02-08

Mr. Speaker, last night, after the Prime Minister left the country yet again, his entire Liberal caucus, instead of defending ethical standards and the taxpayer dollars, defended the Prime Minister with their shameful vote. Now Liberal MPs are not only whipped by their boss but are complicit in condoning breaking the law without any consequences.I have a simple question for the Liberals, if they could answer us and maybe their constituents. Just what was it about yesterday's motion that they disagreed with? What did they disagree with in that motion?

Mr. Speaker, as I stated yesterday, and I will be very clear on this matter, inappropriate sexual behaviour of any kind is completely unacceptable and will not be tolerated in the Canadian Armed Forces. Every person who willingly serves their country deserves to have a professional environment to be able to grow and serve.We have more work to do, and we are going to get it done.

Mr. Speaker, the Chinese company, CCCC International Holding Limited, has a bad reputation. The Chinese government-run corporation has been banned by the World Bank from bidding on construction projects for rigging bids in the Philippines. This corporation is helping the Beijing government violate the law of the sea and now this same company wants to buy Aecon, a leading player in Canada's construction industry.Why will this government not take the time it needs? Why is it in such a hurry to say yes?

Mr. Speaker, CTV has reported that the government is trying to kill a class action law suit that alleges sexual misconduct and gender discrimination within the Canadian Armed Forces. Frankly, I find this quite disturbing. Can the Prime Minister explain why his self-proclaimed feminist government is trying to silence women who are coming forward with such serious allegations?

Mr. Speaker, we are giving him a chance to join us today. Last year, Parliament adopted a NDP motion on cracking down on the stock option tax deduction loophole that costs Canadians a billion dollars a year. Seventy-five of Canada's wealthiest CEOs pocket half-a-billion dollars alone on this giveaway. That is $6 million each.Meanwhile, Canadians lack affordable housing, pharmacare, child care, and drinkable water in hundreds of communities. Will the Liberals join with us, keep their promise from 2015 and crack down on this loophole in the next budget?

Mr. Speaker, here is what voting against the motion means: that the heritage minister can fly off on an all-expenses-paid vacation with Netflix; the finance minister can go to a private Barbados villa with Bay Street executives; and the industry minister can be wined and dined, showered with lavish gifts, by a Chinese Communist Party company looking to buy Canadian companies. All of this can happen with no consequences now. Why can the Liberals not see how illegal, how immoral, how unethical, how corrupt this is?

Mr. Speaker, the Trans Mountain project is extremely important to Canada, to Canada's economy, and to all Canadians. Unfortunately, we have two provinces that are bickering and unable to come to terms in the interest of our national economy, which is a shame. The Prime Minister's job is to be a leader, on behalf of all Canadians. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister went off to the United States for some photo ops instead of dealing with the real problems facing Canadians today.Will someone in government rise and ask the Prime Minister to act like a real head of state?

Mr. Speaker, no other prime minister has broken the ethics code and he incurred taxpayer dollars while doing it.Other members of Parliament, Liberals, in fact, have repaid thousands of dollars when they broke the rules. The only one who does not seem to have to live up to the standard of having consequences for his actions seems to be the Prime Minister. Canadians are left wondering if this is yet another example of a very bad joke by the Prime Minister, this time played on all Canadians.Why does the Prime Minister act like he is above the law?

Mr. Speaker, this is serious, because the issue here is not the environment, but predatory federalism. To quote the government, “The purpose of this Act is...to regulate trade in energy products”.This is a takeover of Hydro-Québec by the federal government, period. It will be able to decide who can sell electricity, to whom, and under what conditions. Do the federal Liberals realize that what they are doing is wresting from Quebec any control over its energy future?

Mr. Speaker, the new Ethics Commissioner, at committee today, made it clear that he would like to see the Conflict of Interest Act reformed to give him powers to apply meaningful monetary penalties against those who are guilty of serious violations of the act. Commissioner Dion also said that he could use new powers to compel an offending member to repay the reasonable value of an illegal gift. One can only guess what that would be with regard to the lavish hospitality value accepted by the Prime Minister for his illegal vacation, but in the meantime, the PM can still do the right thing and just pay it back.

Mr. Speaker, those were two different questions. This government does not really listen. The Liberals promised to crack down on notorious tax havens, but instead they signed more agreements with them. This government is signing agreements with the Cook Islands, Antigua and Barbuda, and Grenada. It is the same agreement, word for word, for all of them. That is shameful.Why are the Liberals signing new agreements with tax havens when they promised to address that inequality and loss of money?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister enjoys making grandiose statements that he knows will make him look good, such as when he apologized to certain groups. However, when it comes to protecting Canadians from abuse and harassment, he comes up with all kinds of excuses and does nothing. Will he do the right thing once and for all and apologize to our military personnel for dishonouring them by refusing to protect them from all forms of workplace harassment?

Mr. Speaker, on this side of the House, we believe in respecting the law and respecting taxpayers. The Prime Minister is guilty of breaking the law by accepting illegal gifts, guilty of accepting a ride on a private aircraft, guilty of arranging his affairs improperly, and guilty of conducting illegal discussions about government business. His illegal trip cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars. He has refused to pay back the money. Why do the Liberals believe that it is the taxpayers who should pay, when they are the ones who break the law?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Liberal MPs were given the opportunity to stand up for the law and stand up for Canadian taxpayers, and they failed miserably. One by one, they stood to vote against our motion, which demanded integrity and responsibility from politicians. The motion said that when politicians broke the law and cost taxpayers money, they had to pay taxpayers back. Which part of that did the Liberals disagree with, the part about obeying the law or the part about paying back taxpayers when they break it?

The Prime Minister acted unethically.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised veterans that they would never have to fight his government in court. We now know that this is false. Standing before a veteran who gave so much for his country, the Prime Minister cold-heartedly stated that, unfortunately, he and his fellow veterans were asking for too much. The Prime Minister can afford to fly all over the world, meeting and greeting, dining and wining—well not whining; he whines at home—with the world's elite, but when it comes to our veterans, there is nothing left in the bank account. When will the Prime Minister show some real leadership and give our veterans what they deserve?

Mr. Speaker, Mary Dawson conducted a year-long investigation on the Prime Minister's free vacation from a registered lobbyist that cost taxpayers $200,000. Her findings in the report are clear: the Prime Minister broke the law by violating four sections of the act. Last night, every Liberal voted against the motion that would require MPs who break ethics and conflict of interest laws to pay the money back. It means that the new norm for the Liberals is that they have no problem accepting gifts or trips from lobbyists, no matter the cost to taxpayers. Have they no shame?

Mr. Speaker, again the Liberals are trying to pull the wool over Canadians' eyes by giving false assurances that all is well with China's takeover of construction giant Aecon. We know this Chinese-run company is rotten with corruption. We also know Aecon is involved with critical Canadian infrastructure projects in the hydro, nuclear, and military sectors. I have a simple question. Will the minister commit in the House today to formally direct security agencies to undertake a full section 25 national security review and not just a perfunctory screening?

Mr. Speaker, thousands of British Columbians put their bodies in front of Kinder Morgan's pipeline construction on Burnaby Mountain in 2014, with 125 being arrested. I stood with them as these people are my constituents.We saw how disrespectfully the Prime Minister treats pipeline opponents during his town hall in Nanaimo last week. How many more people is the Prime Minister willing to arrest to force his pipeline through our beautiful province?

Mr. Speaker, we have received no application for an export permit related to this contract.The Prime Minister and I have been very clear about the Duterte regime's human rights violations and extrajudicial killings.I will conduct an extremely rigorous human rights analysis of any potential export permit application related to this contract. I have the power to deny a permit if I feel it poses a risk to human rights, and I am prepared to do so.

Mr. Speaker, it is the Liberals' process in which people have lost trust. It was the Liberal government that killed northern gateway based purely on politics, not on science. It killed energy east by loading on so many hurdles that it became economically impossible to proceed. Now with Trans Mountain, it has done nothing for months. It is always talk but no action with the government.Is it because the Prime Minister thinks of his job as just ceremonial in nature?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is completely missing in action when it comes to defending the Trans Mountain project. As this trade dispute grows between Alberta and British Columbia, the Prime Minister is doing nothing. This week, he is in the United States collecting photographs of his favourite U.S. political heroes, but Canadians are paying the price here at home. We know that the Trans Mountain project is important to Canadians. It has been declared to be in the national interest, and it will create thousands of jobs across the country. What is the Prime Minister specifically doing to make sure this project actually gets built?

Mr. Speaker, we have been absolutely clear. We have full confidence in our national security agencies. We work with them. We take their advice, and we follow their advice.What I find appalling and concerning is that the members opposite have no faith, no confidence in our national security agencies. We do. That is why we will continue to work with them in order to make a decision that is in the best national interest of all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, when the Canada Revenue Agency changed its policy on the taxation of employee discounts, the minister denied responsibility. When it went after disabled Canadians and single parents, she also denied responsibility. When the Auditor General reported that the agency's call centre is an unmitigated disaster, she denied responsibility.We now know her executives received the highest average performance pay in the entire public sector. Will the minister, for once, accept responsibility for rewarding her executives for the failures of her agency, and explain why?

Mr. Speaker, reports are not going to cut it. It has been two years since we knew that the social security tribunal system was broken. The Conservatives broke the system, and the Liberals have done nothing to fix it. Liberal, Tory, same old story. Workers are suffering, and the government is doing nothing to alleviate those concerns.When will the Liberals fix the system, leave the reports aside, and actually act on what is in the report to finally show respect to Canadian workers and fix this broken EI system?

Mr. Speaker, Canadian Armed Forces members and veterans deserve to know that we will support them if they become ill or injured.As the member for Barrie—Innisfil pointed out, the Conservative government was out of touch with veterans and had lost much of their trust. After 10 years of Conservative government contempt, veterans were disillusioned. That is why we have invested over $10 billion. Veterans have been asking for change for a long time, and unlike the previous government, we kept our promise.

That is peculiar, Mr. Speaker, because immediately after the report was released, it was this Prime Minister who accepted responsibility, and it was this government that accepted the findings. The Conservatives were the party that chose and demanded that the ex-commissioner investigate. Now that she has finished her investigation and submitted the report, they refuse to accept its conclusions. We on this side of the House will always respect the work of our officers of Parliament. We on this side of the House will always accept the advice of our security agencies. That is what Canadians expect.

Mr. Speaker, let me restate the facts for my hon. colleague on the other side. This is the government that put tax fairness at the cornerstone of our actions. We invested more than $800 million in the Canada Revenue Agency to fight tax evasion and tax avoidance. We would hope the member on the other side would join us in fighting tax evasion and tax avoidance in our country. That is what Canadians expect from us. That is what we are delivering.

Mr. Speaker, 28 months ago, the Liberals promised to fix the environmental assessment process, by “[ending] the practice of having federal Ministers interfere in the environmental assessment process”.Today we learned that, under clause 17 of her bill, the Minister of the Environment has the power not to move forward with an assessment. The minister claims to want to regain the public's trust with this new process, but she is breaking her promise.How are Canadians supposed to trust her if she is giving herself the power to end any environmental assessment?

Mr. Speaker, it is not by asking the same question that they will get a different response. What I said was really clear. This is the government that has put tax fairness at the centre of our actions. We have invested more than $800 million in the Canada Revenue Agency, because we believe in tax fairness and combatting tax evasion. This is what our government stands for, and I would hope the member on the other side would recognize that and work with us to make sure we eradicate that in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that my colleague listened to the question, because she played the same tape, using the same speaking notes that she has been using for two weeks.By voting down the motion last night, all Liberal members aided and abetted the Prime Minister and were complicit in his trip to a billionaire's private island with Liberal Party friends and an MP, which cost taxpayers more than $200,000. Therefore, I will calmly ask the Leader of the Government my question again given that the Prime Minister has not wanted to answer for two weeks: what part of the motion did the Prime Minister disagree with so much that he made his entire caucus vote it down?

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be part of a government that makes tax fairness a top priority. We have invested nearly $1 billion in the Canada Revenue Agency precisely to fight tax evasion. I hope that the NDP will join us in taking the appropriate measures to crack down on tax evasion in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, there is a complete lack of confidence in the Liberal government's approach, and the proof is in the amount of investment leaving this country. Billions of dollars have left the energy sector thanks to the government's process. When projects do get to a yes, the Prime Minister says no, based on politics. Now, the Minister of Natural Resources said that he would not tolerate unnecessary delays. This project was supposed to start in November. Nothing has been done.Exactly what is the Liberal government's definition of an unnecessary delay?

They certainly seem to have managed quite well, Mr. Speaker. Because of the changes they imposed on the industry, Canada lost energy east. Good job, guys, that is the opposite of what we needed.We now have an urgent problem to deal with: two provinces are squabbling and all Canadians are going to pay the price. We need a real head of state, a Prime Minister who speaks on behalf of all Canadians in the interest of Canada's economy.Will the Prime Minister finally act as a real head of state?

Mr. Speaker, our government ensures that it fully meets Canadians' expectations by relying on the vital support of a world-class public service.The former Conservative government chose to let the quality of services to Canadians drop by handing out bonuses for cutting jobs. We believe, however, that executive performance measures must reflect government priorities to better serve Canadians. That means healthier, more diverse, and more inclusive work places. Executives do not receive bonuses if they do not meet the objectives established in accordance with the rules—

Mr. Speaker, let me recap the situation for the minister. Turquoise Hill Resources is a mining company based in Vancouver. It made $2.1 billion in profits and paid exactly zero in corporate income taxes in Canada. Instead, it declared those profits in Luxembourg, which employs one part-time employee. As far as I know, Vancouver is not in Luxembourg. If a Canadian company does not feel Canadian enough to pay taxes here, why should it be Canadian enough to get loans and grants from the government?

Mr. Speaker, on page 49 of his campaign platform, the Prime Minister promised that he would not take our veterans to court, but now that is just another broken promise. He even went so far as to insult them by saying they are asking too much of his government. When the member for Louis-Hébert says that he does not like my asking questions about this, that suggests the government is on the defensive. Canadians now know that the Prime Minister is not a credible or trustworthy leader.Why is the Prime Minister breaking his promise not to take veterans to court?

Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud that we delivered on a major campaign process. We are rebuilding trust in how we do environmental assessments so we can actually get to yes on good projects. Unfortunately, under the Harper government, that trust was lost. The Harper government gutted our environmental assessment process. It removed protections for fish and fish habitat for navigable waters. Today we are re-establishing that trust. We know the environment and economy go together, and we will get good projects built while protecting our environment.

Mr. Speaker, caregivers provide an invaluable service for Canadian families. Let me be clear. Our government will continue to ensure a pathway for permanent residency for caregivers. In fact, we are conducting an assessment of the existing programs to improve them.Our government slashed wait times for caregivers from up to seven years under the previous government to 12 months under our government, and there is more good news. The existing cases under the live-in caregiver program will be eliminated by the end of this year.

Mr. Speaker, in November I wrote to the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities to ask why he was putting restrictions on the clean water and wastewater fund. This forces municipalities to rush projects, which ends up costing taxpayers more. It is now February, and I have yet to receive a response or even an acknowledgement of receipt. Why are the Liberals getting in the way of municipalities? What do they have to gain? Instead of rushing these municipalities, will the minister work with them and give them ways to maximize taxpayer money?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals voted against the following motion yesterday: That, in the opinion of the House, when any Member violates the Conflict of Interest Act, including accepting gifts or hospitality (section 11), furthering private interests (section 21), being in a conflict of interest (section 5), and accepting travel (section 12), or violates the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons, and, in so doing, incurs a cost upon the taxpayer, that Member must repay those costs to the taxpayer. Can the Prime Minister tell us exactly which part of the motion he does not agree with?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said on numerous occasions, immediately after the report was released, the Prime Minister accepted responsibility and accepted the report's findings. What is clear is exactly what the Conservatives did in 10 years in government undermining officers of Parliament. Now they have been booted to the opposition, and they continue to do so. We on this side respect officers of Parliament. We respect the work they do, and we accept their findings, as has been the case on numerous occasions.

Mr. Speaker, our government will not be lectured by the former one. We know that the environment and the economy go hand in hand. We have restored confidence in the environmental assessment process. That was the cause of the polarization. That is why projects were not moving forward. It was because the former government did not know that the environment and the economy go hand in hand.

Mr. Speaker, a company owned by the Chinese government wants to take over Aecon, one of Canada's largest construction companies. This company's international record has been generously described as problematic. Time and again, the Liberals and the Conservatives have threatened Canada's sovereignty by allowing the sale of local assets to foreign investors with links to foreign governments. In my riding, Aecon is shortlisted to build Canada's top infrastructure project, the Gordie Howe International Bridge to the United States.What effects will this takeover have on the project? What does the United States think about Beijing controlling a company that runs the show on their soil?

Mr. Speaker, the motion we moved on February 2 had the same effect as the report tabled by the former ethics commissioner. It seems that as far as the Prime Minister is concerned, it went in one ear and out the other since he voted against the motion.We know for sure that there were no exceptional circumstances in the case of the Prime Minister's family vacation, nor was it a matter of national interest. Can the Prime Minister tell us whether he disagrees with section 12 of the report, which calls for him to reimburse Canadian taxpayers for the trip with his own money?

Mr. Speaker, this morning, the International Criminal Court launched an investigation into crimes against humanity committed in the Philippines.In regard to the sale agreement with the Philippines, can the minister confirm that her government excluded this contract from the arms export regulations?How many similar contracts are being negotiated between the Canadian Commercial Corporation and other countries with terrible human rights records?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have been waiting two long years for the Liberals to deliver on their promise of a strengthened environmental assessment process. There are two adjectives we can apply to the proposed new regime: discretionary and uncertainty. Will a project require an assessment? We cannot know, for a myriad of reasons. The list of projects is eventually developed by regulation. Will the minister hold one if the public is concerned? We do not know. Will there be a joint federal-provincial review, or will the minister merely pass the whole thing to the provinces and let them deal with indigenous concerns? What is the answer?

Mr. Speaker, to be clear, everybody deserves an environment that is safe and free from harassment and discrimination. I share the concerns the Prime Minister expressed yesterday with respect to this case. I am looking into the pleadings to ensure that they are consistent with the values of our government, and I will provide my advice as Attorney General to the Prime Minister on this.I have full confidence in the Minister of National Defence to manage his litigation files. While I will not comment on the specifics of this case, it is my goal as Attorney General to ensure that, when appropriate, we can settle these cases that are in the public interest.

Mr. Speaker, the Social Security Tribunal of Canada is a real disaster. Some unemployed workers have had to wait more than a year for a hearing. The KPMG report shows that the tribunal is much more expensive and takes on average five times longer than the old system.Groups that advocate for the unemployed are calling for a return to the three member panel. The Liberals promised to take action, but unemployed workers are still waiting.When will the government keep its promise and reform the EI appeal process?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, on this side of the House we respect officers of Parliament, and we respect the work they do. It was the Conservatives who demanded that the commissioner investigate. The commissioner investigated. She released a report, and now the Conservatives refuse to accept its conclusions. We on this side have accepted its findings. The Prime Minister has accepted responsibility. We will continue to work with the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner to ensure that all recommendations are followed.

Mr. Speaker, no. We recognize that there is provincial jurisdiction and federal jurisdiction. When we make decisions or look at projects under federal jurisdiction, we will surely initiate a process. We respect Quebec and Hydro-Québec, but some projects have environmental impacts, and we will ensure a robust environmental assessment process.

Mr. Speaker, I am so proud that we have done what we said we were going to do. We have a new environmental assessment process that will earn us Canadians' trust. Indeed, Canadians want us to make decisions based on science, evidence, and indigenous knowledge. They want us to listen to Canadians' concerns. They want us to work with indigenous peoples and they want us to be able to give good projects the green light. That is what we are doing today.

Mr. Speaker, I have two words to describe what we announced today: better rules. We understand that we need to have a process to review major projects that is based on good science and indigenous traditional knowledge, that we need to be consulting with Canadians, that we need to be working in partnership with indigenous peoples, and that we need good projects to be able to go ahead in a timely fashion. That is exactly what we announced today.In terms of the project list, we are not just going to develop it ourselves. We are actually going to listen to Canadians, because we need to make sure that the projects being reviewed are those that have a significant impact on the environment and that Canadians have a clear chance to weigh in.

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to fighting tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance. That is why we invested nearly $1 billion in our last two budgets. The Canada Revenue Agency is now able to assess the risk of all large multinational corporations each year. Every year, it reviews every transaction over $10,000 in four regions that are deemed high-risk. The first two are the Isle of Man and Guernsey.As far as offshore compliance is concerned, on December 31, 2017, the CRA audited 1,090 taxpayers and launched criminal investigations in nearly 42 cases of tax evasion.

Mr. Speaker, the member knows full well that I understand the concerns he has raised. I have answered this question in the House several times. We have been very clear that, under the Investment Canada Act, the process is very thorough. It will examine both the economic benefits and national security elements of any acquisition that takes place. We will make sure we do our due diligence, that we are thoughtful about this. We will do our homework, and any decision outcome will be in the best interest of all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge for his tireless advocacy for accessible education.As someone who went back to school as a single mom with two kids, I know that adult learners face many barriers to accessing further education. That is why our government has launched skills boost, which is a new plan to give learners the support they need to succeed in the workforce. Through a new $1,600 per year Canada student grant, and new flexibility for EI, going back to school will be within reach for 43,000 more Canadians.Our government has Canadians covered no matter their circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, Turquoise Hill Resources, a Canadian mining company based in Vancouver avoids paying almost $700 million in taxes here in Canada. As a result of this company's shell games, the government is losing $700 million that could be used to fund our public infrastructure and services. However, instead of dealing with the problem, the government is lending the company $1 billion to fund its overseas projects.Does the government think that investing in companies that engage in aggressive tax avoidance is a good idea?

Mr. Speaker, we have been clear on this issue for many weeks. When it comes to national security, we never have compromised and never will compromise on that. Every single acquisition or transaction is subject to a national security screening. This is a multi-step process. The advice that we will receive from our national security agencies will be followed. We always have followed their advice. We have faith in the advice that they give us. We will make sure that any decision that we make will advance the interests of all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to the well-being of veterans and their families. We have delivered on our promise for a pension-for-life option, a plan designed to help veterans live a full and productive life post-service. The new pension-for-life option is monthly, tax-free, and is payment for life. It provides income replacement payable to 90% of a veteran's pre-release salary indexed annually for life for those who need it.The Conservatives had 10 years to make the changes necessary to support veterans and they did nothing.

Mr. Speaker, the minister keeps doing this. He keeps referring to how robust, rigorous, and multi-staged the process will be.Investment Canada data shows that only five of the more than 700 foreign takeovers in 2016-17 underwent a full-scale national security review. The minister claims all foreign takeovers face a national security review, when in fact most of them only go through the preliminary step.If the minister trusts our national security agencies, like we all do on this side of the House, will he direct them to do the full in-depth national security review of the Aecon purchase?

Mr. Speaker, the EI system needs to be fair. What we have now is a tribunal that does not work. It is too slow. It is unfair. It is complex. It is a source of justice denial. We will correct that system, as we have told employers and unions in the last month. We know that we will be able to depend on, rely on, and build on their support. We look forward to the very important work we need to do.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all members in this House, I would like to congratulate the member for Kildonan—St. Paul for her strong advocacy on behalf of her constituents.Our government is committed to helping more seniors get the benefits they deserve and that they expect. That is why I am so pleased to announce that automatic enrolment for the guaranteed income supplement is now in place since January, and is helping 17,000 vulnerable seniors access the GIS without having to apply. Not only is that making sure that more seniors get the benefits to which they are entitled, but it is also helping to reduce poverty in that very vulnerable part of our population.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for giving me an opportunity to talk about how important it is to have a justice system that functions, that respects the basic principles of natural justice, that ensures an effective and rapid system, and that meets the needs of our most vulnerable citizens.We received a very clear report explaining the fundamental reason that tribunal is not functioning as it should. It was put in place in a misguided way in order to achieve misguided financial goals. We will solve the problem by working closely with the unions, entrepreneurs, and the Canada Employment Insurance Commission.

Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, we will continue our debate on the NDP opposition motion. Tomorrow, we will resume third reading debate of Bill C-50 on political financing.Monday and Thursday of next week shall be allotted days. On Tuesday, we will start second reading debate on Bill C-68, the fisheries legislation. On Wednesday, we will call the environmental assessment bill, which was introduced this morning.

Mr. Speaker, there was quite the debate that took place in the House yesterday. The opposition, which has a limited number of opposition days to raise issues of importance to Canadians, chose to raise an issue that is important to Conservatives. We on this side will continue to focus on Canadians. As we know, this Prime Minister and this government will focus on making sure that there is an economy that works for Canadians. We will make sure that veterans have the resources they need and deserve. We will make sure that the immigration system is working to reunite families and bring them together. As the Conservatives continue to focus on this Prime Minister and this government, this government and this Prime Minister will focus on Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, as the minister responsible for the Investment Canada Act, we have a very thorough, robust, and rigorous process, a process that we will follow, a process that we have followed, and a process that will make sure that the outcome is in the best interest of all Canadians.When it comes to national security, we will take the appropriate step and the advice from the national security advisers. When it comes to Canadians, we will always make sure that any decision we make will be in their best interest.

Mr. Speaker, there have been recent media reports that IRCC may consider eliminating a pathway to permanent residency for caregivers. These reports are worrying those who are providing service to our seniors and children with medical needs. Can the minister please reassure this House and caregivers of our government's position when it comes to a pathway to permanent residency for caregivers?

Mr. Speaker, the new Canadian energy regulator is essentially putting Hydro-Québec in third-party management. The government is prohibiting Hydro-Québec from installing or operating an international or interprovincial electricity distribution line without its permission.If, for example, Hydro-Québec wanted to move forward with its own Northern Pass project with New England, it would have to beg for permission from the federal government and abide by its conditions.What right does the government have to impose federal dictates on Hydro-Québec?

Mr. Speaker, the decision we took on the Trans Mountain expansion project was the right decision and it is based on facts, evidence, and what is in the national interest. Last week, the Prime Minister was in both B.C. and Alberta and clearly stated his support for this very important project. We look forward to working with every province and territory to ensure a strong future for Canadians, but the facts and evidence do not change. This project will diversify our export markets, be built on improved environmental safety, and ensure a strong future for all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise and proud to be part of the Prime Minister's government. We know that the environment and the economy go together. We are rebuilding trust in our environmental assessment processes. We also know that we need good projects to move forward. The former government could not do both of these things. It did not know how to do both, but we do.

Mr. Speaker, innovation changes the way we live and work. It creates new possibilities and new challenges for the people in my riding and across the country who need to support their families and to have a prosperous future.For adult learners in particular, like single moms supporting a family on their own or newcomers who are starting over, going back to school can be very daunting.Would the minister tell the House what our government is doing to support adults who want to upgrade their skills?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, the former commissioner recognized that these costs were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister. As is the case for former prime ministers and the current Prime Minister, no matter where or when a prime minister travels, there are security costs involved. We will continue to seek advice from security officers.

Mr. Speaker, I just said this in English, but I will repeat it in French. We always accept the advice of our security agencies as to how to best ensure the safety of the Prime Minister. The former commissioner of conflict of interest and ethics acknowledged that these costs were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister, as has been the case for former prime ministers.

Now that the ex-commissioner has released her report, they refuse to accept its conclusions. We, on this side, will accept its conclusions. The Prime Minister has accepted responsibility and we thank the commissioner for doing the important work she did.

Mr. Speaker, with tighter timelines, better rules, more certainty for investors, and stronger environmental protections, our new approach to reviewing projects reflects our belief that we must work together to protect our environment and grow our economy to ensure a sustainable future for our children. We are building a better regulatory process that Canadians can have confidence in. Our new system will ensure good projects move forward to create good jobs and grow the economy. We will create a modern, predictable, and timely process that gets good projects built in a responsible, timely, and transparent way. Our legislation is for the—

Mr. Speaker, once again, as I have said on numerous occasions, as has been the case for previous prime ministers and is the case for this Prime Minister, whenever and wherever the Prime Minister travels, there are costs related to his security. Security agencies make recommendations. We take their expert advice, and will continue to do so.It was the Conservatives who demanded an investigation.

Mr. Speaker, we appreciate the advice and counsel of Mr. Dion. In fact, we respect our officers of Parliament, and we always appreciate their advice. We look forward to working with the commissioner and to working with Parliament to continue to raise the bar on transparency and accountability as a government.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, it was the opposition that asked the former commissioner to investigate, and now that her investigation is concluded and her report tabled, the opposition refuses to accept the recommendations. On this side of the House, we have accepted the recommendations and the Prime Minister has taken responsibility.As acknowledged by the former commissioner, these costs were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister and we accept the security agencies' recommendations.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the government House leader if she could please tell the House what the business of the House will be for the remainder of this week and for the rest of next week?

Mr. Speaker, let me assure the member opposite that we agree that the approval of the Trans Mountain project was in the national interest. It is well within our jurisdiction, and this project will go ahead. In fact, today I had discussions with both my counterparts from Alberta and British Columbia. We have officials in British Columbia right now having discussions. We are going to get to a resolution.I was also very proud today to announce a new environmental assessment process, rebuilding trust in a system that was so desperately lost under the previous government.

Mr. Speaker, delays we saw under the last 10 years of the previous government. It did not understand that the environment and the economy go together. I am extremely proud that in January 2016 we introduced interim principles to approve major projects, to make decisions based on science, on consultation, on engagement with indigenous people. We also said that no projects would go back to the starting line. We announced the national climate plan. We announced the oceans protection plan. It is in that context that we approved the Trans Mountain project. That project will get built.

Mr. Speaker, Kildonan—St. Paul is home to one of Canada's largest senior populations. While seniors benefit our communities in so many ways, they also rely on benefits like CPP, old age security, and GIS to ensure they have the security that they have worked a lifetime to earn. Could the minister responsible for seniors advise the House on what this government is doing to ensure our seniors are receiving all the benefits to which they are entitled?

Mr. Speaker, as has been said on numerous occasions, immediately after the report was released, the Prime Minister accepted responsibility and accepted the findings of the report. What has also been articulated many times, and what the ex-commissioner has recognized, is that these expenses were part of the role of the Prime Minister and were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister, as has been the case for previous prime ministers.When it comes to our security agencies, they make recommendations. We take their advice, we take their expertise, and we will continue to do so.

Mr. Speaker, our government understands that effective and efficient infrastructure is the foundation of building a strong economy, creating jobs for the middle class, and also building inclusive and welcoming places for all of us to live. We work very closely with the municipalities, and take pride in listening to them. I often listen to them. We have made changes to extend the deadline for wastewater projects and transit funding. This allows them to build the project in a way that meets their schedule, and we are very happy to work with them to extend this timeline.

Mr. Speaker, on this side of the House, we believe in respecting the law and respecting taxpayers. The Prime Minister is guilty of breaking the law by accepting illegal gifts, guilty of accepting a ride on a private aircraft, guilty of arranging his affairs improperly, and guilty of conducting illegal discussions about government business. His illegal trip cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars. He has refused to pay back the money. Why do the Liberals believe that it is the taxpayers who should pay, when they are the ones who break the law?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Liberal MPs were given the opportunity to stand up for the law and stand up for Canadian taxpayers, and they failed miserably. One by one, they stood to vote against our motion, which demanded integrity and responsibility from politicians. The motion said that when politicians broke the law and cost taxpayers money, they had to pay taxpayers back. Which part of that did the Liberals disagree with, the part about obeying the law or the part about paying back taxpayers when they break it?

Mr. Speaker, no other prime minister has broken the ethics code and he incurred taxpayer dollars while doing it.Other members of Parliament, Liberals, in fact, have repaid thousands of dollars when they broke the rules. The only one who does not seem to have to live up to the standard of having consequences for his actions seems to be the Prime Minister. Canadians are left wondering if this is yet another example of a very bad joke by the Prime Minister, this time played on all Canadians.Why does the Prime Minister act like he is above the law?

Mr. Speaker, Canadian Armed Forces members and veterans deserve to know that we will support them if they become ill or injured.As the member for Barrie—Innisfil pointed out, the Conservative government was out of touch with veterans and had lost much of their trust. After 10 years of Conservative government contempt, veterans were disillusioned. That is why we have invested over $10 billion. Veterans have been asking for change for a long time, and unlike the previous government, we kept our promise.

Mr. Speaker, this morning, the International Criminal Court launched an investigation into crimes against humanity committed in the Philippines.In regard to the sale agreement with the Philippines, can the minister confirm that her government excluded this contract from the arms export regulations?How many similar contracts are being negotiated between the Canadian Commercial Corporation and other countries with terrible human rights records?

Mr. Speaker, the Trans Mountain project is extremely important to Canada, to Canada's economy, and to all Canadians. Unfortunately, we have two provinces that are bickering and unable to come to terms in the interest of our national economy, which is a shame. The Prime Minister's job is to be a leader, on behalf of all Canadians. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister went off to the United States for some photo ops instead of dealing with the real problems facing Canadians today.Will someone in government rise and ask the Prime Minister to act like a real head of state?

Mr. Speaker, reports are not going to cut it. It has been two years since we knew that the social security tribunal system was broken. The Conservatives broke the system, and the Liberals have done nothing to fix it. Liberal, Tory, same old story. Workers are suffering, and the government is doing nothing to alleviate those concerns.When will the Liberals fix the system, leave the reports aside, and actually act on what is in the report to finally show respect to Canadian workers and fix this broken EI system?

Mr. Speaker, we are giving him a chance to join us today. Last year, Parliament adopted a NDP motion on cracking down on the stock option tax deduction loophole that costs Canadians a billion dollars a year. Seventy-five of Canada's wealthiest CEOs pocket half-a-billion dollars alone on this giveaway. That is $6 million each.Meanwhile, Canadians lack affordable housing, pharmacare, child care, and drinkable water in hundreds of communities. Will the Liberals join with us, keep their promise from 2015 and crack down on this loophole in the next budget?

Mr. Speaker, on page 49 of his campaign platform, the Prime Minister promised that he would not take our veterans to court, but now that is just another broken promise. He even went so far as to insult them by saying they are asking too much of his government. When the member for Louis-Hébert says that he does not like my asking questions about this, that suggests the government is on the defensive. Canadians now know that the Prime Minister is not a credible or trustworthy leader.Why is the Prime Minister breaking his promise not to take veterans to court?

Mr. Speaker, the Chinese company, CCCC International Holding Limited, has a bad reputation. The Chinese government-run corporation has been banned by the World Bank from bidding on construction projects for rigging bids in the Philippines. This corporation is helping the Beijing government violate the law of the sea and now this same company wants to buy Aecon, a leading player in Canada's construction industry.Why will this government not take the time it needs? Why is it in such a hurry to say yes?

Mr. Speaker, there is a complete lack of confidence in the Liberal government's approach, and the proof is in the amount of investment leaving this country. Billions of dollars have left the energy sector thanks to the government's process. When projects do get to a yes, the Prime Minister says no, based on politics. Now, the Minister of Natural Resources said that he would not tolerate unnecessary delays. This project was supposed to start in November. Nothing has been done.Exactly what is the Liberal government's definition of an unnecessary delay?

Mr. Speaker, once again, as I have said on numerous occasions, as has been the case for previous prime ministers and is the case for this Prime Minister, whenever and wherever the Prime Minister travels, there are costs related to his security. Security agencies make recommendations. We take their expert advice, and will continue to do so.It was the Conservatives who demanded an investigation.

Mr. Speaker, it is the Liberals' process in which people have lost trust. It was the Liberal government that killed northern gateway based purely on politics, not on science. It killed energy east by loading on so many hurdles that it became economically impossible to proceed. Now with Trans Mountain, it has done nothing for months. It is always talk but no action with the government.Is it because the Prime Minister thinks of his job as just ceremonial in nature?

Mr. Speaker, CTV has reported that the government is trying to kill a class action law suit that alleges sexual misconduct and gender discrimination within the Canadian Armed Forces. Frankly, I find this quite disturbing. Can the Prime Minister explain why his self-proclaimed feminist government is trying to silence women who are coming forward with such serious allegations?

Mr. Speaker, here is what voting against the motion means: that the heritage minister can fly off on an all-expenses-paid vacation with Netflix; the finance minister can go to a private Barbados villa with Bay Street executives; and the industry minister can be wined and dined, showered with lavish gifts, by a Chinese Communist Party company looking to buy Canadian companies. All of this can happen with no consequences now. Why can the Liberals not see how illegal, how immoral, how unethical, how corrupt this is?

Mr. Speaker, the new Ethics Commissioner, at committee today, made it clear that he would like to see the Conflict of Interest Act reformed to give him powers to apply meaningful monetary penalties against those who are guilty of serious violations of the act. Commissioner Dion also said that he could use new powers to compel an offending member to repay the reasonable value of an illegal gift. One can only guess what that would be with regard to the lavish hospitality value accepted by the Prime Minister for his illegal vacation, but in the meantime, the PM can still do the right thing and just pay it back.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have been waiting two long years for the Liberals to deliver on their promise of a strengthened environmental assessment process. There are two adjectives we can apply to the proposed new regime: discretionary and uncertainty. Will a project require an assessment? We cannot know, for a myriad of reasons. The list of projects is eventually developed by regulation. Will the minister hold one if the public is concerned? We do not know. Will there be a joint federal-provincial review, or will the minister merely pass the whole thing to the provinces and let them deal with indigenous concerns? What is the answer?

Mr. Speaker, again the Liberals are trying to pull the wool over Canadians' eyes by giving false assurances that all is well with China's takeover of construction giant Aecon. We know this Chinese-run company is rotten with corruption. We also know Aecon is involved with critical Canadian infrastructure projects in the hydro, nuclear, and military sectors. I have a simple question. Will the minister commit in the House today to formally direct security agencies to undertake a full section 25 national security review and not just a perfunctory screening?

Mr. Speaker, our government will not be lectured by the former one. We know that the environment and the economy go hand in hand. We have restored confidence in the environmental assessment process. That was the cause of the polarization. That is why projects were not moving forward. It was because the former government did not know that the environment and the economy go hand in hand.

The Prime Minister acted unethically.

That is peculiar, Mr. Speaker, because immediately after the report was released, it was this Prime Minister who accepted responsibility, and it was this government that accepted the findings. The Conservatives were the party that chose and demanded that the ex-commissioner investigate. Now that she has finished her investigation and submitted the report, they refuse to accept its conclusions. We on this side of the House will always respect the work of our officers of Parliament. We on this side of the House will always accept the advice of our security agencies. That is what Canadians expect.

Mr. Speaker, we appreciate the advice and counsel of Mr. Dion. In fact, we respect our officers of Parliament, and we always appreciate their advice. We look forward to working with the commissioner and to working with Parliament to continue to raise the bar on transparency and accountability as a government.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, on this side of the House we respect officers of Parliament, and we respect the work they do. It was the Conservatives who demanded that the commissioner investigate. The commissioner investigated. She released a report, and now the Conservatives refuse to accept its conclusions. We on this side have accepted its findings. The Prime Minister has accepted responsibility. We will continue to work with the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner to ensure that all recommendations are followed.

Mr. Speaker, there have been recent media reports that IRCC may consider eliminating a pathway to permanent residency for caregivers. These reports are worrying those who are providing service to our seniors and children with medical needs. Can the minister please reassure this House and caregivers of our government's position when it comes to a pathway to permanent residency for caregivers?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the government House leader if she could please tell the House what the business of the House will be for the remainder of this week and for the rest of next week?

Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, we will continue our debate on the NDP opposition motion. Tomorrow, we will resume third reading debate of Bill C-50 on political financing.Monday and Thursday of next week shall be allotted days. On Tuesday, we will start second reading debate on Bill C-68, the fisheries legislation. On Wednesday, we will call the environmental assessment bill, which was introduced this morning.

Mr. Speaker, we have received no application for an export permit related to this contract.The Prime Minister and I have been very clear about the Duterte regime's human rights violations and extrajudicial killings.I will conduct an extremely rigorous human rights analysis of any potential export permit application related to this contract. I have the power to deny a permit if I feel it poses a risk to human rights, and I am prepared to do so.

Mr. Speaker, when the Canada Revenue Agency changed its policy on the taxation of employee discounts, the minister denied responsibility. When it went after disabled Canadians and single parents, she also denied responsibility. When the Auditor General reported that the agency's call centre is an unmitigated disaster, she denied responsibility.We now know her executives received the highest average performance pay in the entire public sector. Will the minister, for once, accept responsibility for rewarding her executives for the failures of her agency, and explain why?

Mr. Speaker, last night, after the Prime Minister left the country yet again, his entire Liberal caucus, instead of defending ethical standards and the taxpayer dollars, defended the Prime Minister with their shameful vote. Now Liberal MPs are not only whipped by their boss but are complicit in condoning breaking the law without any consequences.I have a simple question for the Liberals, if they could answer us and maybe their constituents. Just what was it about yesterday's motion that they disagreed with? What did they disagree with in that motion?

Mr. Speaker, this is serious, because the issue here is not the environment, but predatory federalism. To quote the government, “The purpose of this Act is...to regulate trade in energy products”.This is a takeover of Hydro-Québec by the federal government, period. It will be able to decide who can sell electricity, to whom, and under what conditions. Do the federal Liberals realize that what they are doing is wresting from Quebec any control over its energy future?

Mr. Speaker, a company owned by the Chinese government wants to take over Aecon, one of Canada's largest construction companies. This company's international record has been generously described as problematic. Time and again, the Liberals and the Conservatives have threatened Canada's sovereignty by allowing the sale of local assets to foreign investors with links to foreign governments. In my riding, Aecon is shortlisted to build Canada's top infrastructure project, the Gordie Howe International Bridge to the United States.What effects will this takeover have on the project? What does the United States think about Beijing controlling a company that runs the show on their soil?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised veterans that they would never have to fight his government in court. We now know that this is false. Standing before a veteran who gave so much for his country, the Prime Minister cold-heartedly stated that, unfortunately, he and his fellow veterans were asking for too much. The Prime Minister can afford to fly all over the world, meeting and greeting, dining and wining—well not whining; he whines at home—with the world's elite, but when it comes to our veterans, there is nothing left in the bank account. When will the Prime Minister show some real leadership and give our veterans what they deserve?

Mr. Speaker, those were two different questions. This government does not really listen. The Liberals promised to crack down on notorious tax havens, but instead they signed more agreements with them. This government is signing agreements with the Cook Islands, Antigua and Barbuda, and Grenada. It is the same agreement, word for word, for all of them. That is shameful.Why are the Liberals signing new agreements with tax havens when they promised to address that inequality and loss of money?

Mr. Speaker, 28 months ago, the Liberals promised to fix the environmental assessment process, by “[ending] the practice of having federal Ministers interfere in the environmental assessment process”.Today we learned that, under clause 17 of her bill, the Minister of the Environment has the power not to move forward with an assessment. The minister claims to want to regain the public's trust with this new process, but she is breaking her promise.How are Canadians supposed to trust her if she is giving herself the power to end any environmental assessment?

Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that my colleague listened to the question, because she played the same tape, using the same speaking notes that she has been using for two weeks.By voting down the motion last night, all Liberal members aided and abetted the Prime Minister and were complicit in his trip to a billionaire's private island with Liberal Party friends and an MP, which cost taxpayers more than $200,000. Therefore, I will calmly ask the Leader of the Government my question again given that the Prime Minister has not wanted to answer for two weeks: what part of the motion did the Prime Minister disagree with so much that he made his entire caucus vote it down?

Mr. Speaker, let me recap the situation for the minister. Turquoise Hill Resources is a mining company based in Vancouver. It made $2.1 billion in profits and paid exactly zero in corporate income taxes in Canada. Instead, it declared those profits in Luxembourg, which employs one part-time employee. As far as I know, Vancouver is not in Luxembourg. If a Canadian company does not feel Canadian enough to pay taxes here, why should it be Canadian enough to get loans and grants from the government?

Mr. Speaker, let me assure the member opposite that we agree that the approval of the Trans Mountain project was in the national interest. It is well within our jurisdiction, and this project will go ahead. In fact, today I had discussions with both my counterparts from Alberta and British Columbia. We have officials in British Columbia right now having discussions. We are going to get to a resolution.I was also very proud today to announce a new environmental assessment process, rebuilding trust in a system that was so desperately lost under the previous government.

Mr. Speaker, let me restate the facts for my hon. colleague on the other side. This is the government that put tax fairness at the cornerstone of our actions. We invested more than $800 million in the Canada Revenue Agency to fight tax evasion and tax avoidance. We would hope the member on the other side would join us in fighting tax evasion and tax avoidance in our country. That is what Canadians expect from us. That is what we are delivering.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals voted against the following motion yesterday: That, in the opinion of the House, when any Member violates the Conflict of Interest Act, including accepting gifts or hospitality (section 11), furthering private interests (section 21), being in a conflict of interest (section 5), and accepting travel (section 12), or violates the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons, and, in so doing, incurs a cost upon the taxpayer, that Member must repay those costs to the taxpayer. Can the Prime Minister tell us exactly which part of the motion he does not agree with?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said on numerous occasions, immediately after the report was released, the Prime Minister accepted responsibility and accepted the report's findings. What is clear is exactly what the Conservatives did in 10 years in government undermining officers of Parliament. Now they have been booted to the opposition, and they continue to do so. We on this side respect officers of Parliament. We respect the work they do, and we accept their findings, as has been the case on numerous occasions.

Mr. Speaker, the EI system needs to be fair. What we have now is a tribunal that does not work. It is too slow. It is unfair. It is complex. It is a source of justice denial. We will correct that system, as we have told employers and unions in the last month. We know that we will be able to depend on, rely on, and build on their support. We look forward to the very important work we need to do.

Mr. Speaker, the Social Security Tribunal of Canada is a real disaster. Some unemployed workers have had to wait more than a year for a hearing. The KPMG report shows that the tribunal is much more expensive and takes on average five times longer than the old system.Groups that advocate for the unemployed are calling for a return to the three member panel. The Liberals promised to take action, but unemployed workers are still waiting.When will the government keep its promise and reform the EI appeal process?

Mr. Speaker, the motion we moved on February 2 had the same effect as the report tabled by the former ethics commissioner. It seems that as far as the Prime Minister is concerned, it went in one ear and out the other since he voted against the motion.We know for sure that there were no exceptional circumstances in the case of the Prime Minister's family vacation, nor was it a matter of national interest. Can the Prime Minister tell us whether he disagrees with section 12 of the report, which calls for him to reimburse Canadian taxpayers for the trip with his own money?

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to fighting tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance. That is why we invested nearly $1 billion in our last two budgets. The Canada Revenue Agency is now able to assess the risk of all large multinational corporations each year. Every year, it reviews every transaction over $10,000 in four regions that are deemed high-risk. The first two are the Isle of Man and Guernsey.As far as offshore compliance is concerned, on December 31, 2017, the CRA audited 1,090 taxpayers and launched criminal investigations in nearly 42 cases of tax evasion.

Mr. Speaker, as has been said on numerous occasions, immediately after the report was released, the Prime Minister accepted responsibility and accepted the findings of the report. What has also been articulated many times, and what the ex-commissioner has recognized, is that these expenses were part of the role of the Prime Minister and were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister, as has been the case for previous prime ministers.When it comes to our security agencies, they make recommendations. We take their advice, we take their expertise, and we will continue to do so.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is completely missing in action when it comes to defending the Trans Mountain project. As this trade dispute grows between Alberta and British Columbia, the Prime Minister is doing nothing. This week, he is in the United States collecting photographs of his favourite U.S. political heroes, but Canadians are paying the price here at home. We know that the Trans Mountain project is important to Canadians. It has been declared to be in the national interest, and it will create thousands of jobs across the country. What is the Prime Minister specifically doing to make sure this project actually gets built?

Mr. Speaker, delays we saw under the last 10 years of the previous government. It did not understand that the environment and the economy go together. I am extremely proud that in January 2016 we introduced interim principles to approve major projects, to make decisions based on science, on consultation, on engagement with indigenous people. We also said that no projects would go back to the starting line. We announced the national climate plan. We announced the oceans protection plan. It is in that context that we approved the Trans Mountain project. That project will get built.

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to the well-being of veterans and their families. We have delivered on our promise for a pension-for-life option, a plan designed to help veterans live a full and productive life post-service. The new pension-for-life option is monthly, tax-free, and is payment for life. It provides income replacement payable to 90% of a veteran's pre-release salary indexed annually for life for those who need it.The Conservatives had 10 years to make the changes necessary to support veterans and they did nothing.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, the former commissioner recognized that these costs were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister. As is the case for former prime ministers and the current Prime Minister, no matter where or when a prime minister travels, there are security costs involved. We will continue to seek advice from security officers.

Mr. Speaker, Mary Dawson conducted a year-long investigation on the Prime Minister's free vacation from a registered lobbyist that cost taxpayers $200,000. Her findings in the report are clear: the Prime Minister broke the law by violating four sections of the act. Last night, every Liberal voted against the motion that would require MPs who break ethics and conflict of interest laws to pay the money back. It means that the new norm for the Liberals is that they have no problem accepting gifts or trips from lobbyists, no matter the cost to taxpayers. Have they no shame?

Mr. Speaker, our government ensures that it fully meets Canadians' expectations by relying on the vital support of a world-class public service.The former Conservative government chose to let the quality of services to Canadians drop by handing out bonuses for cutting jobs. We believe, however, that executive performance measures must reflect government priorities to better serve Canadians. That means healthier, more diverse, and more inclusive work places. Executives do not receive bonuses if they do not meet the objectives established in accordance with the rules—

Mr. Speaker, the minister keeps doing this. He keeps referring to how robust, rigorous, and multi-staged the process will be.Investment Canada data shows that only five of the more than 700 foreign takeovers in 2016-17 underwent a full-scale national security review. The minister claims all foreign takeovers face a national security review, when in fact most of them only go through the preliminary step.If the minister trusts our national security agencies, like we all do on this side of the House, will he direct them to do the full in-depth national security review of the Aecon purchase?

Mr. Speaker, innovation changes the way we live and work. It creates new possibilities and new challenges for the people in my riding and across the country who need to support their families and to have a prosperous future.For adult learners in particular, like single moms supporting a family on their own or newcomers who are starting over, going back to school can be very daunting.Would the minister tell the House what our government is doing to support adults who want to upgrade their skills?

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for giving me an opportunity to talk about how important it is to have a justice system that functions, that respects the basic principles of natural justice, that ensures an effective and rapid system, and that meets the needs of our most vulnerable citizens.We received a very clear report explaining the fundamental reason that tribunal is not functioning as it should. It was put in place in a misguided way in order to achieve misguided financial goals. We will solve the problem by working closely with the unions, entrepreneurs, and the Canada Employment Insurance Commission.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all members in this House, I would like to congratulate the member for Kildonan—St. Paul for her strong advocacy on behalf of her constituents.Our government is committed to helping more seniors get the benefits they deserve and that they expect. That is why I am so pleased to announce that automatic enrolment for the guaranteed income supplement is now in place since January, and is helping 17,000 vulnerable seniors access the GIS without having to apply. Not only is that making sure that more seniors get the benefits to which they are entitled, but it is also helping to reduce poverty in that very vulnerable part of our population.

Mr. Speaker, it is not by asking the same question that they will get a different response. What I said was really clear. This is the government that has put tax fairness at the centre of our actions. We have invested more than $800 million in the Canada Revenue Agency, because we believe in tax fairness and combatting tax evasion. This is what our government stands for, and I would hope the member on the other side would recognize that and work with us to make sure we eradicate that in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge for his tireless advocacy for accessible education.As someone who went back to school as a single mom with two kids, I know that adult learners face many barriers to accessing further education. That is why our government has launched skills boost, which is a new plan to give learners the support they need to succeed in the workforce. Through a new $1,600 per year Canada student grant, and new flexibility for EI, going back to school will be within reach for 43,000 more Canadians.Our government has Canadians covered no matter their circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, it was the opposition that asked the former commissioner to investigate, and now that her investigation is concluded and her report tabled, the opposition refuses to accept the recommendations. On this side of the House, we have accepted the recommendations and the Prime Minister has taken responsibility.As acknowledged by the former commissioner, these costs were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister and we accept the security agencies' recommendations.

Mr. Speaker, we have been clear on this issue for many weeks. When it comes to national security, we never have compromised and never will compromise on that. Every single acquisition or transaction is subject to a national security screening. This is a multi-step process. The advice that we will receive from our national security agencies will be followed. We always have followed their advice. We have faith in the advice that they give us. We will make sure that any decision that we make will advance the interests of all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the new Canadian energy regulator is essentially putting Hydro-Québec in third-party management. The government is prohibiting Hydro-Québec from installing or operating an international or interprovincial electricity distribution line without its permission.If, for example, Hydro-Québec wanted to move forward with its own Northern Pass project with New England, it would have to beg for permission from the federal government and abide by its conditions.What right does the government have to impose federal dictates on Hydro-Québec?

Mr. Speaker, I just said this in English, but I will repeat it in French. We always accept the advice of our security agencies as to how to best ensure the safety of the Prime Minister. The former commissioner of conflict of interest and ethics acknowledged that these costs were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister, as has been the case for former prime ministers.

They certainly seem to have managed quite well, Mr. Speaker. Because of the changes they imposed on the industry, Canada lost energy east. Good job, guys, that is the opposite of what we needed.We now have an urgent problem to deal with: two provinces are squabbling and all Canadians are going to pay the price. We need a real head of state, a Prime Minister who speaks on behalf of all Canadians in the interest of Canada's economy.Will the Prime Minister finally act as a real head of state?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister enjoys making grandiose statements that he knows will make him look good, such as when he apologized to certain groups. However, when it comes to protecting Canadians from abuse and harassment, he comes up with all kinds of excuses and does nothing. Will he do the right thing once and for all and apologize to our military personnel for dishonouring them by refusing to protect them from all forms of workplace harassment?

Mr. Speaker, we have been absolutely clear. We have full confidence in our national security agencies. We work with them. We take their advice, and we follow their advice.What I find appalling and concerning is that the members opposite have no faith, no confidence in our national security agencies. We do. That is why we will continue to work with them in order to make a decision that is in the best national interest of all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the decision we took on the Trans Mountain expansion project was the right decision and it is based on facts, evidence, and what is in the national interest. Last week, the Prime Minister was in both B.C. and Alberta and clearly stated his support for this very important project. We look forward to working with every province and territory to ensure a strong future for Canadians, but the facts and evidence do not change. This project will diversify our export markets, be built on improved environmental safety, and ensure a strong future for all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, to be clear, everybody deserves an environment that is safe and free from harassment and discrimination. I share the concerns the Prime Minister expressed yesterday with respect to this case. I am looking into the pleadings to ensure that they are consistent with the values of our government, and I will provide my advice as Attorney General to the Prime Minister on this.I have full confidence in the Minister of National Defence to manage his litigation files. While I will not comment on the specifics of this case, it is my goal as Attorney General to ensure that, when appropriate, we can settle these cases that are in the public interest.

Mr. Speaker, Kildonan—St. Paul is home to one of Canada's largest senior populations. While seniors benefit our communities in so many ways, they also rely on benefits like CPP, old age security, and GIS to ensure they have the security that they have worked a lifetime to earn. Could the minister responsible for seniors advise the House on what this government is doing to ensure our seniors are receiving all the benefits to which they are entitled?

Mr. Speaker, caregivers provide an invaluable service for Canadian families. Let me be clear. Our government will continue to ensure a pathway for permanent residency for caregivers. In fact, we are conducting an assessment of the existing programs to improve them.Our government slashed wait times for caregivers from up to seven years under the previous government to 12 months under our government, and there is more good news. The existing cases under the live-in caregiver program will be eliminated by the end of this year.

Mr. Speaker, thousands of British Columbians put their bodies in front of Kinder Morgan's pipeline construction on Burnaby Mountain in 2014, with 125 being arrested. I stood with them as these people are my constituents.We saw how disrespectfully the Prime Minister treats pipeline opponents during his town hall in Nanaimo last week. How many more people is the Prime Minister willing to arrest to force his pipeline through our beautiful province?

Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud that we delivered on a major campaign process. We are rebuilding trust in how we do environmental assessments so we can actually get to yes on good projects. Unfortunately, under the Harper government, that trust was lost. The Harper government gutted our environmental assessment process. It removed protections for fish and fish habitat for navigable waters. Today we are re-establishing that trust. We know the environment and economy go together, and we will get good projects built while protecting our environment.

Mr. Speaker, the member knows full well that I understand the concerns he has raised. I have answered this question in the House several times. We have been very clear that, under the Investment Canada Act, the process is very thorough. It will examine both the economic benefits and national security elements of any acquisition that takes place. We will make sure we do our due diligence, that we are thoughtful about this. We will do our homework, and any decision outcome will be in the best interest of all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be part of a government that makes tax fairness a top priority. We have invested nearly $1 billion in the Canada Revenue Agency precisely to fight tax evasion. I hope that the NDP will join us in taking the appropriate measures to crack down on tax evasion in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, as I stated yesterday, and I will be very clear on this matter, inappropriate sexual behaviour of any kind is completely unacceptable and will not be tolerated in the Canadian Armed Forces. Every person who willingly serves their country deserves to have a professional environment to be able to grow and serve.We have more work to do, and we are going to get it done.

Mr. Speaker, I have two words to describe what we announced today: better rules. We understand that we need to have a process to review major projects that is based on good science and indigenous traditional knowledge, that we need to be consulting with Canadians, that we need to be working in partnership with indigenous peoples, and that we need good projects to be able to go ahead in a timely fashion. That is exactly what we announced today.In terms of the project list, we are not just going to develop it ourselves. We are actually going to listen to Canadians, because we need to make sure that the projects being reviewed are those that have a significant impact on the environment and that Canadians have a clear chance to weigh in.

Mr. Speaker, with tighter timelines, better rules, more certainty for investors, and stronger environmental protections, our new approach to reviewing projects reflects our belief that we must work together to protect our environment and grow our economy to ensure a sustainable future for our children. We are building a better regulatory process that Canadians can have confidence in. Our new system will ensure good projects move forward to create good jobs and grow the economy. We will create a modern, predictable, and timely process that gets good projects built in a responsible, timely, and transparent way. Our legislation is for the—

Mr. Speaker, Turquoise Hill Resources, a Canadian mining company based in Vancouver avoids paying almost $700 million in taxes here in Canada. As a result of this company's shell games, the government is losing $700 million that could be used to fund our public infrastructure and services. However, instead of dealing with the problem, the government is lending the company $1 billion to fund its overseas projects.Does the government think that investing in companies that engage in aggressive tax avoidance is a good idea?

Mr. Speaker, there was quite the debate that took place in the House yesterday. The opposition, which has a limited number of opposition days to raise issues of importance to Canadians, chose to raise an issue that is important to Conservatives. We on this side will continue to focus on Canadians. As we know, this Prime Minister and this government will focus on making sure that there is an economy that works for Canadians. We will make sure that veterans have the resources they need and deserve. We will make sure that the immigration system is working to reunite families and bring them together. As the Conservatives continue to focus on this Prime Minister and this government, this government and this Prime Minister will focus on Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I am so proud that we have done what we said we were going to do. We have a new environmental assessment process that will earn us Canadians' trust. Indeed, Canadians want us to make decisions based on science, evidence, and indigenous knowledge. They want us to listen to Canadians' concerns. They want us to work with indigenous peoples and they want us to be able to give good projects the green light. That is what we are doing today.

Mr. Speaker, our government understands that effective and efficient infrastructure is the foundation of building a strong economy, creating jobs for the middle class, and also building inclusive and welcoming places for all of us to live. We work very closely with the municipalities, and take pride in listening to them. I often listen to them. We have made changes to extend the deadline for wastewater projects and transit funding. This allows them to build the project in a way that meets their schedule, and we are very happy to work with them to extend this timeline.

Now that the ex-commissioner has released her report, they refuse to accept its conclusions. We, on this side, will accept its conclusions. The Prime Minister has accepted responsibility and we thank the commissioner for doing the important work she did.

Mr. Speaker, in November I wrote to the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities to ask why he was putting restrictions on the clean water and wastewater fund. This forces municipalities to rush projects, which ends up costing taxpayers more. It is now February, and I have yet to receive a response or even an acknowledgement of receipt. Why are the Liberals getting in the way of municipalities? What do they have to gain? Instead of rushing these municipalities, will the minister work with them and give them ways to maximize taxpayer money?

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise and proud to be part of the Prime Minister's government. We know that the environment and the economy go together. We are rebuilding trust in our environmental assessment processes. We also know that we need good projects to move forward. The former government could not do both of these things. It did not know how to do both, but we do.

Mr. Speaker, no. We recognize that there is provincial jurisdiction and federal jurisdiction. When we make decisions or look at projects under federal jurisdiction, we will surely initiate a process. We respect Quebec and Hydro-Québec, but some projects have environmental impacts, and we will ensure a robust environmental assessment process.

Mr. Speaker, as the minister responsible for the Investment Canada Act, we have a very thorough, robust, and rigorous process, a process that we will follow, a process that we have followed, and a process that will make sure that the outcome is in the best interest of all Canadians.When it comes to national security, we will take the appropriate step and the advice from the national security advisers. When it comes to Canadians, we will always make sure that any decision we make will be in their best interest.

Mr. Speaker, as the minister responsible for the Investment Canada Act, we have a very thorough, robust, and rigorous process, a process that we will follow, a process that we have followed, and a process that will make sure that the outcome is in the best interest of all Canadians.When it comes to national security, we will take the appropriate step and the advice from the national security advisers. When it comes to Canadians, we will always make sure that any decision we make will be in their best interest.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise and proud to be part of the Prime Minister's government. We know that the environment and the economy go together. We are rebuilding trust in our environmental assessment processes. We also know that we need good projects to move forward. The former government could not do both of these things. It did not know how to do both, but we do.

Mr. Speaker, no. We recognize that there is provincial jurisdiction and federal jurisdiction. When we make decisions or look at projects under federal jurisdiction, we will surely initiate a process. We respect Quebec and Hydro-Québec, but some projects have environmental impacts, and we will ensure a robust environmental assessment process.

Mr. Speaker, in November I wrote to the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities to ask why he was putting restrictions on the clean water and wastewater fund. This forces municipalities to rush projects, which ends up costing taxpayers more. It is now February, and I have yet to receive a response or even an acknowledgement of receipt. Why are the Liberals getting in the way of municipalities? What do they have to gain? Instead of rushing these municipalities, will the minister work with them and give them ways to maximize taxpayer money?

Now that the ex-commissioner has released her report, they refuse to accept its conclusions. We, on this side, will accept its conclusions. The Prime Minister has accepted responsibility and we thank the commissioner for doing the important work she did.

Mr. Speaker, our government understands that effective and efficient infrastructure is the foundation of building a strong economy, creating jobs for the middle class, and also building inclusive and welcoming places for all of us to live. We work very closely with the municipalities, and take pride in listening to them. I often listen to them. We have made changes to extend the deadline for wastewater projects and transit funding. This allows them to build the project in a way that meets their schedule, and we are very happy to work with them to extend this timeline.

Mr. Speaker, I am so proud that we have done what we said we were going to do. We have a new environmental assessment process that will earn us Canadians' trust. Indeed, Canadians want us to make decisions based on science, evidence, and indigenous knowledge. They want us to listen to Canadians' concerns. They want us to work with indigenous peoples and they want us to be able to give good projects the green light. That is what we are doing today.

Mr. Speaker, there was quite the debate that took place in the House yesterday. The opposition, which has a limited number of opposition days to raise issues of importance to Canadians, chose to raise an issue that is important to Conservatives. We on this side will continue to focus on Canadians. As we know, this Prime Minister and this government will focus on making sure that there is an economy that works for Canadians. We will make sure that veterans have the resources they need and deserve. We will make sure that the immigration system is working to reunite families and bring them together. As the Conservatives continue to focus on this Prime Minister and this government, this government and this Prime Minister will focus on Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, Turquoise Hill Resources, a Canadian mining company based in Vancouver avoids paying almost $700 million in taxes here in Canada. As a result of this company's shell games, the government is losing $700 million that could be used to fund our public infrastructure and services. However, instead of dealing with the problem, the government is lending the company $1 billion to fund its overseas projects.Does the government think that investing in companies that engage in aggressive tax avoidance is a good idea?

Mr. Speaker, with tighter timelines, better rules, more certainty for investors, and stronger environmental protections, our new approach to reviewing projects reflects our belief that we must work together to protect our environment and grow our economy to ensure a sustainable future for our children. We are building a better regulatory process that Canadians can have confidence in. Our new system will ensure good projects move forward to create good jobs and grow the economy. We will create a modern, predictable, and timely process that gets good projects built in a responsible, timely, and transparent way. Our legislation is for the—

Mr. Speaker, I have two words to describe what we announced today: better rules. We understand that we need to have a process to review major projects that is based on good science and indigenous traditional knowledge, that we need to be consulting with Canadians, that we need to be working in partnership with indigenous peoples, and that we need good projects to be able to go ahead in a timely fashion. That is exactly what we announced today.In terms of the project list, we are not just going to develop it ourselves. We are actually going to listen to Canadians, because we need to make sure that the projects being reviewed are those that have a significant impact on the environment and that Canadians have a clear chance to weigh in.

Mr. Speaker, as I stated yesterday, and I will be very clear on this matter, inappropriate sexual behaviour of any kind is completely unacceptable and will not be tolerated in the Canadian Armed Forces. Every person who willingly serves their country deserves to have a professional environment to be able to grow and serve.We have more work to do, and we are going to get it done.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be part of a government that makes tax fairness a top priority. We have invested nearly $1 billion in the Canada Revenue Agency precisely to fight tax evasion. I hope that the NDP will join us in taking the appropriate measures to crack down on tax evasion in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, the member knows full well that I understand the concerns he has raised. I have answered this question in the House several times. We have been very clear that, under the Investment Canada Act, the process is very thorough. It will examine both the economic benefits and national security elements of any acquisition that takes place. We will make sure we do our due diligence, that we are thoughtful about this. We will do our homework, and any decision outcome will be in the best interest of all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud that we delivered on a major campaign process. We are rebuilding trust in how we do environmental assessments so we can actually get to yes on good projects. Unfortunately, under the Harper government, that trust was lost. The Harper government gutted our environmental assessment process. It removed protections for fish and fish habitat for navigable waters. Today we are re-establishing that trust. We know the environment and economy go together, and we will get good projects built while protecting our environment.

Mr. Speaker, thousands of British Columbians put their bodies in front of Kinder Morgan's pipeline construction on Burnaby Mountain in 2014, with 125 being arrested. I stood with them as these people are my constituents.We saw how disrespectfully the Prime Minister treats pipeline opponents during his town hall in Nanaimo last week. How many more people is the Prime Minister willing to arrest to force his pipeline through our beautiful province?

Mr. Speaker, caregivers provide an invaluable service for Canadian families. Let me be clear. Our government will continue to ensure a pathway for permanent residency for caregivers. In fact, we are conducting an assessment of the existing programs to improve them.Our government slashed wait times for caregivers from up to seven years under the previous government to 12 months under our government, and there is more good news. The existing cases under the live-in caregiver program will be eliminated by the end of this year.

Mr. Speaker, Kildonan—St. Paul is home to one of Canada's largest senior populations. While seniors benefit our communities in so many ways, they also rely on benefits like CPP, old age security, and GIS to ensure they have the security that they have worked a lifetime to earn. Could the minister responsible for seniors advise the House on what this government is doing to ensure our seniors are receiving all the benefits to which they are entitled?

Mr. Speaker, to be clear, everybody deserves an environment that is safe and free from harassment and discrimination. I share the concerns the Prime Minister expressed yesterday with respect to this case. I am looking into the pleadings to ensure that they are consistent with the values of our government, and I will provide my advice as Attorney General to the Prime Minister on this.I have full confidence in the Minister of National Defence to manage his litigation files. While I will not comment on the specifics of this case, it is my goal as Attorney General to ensure that, when appropriate, we can settle these cases that are in the public interest.

Mr. Speaker, the decision we took on the Trans Mountain expansion project was the right decision and it is based on facts, evidence, and what is in the national interest. Last week, the Prime Minister was in both B.C. and Alberta and clearly stated his support for this very important project. We look forward to working with every province and territory to ensure a strong future for Canadians, but the facts and evidence do not change. This project will diversify our export markets, be built on improved environmental safety, and ensure a strong future for all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister enjoys making grandiose statements that he knows will make him look good, such as when he apologized to certain groups. However, when it comes to protecting Canadians from abuse and harassment, he comes up with all kinds of excuses and does nothing. Will he do the right thing once and for all and apologize to our military personnel for dishonouring them by refusing to protect them from all forms of workplace harassment?

Mr. Speaker, we have been absolutely clear. We have full confidence in our national security agencies. We work with them. We take their advice, and we follow their advice.What I find appalling and concerning is that the members opposite have no faith, no confidence in our national security agencies. We do. That is why we will continue to work with them in order to make a decision that is in the best national interest of all Canadians.

They certainly seem to have managed quite well, Mr. Speaker. Because of the changes they imposed on the industry, Canada lost energy east. Good job, guys, that is the opposite of what we needed.We now have an urgent problem to deal with: two provinces are squabbling and all Canadians are going to pay the price. We need a real head of state, a Prime Minister who speaks on behalf of all Canadians in the interest of Canada's economy.Will the Prime Minister finally act as a real head of state?

Mr. Speaker, I just said this in English, but I will repeat it in French. We always accept the advice of our security agencies as to how to best ensure the safety of the Prime Minister. The former commissioner of conflict of interest and ethics acknowledged that these costs were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister, as has been the case for former prime ministers.

Mr. Speaker, the new Canadian energy regulator is essentially putting Hydro-Québec in third-party management. The government is prohibiting Hydro-Québec from installing or operating an international or interprovincial electricity distribution line without its permission.If, for example, Hydro-Québec wanted to move forward with its own Northern Pass project with New England, it would have to beg for permission from the federal government and abide by its conditions.What right does the government have to impose federal dictates on Hydro-Québec?

Mr. Speaker, we have been clear on this issue for many weeks. When it comes to national security, we never have compromised and never will compromise on that. Every single acquisition or transaction is subject to a national security screening. This is a multi-step process. The advice that we will receive from our national security agencies will be followed. We always have followed their advice. We have faith in the advice that they give us. We will make sure that any decision that we make will advance the interests of all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, it was the opposition that asked the former commissioner to investigate, and now that her investigation is concluded and her report tabled, the opposition refuses to accept the recommendations. On this side of the House, we have accepted the recommendations and the Prime Minister has taken responsibility.As acknowledged by the former commissioner, these costs were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister and we accept the security agencies' recommendations.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge for his tireless advocacy for accessible education.As someone who went back to school as a single mom with two kids, I know that adult learners face many barriers to accessing further education. That is why our government has launched skills boost, which is a new plan to give learners the support they need to succeed in the workforce. Through a new $1,600 per year Canada student grant, and new flexibility for EI, going back to school will be within reach for 43,000 more Canadians.Our government has Canadians covered no matter their circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, it is not by asking the same question that they will get a different response. What I said was really clear. This is the government that has put tax fairness at the centre of our actions. We have invested more than $800 million in the Canada Revenue Agency, because we believe in tax fairness and combatting tax evasion. This is what our government stands for, and I would hope the member on the other side would recognize that and work with us to make sure we eradicate that in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all members in this House, I would like to congratulate the member for Kildonan—St. Paul for her strong advocacy on behalf of her constituents.Our government is committed to helping more seniors get the benefits they deserve and that they expect. That is why I am so pleased to announce that automatic enrolment for the guaranteed income supplement is now in place since January, and is helping 17,000 vulnerable seniors access the GIS without having to apply. Not only is that making sure that more seniors get the benefits to which they are entitled, but it is also helping to reduce poverty in that very vulnerable part of our population.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for giving me an opportunity to talk about how important it is to have a justice system that functions, that respects the basic principles of natural justice, that ensures an effective and rapid system, and that meets the needs of our most vulnerable citizens.We received a very clear report explaining the fundamental reason that tribunal is not functioning as it should. It was put in place in a misguided way in order to achieve misguided financial goals. We will solve the problem by working closely with the unions, entrepreneurs, and the Canada Employment Insurance Commission.

Mr. Speaker, innovation changes the way we live and work. It creates new possibilities and new challenges for the people in my riding and across the country who need to support their families and to have a prosperous future.For adult learners in particular, like single moms supporting a family on their own or newcomers who are starting over, going back to school can be very daunting.Would the minister tell the House what our government is doing to support adults who want to upgrade their skills?

Mr. Speaker, the minister keeps doing this. He keeps referring to how robust, rigorous, and multi-staged the process will be.Investment Canada data shows that only five of the more than 700 foreign takeovers in 2016-17 underwent a full-scale national security review. The minister claims all foreign takeovers face a national security review, when in fact most of them only go through the preliminary step.If the minister trusts our national security agencies, like we all do on this side of the House, will he direct them to do the full in-depth national security review of the Aecon purchase?

Mr. Speaker, our government ensures that it fully meets Canadians' expectations by relying on the vital support of a world-class public service.The former Conservative government chose to let the quality of services to Canadians drop by handing out bonuses for cutting jobs. We believe, however, that executive performance measures must reflect government priorities to better serve Canadians. That means healthier, more diverse, and more inclusive work places. Executives do not receive bonuses if they do not meet the objectives established in accordance with the rules—

Mr. Speaker, Mary Dawson conducted a year-long investigation on the Prime Minister's free vacation from a registered lobbyist that cost taxpayers $200,000. Her findings in the report are clear: the Prime Minister broke the law by violating four sections of the act. Last night, every Liberal voted against the motion that would require MPs who break ethics and conflict of interest laws to pay the money back. It means that the new norm for the Liberals is that they have no problem accepting gifts or trips from lobbyists, no matter the cost to taxpayers. Have they no shame?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, the former commissioner recognized that these costs were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister. As is the case for former prime ministers and the current Prime Minister, no matter where or when a prime minister travels, there are security costs involved. We will continue to seek advice from security officers.

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to the well-being of veterans and their families. We have delivered on our promise for a pension-for-life option, a plan designed to help veterans live a full and productive life post-service. The new pension-for-life option is monthly, tax-free, and is payment for life. It provides income replacement payable to 90% of a veteran's pre-release salary indexed annually for life for those who need it.The Conservatives had 10 years to make the changes necessary to support veterans and they did nothing.

Mr. Speaker, delays we saw under the last 10 years of the previous government. It did not understand that the environment and the economy go together. I am extremely proud that in January 2016 we introduced interim principles to approve major projects, to make decisions based on science, on consultation, on engagement with indigenous people. We also said that no projects would go back to the starting line. We announced the national climate plan. We announced the oceans protection plan. It is in that context that we approved the Trans Mountain project. That project will get built.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is completely missing in action when it comes to defending the Trans Mountain project. As this trade dispute grows between Alberta and British Columbia, the Prime Minister is doing nothing. This week, he is in the United States collecting photographs of his favourite U.S. political heroes, but Canadians are paying the price here at home. We know that the Trans Mountain project is important to Canadians. It has been declared to be in the national interest, and it will create thousands of jobs across the country. What is the Prime Minister specifically doing to make sure this project actually gets built?

Mr. Speaker, as has been said on numerous occasions, immediately after the report was released, the Prime Minister accepted responsibility and accepted the findings of the report. What has also been articulated many times, and what the ex-commissioner has recognized, is that these expenses were part of the role of the Prime Minister and were incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister, as has been the case for previous prime ministers.When it comes to our security agencies, they make recommendations. We take their advice, we take their expertise, and we will continue to do so.

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to fighting tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance. That is why we invested nearly $1 billion in our last two budgets. The Canada Revenue Agency is now able to assess the risk of all large multinational corporations each year. Every year, it reviews every transaction over $10,000 in four regions that are deemed high-risk. The first two are the Isle of Man and Guernsey.As far as offshore compliance is concerned, on December 31, 2017, the CRA audited 1,090 taxpayers and launched criminal investigations in nearly 42 cases of tax evasion.

Mr. Speaker, the motion we moved on February 2 had the same effect as the report tabled by the former ethics commissioner. It seems that as far as the Prime Minister is concerned, it went in one ear and out the other since he voted against the motion.We know for sure that there were no exceptional circumstances in the case of the Prime Minister's family vacation, nor was it a matter of national interest. Can the Prime Minister tell us whether he disagrees with section 12 of the report, which calls for him to reimburse Canadian taxpayers for the trip with his own money?

Mr. Speaker, the Social Security Tribunal of Canada is a real disaster. Some unemployed workers have had to wait more than a year for a hearing. The KPMG report shows that the tribunal is much more expensive and takes on average five times longer than the old system.Groups that advocate for the unemployed are calling for a return to the three member panel. The Liberals promised to take action, but unemployed workers are still waiting.When will the government keep its promise and reform the EI appeal process?

Mr. Speaker, the EI system needs to be fair. What we have now is a tribunal that does not work. It is too slow. It is unfair. It is complex. It is a source of justice denial. We will correct that system, as we have told employers and unions in the last month. We know that we will be able to depend on, rely on, and build on their support. We look forward to the very important work we need to do.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said on numerous occasions, immediately after the report was released, the Prime Minister accepted responsibility and accepted the report's findings. What is clear is exactly what the Conservatives did in 10 years in government undermining officers of Parliament. Now they have been booted to the opposition, and they continue to do so. We on this side respect officers of Parliament. We respect the work they do, and we accept their findings, as has been the case on numerous occasions.

Mr. Speaker, let me restate the facts for my hon. colleague on the other side. This is the government that put tax fairness at the cornerstone of our actions. We invested more than $800 million in the Canada Revenue Agency to fight tax evasion and tax avoidance. We would hope the member on the other side would join us in fighting tax evasion and tax avoidance in our country. That is what Canadians expect from us. That is what we are delivering.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals voted against the following motion yesterday: That, in the opinion of the House, when any Member violates the Conflict of Interest Act, including accepting gifts or hospitality (section 11), furthering private interests (section 21), being in a conflict of interest (section 5), and accepting travel (section 12), or violates the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons, and, in so doing, incurs a cost upon the taxpayer, that Member must repay those costs to the taxpayer. Can the Prime Minister tell us exactly which part of the motion he does not agree with?

Mr. Speaker, let me assure the member opposite that we agree that the approval of the Trans Mountain project was in the national interest. It is well within our jurisdiction, and this project will go ahead. In fact, today I had discussions with both my counterparts from Alberta and British Columbia. We have officials in British Columbia right now having discussions. We are going to get to a resolution.I was also very proud today to announce a new environmental assessment process, rebuilding trust in a system that was so desperately lost under the previous government.

Mr. Speaker, let me recap the situation for the minister. Turquoise Hill Resources is a mining company based in Vancouver. It made $2.1 billion in profits and paid exactly zero in corporate income taxes in Canada. Instead, it declared those profits in Luxembourg, which employs one part-time employee. As far as I know, Vancouver is not in Luxembourg. If a Canadian company does not feel Canadian enough to pay taxes here, why should it be Canadian enough to get loans and grants from the government?

Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that my colleague listened to the question, because she played the same tape, using the same speaking notes that she has been using for two weeks.By voting down the motion last night, all Liberal members aided and abetted the Prime Minister and were complicit in his trip to a billionaire's private island with Liberal Party friends and an MP, which cost taxpayers more than $200,000. Therefore, I will calmly ask the Leader of the Government my question again given that the Prime Minister has not wanted to answer for two weeks: what part of the motion did the Prime Minister disagree with so much that he made his entire caucus vote it down?

Mr. Speaker, 28 months ago, the Liberals promised to fix the environmental assessment process, by “[ending] the practice of having federal Ministers interfere in the environmental assessment process”.Today we learned that, under clause 17 of her bill, the Minister of the Environment has the power not to move forward with an assessment. The minister claims to want to regain the public's trust with this new process, but she is breaking her promise.How are Canadians supposed to trust her if she is giving herself the power to end any environmental assessment?

Mr. Speaker, those were two different questions. This government does not really listen. The Liberals promised to crack down on notorious tax havens, but instead they signed more agreements with them. This government is signing agreements with the Cook Islands, Antigua and Barbuda, and Grenada. It is the same agreement, word for word, for all of them. That is shameful.Why are the Liberals signing new agreements with tax havens when they promised to address that inequality and loss of money?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised veterans that they would never have to fight his government in court. We now know that this is false. Standing before a veteran who gave so much for his country, the Prime Minister cold-heartedly stated that, unfortunately, he and his fellow veterans were asking for too much. The Prime Minister can afford to fly all over the world, meeting and greeting, dining and wining—well not whining; he whines at home—with the world's elite, but when it comes to our veterans, there is nothing left in the bank account. When will the Prime Minister show some real leadership and give our veterans what they deserve?

Mr. Speaker, a company owned by the Chinese government wants to take over Aecon, one of Canada's largest construction companies. This company's international record has been generously described as problematic. Time and again, the Liberals and the Conservatives have threatened Canada's sovereignty by allowing the sale of local assets to foreign investors with links to foreign governments. In my riding, Aecon is shortlisted to build Canada's top infrastructure project, the Gordie Howe International Bridge to the United States.What effects will this takeover have on the project? What does the United States think about Beijing controlling a company that runs the show on their soil?

Mr. Speaker, this is serious, because the issue here is not the environment, but predatory federalism. To quote the government, “The purpose of this Act is...to regulate trade in energy products”.This is a takeover of Hydro-Québec by the federal government, period. It will be able to decide who can sell electricity, to whom, and under what conditions. Do the federal Liberals realize that what they are doing is wresting from Quebec any control over its energy future?

Mr. Speaker, last night, after the Prime Minister left the country yet again, his entire Liberal caucus, instead of defending ethical standards and the taxpayer dollars, defended the Prime Minister with their shameful vote. Now Liberal MPs are not only whipped by their boss but are complicit in condoning breaking the law without any consequences.I have a simple question for the Liberals, if they could answer us and maybe their constituents. Just what was it about yesterday's motion that they disagreed with? What did they disagree with in that motion?

Mr. Speaker, when the Canada Revenue Agency changed its policy on the taxation of employee discounts, the minister denied responsibility. When it went after disabled Canadians and single parents, she also denied responsibility. When the Auditor General reported that the agency's call centre is an unmitigated disaster, she denied responsibility.We now know her executives received the highest average performance pay in the entire public sector. Will the minister, for once, accept responsibility for rewarding her executives for the failures of her agency, and explain why?

Mr. Speaker, we have received no application for an export permit related to this contract.The Prime Minister and I have been very clear about the Duterte regime's human rights violations and extrajudicial killings.I will conduct an extremely rigorous human rights analysis of any potential export permit application related to this contract. I have the power to deny a permit if I feel it poses a risk to human rights, and I am prepared to do so.

Mr. Speaker, our government will not be lectured by the former one. We know that the environment and the economy go hand in hand. We have restored confidence in the environmental assessment process. That was the cause of the polarization. That is why projects were not moving forward. It was because the former government did not know that the environment and the economy go hand in hand.

The Prime Minister acted unethically.

That is peculiar, Mr. Speaker, because immediately after the report was released, it was this Prime Minister who accepted responsibility, and it was this government that accepted the findings. The Conservatives were the party that chose and demanded that the ex-commissioner investigate. Now that she has finished her investigation and submitted the report, they refuse to accept its conclusions. We on this side of the House will always respect the work of our officers of Parliament. We on this side of the House will always accept the advice of our security agencies. That is what Canadians expect.

Mr. Speaker, we appreciate the advice and counsel of Mr. Dion. In fact, we respect our officers of Parliament, and we always appreciate their advice. We look forward to working with the commissioner and to working with Parliament to continue to raise the bar on transparency and accountability as a government.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, on this side of the House we respect officers of Parliament, and we respect the work they do. It was the Conservatives who demanded that the commissioner investigate. The commissioner investigated. She released a report, and now the Conservatives refuse to accept its conclusions. We on this side have accepted its findings. The Prime Minister has accepted responsibility. We will continue to work with the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner to ensure that all recommendations are followed.

Mr. Speaker, there have been recent media reports that IRCC may consider eliminating a pathway to permanent residency for caregivers. These reports are worrying those who are providing service to our seniors and children with medical needs. Can the minister please reassure this House and caregivers of our government's position when it comes to a pathway to permanent residency for caregivers?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the government House leader if she could please tell the House what the business of the House will be for the remainder of this week and for the rest of next week?

Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, we will continue our debate on the NDP opposition motion. Tomorrow, we will resume third reading debate of Bill C-50 on political financing.Monday and Thursday of next week shall be allotted days. On Tuesday, we will start second reading debate on Bill C-68, the fisheries legislation. On Wednesday, we will call the environmental assessment bill, which was introduced this morning.

Mr. Speaker, again the Liberals are trying to pull the wool over Canadians' eyes by giving false assurances that all is well with China's takeover of construction giant Aecon. We know this Chinese-run company is rotten with corruption. We also know Aecon is involved with critical Canadian infrastructure projects in the hydro, nuclear, and military sectors. I have a simple question. Will the minister commit in the House today to formally direct security agencies to undertake a full section 25 national security review and not just a perfunctory screening?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have been waiting two long years for the Liberals to deliver on their promise of a strengthened environmental assessment process. There are two adjectives we can apply to the proposed new regime: discretionary and uncertainty. Will a project require an assessment? We cannot know, for a myriad of reasons. The list of projects is eventually developed by regulation. Will the minister hold one if the public is concerned? We do not know. Will there be a joint federal-provincial review, or will the minister merely pass the whole thing to the provinces and let them deal with indigenous concerns? What is the answer?

Mr. Speaker, the new Ethics Commissioner, at committee today, made it clear that he would like to see the Conflict of Interest Act reformed to give him powers to apply meaningful monetary penalties against those who are guilty of serious violations of the act. Commissioner Dion also said that he could use new powers to compel an offending member to repay the reasonable value of an illegal gift. One can only guess what that would be with regard to the lavish hospitality value accepted by the Prime Minister for his illegal vacation, but in the meantime, the PM can still do the right thing and just pay it back.

Mr. Speaker, here is what voting against the motion means: that the heritage minister can fly off on an all-expenses-paid vacation with Netflix; the finance minister can go to a private Barbados villa with Bay Street executives; and the industry minister can be wined and dined, showered with lavish gifts, by a Chinese Communist Party company looking to buy Canadian companies. All of this can happen with no consequences now. Why can the Liberals not see how illegal, how immoral, how unethical, how corrupt this is?

Mr. Speaker, CTV has reported that the government is trying to kill a class action law suit that alleges sexual misconduct and gender discrimination within the Canadian Armed Forces. Frankly, I find this quite disturbing. Can the Prime Minister explain why his self-proclaimed feminist government is trying to silence women who are coming forward with such serious allegations?

Mr. Speaker, it is the Liberals' process in which people have lost trust. It was the Liberal government that killed northern gateway based purely on politics, not on science. It killed energy east by loading on so many hurdles that it became economically impossible to proceed. Now with Trans Mountain, it has done nothing for months. It is always talk but no action with the government.Is it because the Prime Minister thinks of his job as just ceremonial in nature?

Mr. Speaker, once again, as I have said on numerous occasions, as has been the case for previous prime ministers and is the case for this Prime Minister, whenever and wherever the Prime Minister travels, there are costs related to his security. Security agencies make recommendations. We take their expert advice, and will continue to do so.It was the Conservatives who demanded an investigation.

Mr. Speaker, there is a complete lack of confidence in the Liberal government's approach, and the proof is in the amount of investment leaving this country. Billions of dollars have left the energy sector thanks to the government's process. When projects do get to a yes, the Prime Minister says no, based on politics. Now, the Minister of Natural Resources said that he would not tolerate unnecessary delays. This project was supposed to start in November. Nothing has been done.Exactly what is the Liberal government's definition of an unnecessary delay?

Mr. Speaker, the Chinese company, CCCC International Holding Limited, has a bad reputation. The Chinese government-run corporation has been banned by the World Bank from bidding on construction projects for rigging bids in the Philippines. This corporation is helping the Beijing government violate the law of the sea and now this same company wants to buy Aecon, a leading player in Canada's construction industry.Why will this government not take the time it needs? Why is it in such a hurry to say yes?

Mr. Speaker, on page 49 of his campaign platform, the Prime Minister promised that he would not take our veterans to court, but now that is just another broken promise. He even went so far as to insult them by saying they are asking too much of his government. When the member for Louis-Hébert says that he does not like my asking questions about this, that suggests the government is on the defensive. Canadians now know that the Prime Minister is not a credible or trustworthy leader.Why is the Prime Minister breaking his promise not to take veterans to court?

Mr. Speaker, we are giving him a chance to join us today. Last year, Parliament adopted a NDP motion on cracking down on the stock option tax deduction loophole that costs Canadians a billion dollars a year. Seventy-five of Canada's wealthiest CEOs pocket half-a-billion dollars alone on this giveaway. That is $6 million each.Meanwhile, Canadians lack affordable housing, pharmacare, child care, and drinkable water in hundreds of communities. Will the Liberals join with us, keep their promise from 2015 and crack down on this loophole in the next budget?

Mr. Speaker, reports are not going to cut it. It has been two years since we knew that the social security tribunal system was broken. The Conservatives broke the system, and the Liberals have done nothing to fix it. Liberal, Tory, same old story. Workers are suffering, and the government is doing nothing to alleviate those concerns.When will the Liberals fix the system, leave the reports aside, and actually act on what is in the report to finally show respect to Canadian workers and fix this broken EI system?

Mr. Speaker, the Trans Mountain project is extremely important to Canada, to Canada's economy, and to all Canadians. Unfortunately, we have two provinces that are bickering and unable to come to terms in the interest of our national economy, which is a shame. The Prime Minister's job is to be a leader, on behalf of all Canadians. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister went off to the United States for some photo ops instead of dealing with the real problems facing Canadians today.Will someone in government rise and ask the Prime Minister to act like a real head of state?

Mr. Speaker, this morning, the International Criminal Court launched an investigation into crimes against humanity committed in the Philippines.In regard to the sale agreement with the Philippines, can the minister confirm that her government excluded this contract from the arms export regulations?How many similar contracts are being negotiated between the Canadian Commercial Corporation and other countries with terrible human rights records?

Mr. Speaker, Canadian Armed Forces members and veterans deserve to know that we will support them if they become ill or injured.As the member for Barrie—Innisfil pointed out, the Conservative government was out of touch with veterans and had lost much of their trust. After 10 years of Conservative government contempt, veterans were disillusioned. That is why we have invested over $10 billion. Veterans have been asking for change for a long time, and unlike the previous government, we kept our promise.

Mr. Speaker, no other prime minister has broken the ethics code and he incurred taxpayer dollars while doing it.Other members of Parliament, Liberals, in fact, have repaid thousands of dollars when they broke the rules. The only one who does not seem to have to live up to the standard of having consequences for his actions seems to be the Prime Minister. Canadians are left wondering if this is yet another example of a very bad joke by the Prime Minister, this time played on all Canadians.Why does the Prime Minister act like he is above the law?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Liberal MPs were given the opportunity to stand up for the law and stand up for Canadian taxpayers, and they failed miserably. One by one, they stood to vote against our motion, which demanded integrity and responsibility from politicians. The motion said that when politicians broke the law and cost taxpayers money, they had to pay taxpayers back. Which part of that did the Liberals disagree with, the part about obeying the law or the part about paying back taxpayers when they break it?

Mr. Speaker, on this side of the House, we believe in respecting the law and respecting taxpayers. The Prime Minister is guilty of breaking the law by accepting illegal gifts, guilty of accepting a ride on a private aircraft, guilty of arranging his affairs improperly, and guilty of conducting illegal discussions about government business. His illegal trip cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars. He has refused to pay back the money. Why do the Liberals believe that it is the taxpayers who should pay, when they are the ones who break the law?