Most toxic speeches
Mr. Speaker, the answer is always the same: no comment.The government's primary responsibility is to protect the people. It is disgusting to see the opposition parties bashing SNC-Lavalin workers, who have done nothing wrong. This affects them. They are going to pay the price come the election. The Attorney General is responsible for this matter. He has the power to take over the SNC-Lavalin case at any time and to negotiate a remediation agreement to ensure that the guilty are punished, not thousands of workers.When will he take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, right now, the government is changing its story day by day, getting up to all kinds of monkey business in an attempt to influence our justice system. The director of public prosecutions made her decision on September 4. She confirmed that decision on October 9. Nevertheless, the Prime Minister and his cronies repeatedly tried to get her to change her mind.We want to know whether the Prime Minister will agree to appear before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to answer all of the opposition's questions.
Mr. Speaker, the director of public prosecutions confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently.The Conservatives keep talking out of both sides of their mouths. In French, they claim they would not dream of hurting the employees of SNC-Lavalin, as the member for CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles says. However, in English, it is a different story, as we heard from the member for Carleton, who is not hiding the fact that he wants to shut this company down. The Conservatives need to stop their doublespeak and start being clear with Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. Canadians deserve transparency. Canadians deserve answers about the Prime Minister's involvement in this sordid affair. Again, what did the Prime Minister say to Wernick that prompted him to pick up the phone and call the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter? What did he say?
Mr. Speaker, everyone here agrees that the former SNC-Lavalin executives who committed crimes must be brought to justice. However, it seems like everyone here also thinks that thousands of workers should pay for crimes committed by a handful of individuals. SNC-Lavalin has lost $1.6 billion since this crisis started. Next, it will be cutting jobs or having a fire sale and opening itself up to a foreign takeover.Will the Attorney General finally take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals do not support the RCMP and community safety programs, people and communities suffer.In Pelican Narrows, the community safety officer program is responsible for recruiting and training officers to do nightly patrols, but they lack the resources to bring in the talent they need. People's safety should be a priority, yet the Liberal government is failing to act. When will the Liberals commit to the safety of people in northern Saskatchewan and dedicate funding for their community safety programs?
Mr. Speaker, what a milestone. The Phoenix fiasco began three years ago, and the Liberal government still has yet to find a solution.Public servants have been living this nightmare for three years, and the government refuses to say when this fiasco will be fixed. An internal government memo says it could take 10 years. Public servants continue to provide services every day, and they are still having problems getting paid properly.The government has turned its back on these families. Public servants must get the money they are owed immediately.When will the Liberals fix this, once and for all?
It certainly is not speculation, Mr. Speaker, because those were Wernick's words.Canadians need to know what is not being said by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. It is clear that there was a concerted and sustained effort by the Prime Minister and his senior operatives to make the former attorney general change her mind.If we are not going to get answers in this place, will the Prime Minister appear before the justice committee and finally tell the truth?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are suffering the consequences of climate change and paying the price for the Liberal government's half measures. Last week, the National Energy Board once again recommended that the government move forward with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We know what is coming next. The Liberals are going to hide behind the NEB to justify their bad decision regarding the Trans Mountain pipeline and their failure to protect the environment as they should.How can Quebeckers trust the Liberals not to do the same in the case of energy east?
Mr. Speaker, it has been three years since the ill-fated Phoenix rollout and we are still hearing the same answers we heard three years ago when the whole thing started. It is a shame. Federal workers have lost homes and have had strain put on their families. Even some simple things would help, like changing the law so that they do not have to pay back the gross pay on the net pay that they received.When SNC-Lavalin wanted legal changes to get out of criminal charges, that got done. In fact, they rolled out the red carpet. Why should workers continue to have their lives put on hold while the government is distracted protecting its well-connected buddies?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has finally found a line that it seems like he might stick with for more than a day. His story has changed nearly every single day since this scandal first broke, and Canadians deserve answers.The Prime Minister first said that the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail story were false, that no direction or even pressure was applied on the former attorney general. Now we find out from the Clerk of the Privy Council that the Prime Minister's fingerprints are all over this sleazy affair to let his friends off the hook.Once again, if the decision was the former attorney general's and hers alone to make, why did the Prime Minister try so often to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, SNC was told there was no deal. On September 17, the Prime Minister and Privy Council clerk met with the former attorney general to discuss SNC. On December 5, the Prime Minister's top staffer, Gerry Butts, met with her to discuss it. On December 18, the Prime Minister's two top staffers met with her chief of staff to discuss it. On December 19, the Privy Council clerk called her to discuss it. On January 14, the former attorney general was fired from her role. How can Canadians, who are reviewing these facts, not conclude there was relentless pressure to have her change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister cannot seem to take no for an answer. When the former attorney general said that, no, she was not going to give SNC-Lavalin a deal, he was not happy, so he sent in his two top people, Telford and Butts, the two people who spoke directly for him, to do some persuading. On December 18, they meet with the chief of staff to the then attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin deal. What did Telford and Butts say at that meeting, and what did they threaten would happen if SNC-Lavalin did not get the deal?
Mr. Speaker, after the Prime Minister moved the former attorney general out of her position, she wrote a letter to the public saying that she had spoken truth to power. She rose recently and said that she would like to speak her truth to all Canadians.So far, the Prime Minister has been silencing her, invoking solicitor-client privilege, real or imagined. Today, he says that he will finally allow her to speak, but only to say things that he considers relevant.Will the Prime Minister remove these obstacles to the former attorney general's free speech and let her speak?
Mr. Speaker, the key words are relevant matter.This is not the first time the Liberals have rewritten our laws to suit their friends, but this time they are truly pulling out all the stops.Not only did the Liberals change the Criminal Code to help SNC-Lavalin executives, but once the former attorney general said no, they decided to also change our procurement systems to help SNC-Lavalin.When their rich friends ask for help, the Liberals leap to their aid, but when it comes to ordinary Canadians, the Liberals tell them to wait.When will the Liberals tell the truth and show some transparency?
Mr. Speaker, whatever the justification the Prime Minister is going to try to use, he needs to remember one thing: interfering in a criminal court case is always wrong.The Prime Minister thinks he is above the law, that he can use his power to get his well-connected friends off the hook. That is not the way Canada works.If the decision was the former attorney general's to make and hers alone, then why did the Prime Minister continually apply pressure to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to halt the criminal trial of a corporation accused of corruption.My question has to do with the December 18 meeting between the PMO and the office of the former attorney general. We know that Gerald Butts and Katie Telford spoke on behalf of the Prime Minister. We also know that they, along with the Prime Minister, have all the power in the Liberal government.Canadians want to know why the Prime Minister asked those two individuals to meet with the chief of staff to the former attorney general on December 18.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has claimed that climate change is the fight of his life. He has claimed that there is no relationship more important to him than that with indigenous peoples and he has claimed that he really, really cares about protecting our west coast.When the National Energy Board said that the Trans Mountain pipeline will, one, have major impacts on our climate; two, significantly damage indigenous rights and title; and three, potentially wipe out the southern resident killer whale population, it seems like this decision would be a no-brainer. This is a test for the Prime Minister. Between the principles he claims to hold and a pipeline he so desperately wants to build, what is it going to be?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, that is exactly what we are doing.We will stand up for good jobs, including jobs at SNC-Lavalin across the country, for the nearly 10,000 Canadians who work there.As far as remediation agreements are concerned, the Department of Justice's official backgrounder confirms that there are two purposes for such agreements: to hold the organization accountable for the wrongdoing; and, importantly, to reduce harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties who did not take part
Mr. Speaker, that member just confirmed that the Conservative Party and its members will continue to speculate rather than look at the facts. That is something Canadians know very well and that is exactly why they are sitting on the opposition benches. That is the party that chose to undermine committees. They put out a rule book to make sure that they could undermine and destroy the work of committees. We on this side will not do that. We are the government that increased resources to committees. We know that they do important work. We know that members on both sides are asking witnesses to appear and we know that witnesses are answering. Let them do their work.
Mr. Speaker, it is true that just a few days ago, Liberal MPs described getting the former attorney general to testify at parliamentary committee as a witch hunt, a fishing expedition and a distraction. However, if the minister and the Liberal government are so open to hearing from everyone at committee, will they allow the Prime Minister to have his say?
Mr. Speaker, we know the Prime Minister sent in his highest-ranking people, who speak on his behalf, to pressure and persuade the former attorney general through her chief of staff. Canadians deserve to know what kind of pressure was applied to their attorney general. The only person who knows is the Prime Minister, and the buck stops with him. Therefore, will he come to the justice committee? Will he finally stop evading and answer some questions truthfully and openly?
Mr. Speaker, climate change is real and the cost of inaction is enormous. It is disappointing that while climate change is having a real impact on the health and well-being of Canadians, Conservative politicians are wasting millions of taxpayer dollars fighting climate action in court. Meanwhile, the party opposite still has no plan to protect the environment. Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment please update the House on the actions our government is taking to flight climate change while growing our economy?
Mr. Speaker, last month the NDP secured a request to have General Motors CEO Mary Barra appear before committee to answer questions on the closure of the Oshawa plant. Instead, the Liberals cut a private deal to excuse her and now we get a lobbyist, and this is because the Prime Minister could not even get his own meeting. So much for not interfering with committees. Meanwhile, U.S. political pressure gets a new deal to extend plant operations and now Canada is left out in the cold. Why are the Liberals letting CEO Barra off the hook?Would the Prime Minister care to explain to Canadians his failures for Oshawa versus the workers of Detroit-Hamtramck, who are getting a new life on their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, I completely agree that Canada's public servants deserve to be paid on time and accurately for the important work they do. More than 170,000 cases have been cleared from the backlog since January 2018, and we are working very hard to accelerate the progress being made every month.We continue doing this important work. We will not stop until this is fixed.
Mr. Speaker, that is speculation.We know very well that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed when he was at the justice committee last week that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the Minister of Justice to take.There are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are appearing and answering tough questions.We, on this side, know that Canadians should have confidence in their institutions. We will not undermine that work because we know the committee is working hard. The Conservatives should stop their doublespeak.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, since January 2018, the backlog has gone down by 160,000 cases. We are doing whatever we possibly can to make sure our public servants are paid on time and accurately. In May of this year, all the departments will be serviced by pay pods. Employees are satisfied by this movement. It was an employee-generated idea.This will be resolved. We will stabilize the system. Yes, it is taking longer than we wish, but rest assured, this is my number one priority.
Mr. Speaker, what is important to note is that the justice committee has members from all parties recognized in this House. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are answering tough questions.However, it is also important to note that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company and the NDP leader met with representatives of the company. The Conservative deputy leader herself, who just asked the question, said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin....At the justice committee, the Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not seem to understand that it is not the Prime Minister's role to direct prosecutors and judges to give special deals to their friends.The independent Crown prosecutor determined that SNC-Lavalin did not qualify. The former attorney general seems to have made up her mind that it did not qualify. That is when the Prime Minister and his office went to work with unwanted, coordinated and sustained pressure to force the former attorney general to let his well-connected friends off the hook.If the Prime Minister is so sure that he did nothing wrong, will he appear before the justice committee to explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, we will consistently stand up for hard-working Canadians right across the country and be not the least bit apologetic about standing up for good jobs, wherever they are, across the country.I am pleased also to confirm that later today the government will confirm that the member for Vancouver Granville will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We of course continue to welcome the studies by the Ethics Commissioner and the parliamentary committee.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that under 10 years of Stephen Harper, they had no respect for committees. The Conservatives have chosen a new leader, but it remains a party of Stephen Harper that has no regard for committees, and the Conservatives continue to undermine their work. We on this side know that Canadians should have confidence in their decisions. We will let the committees do their important work.
Mr. Speaker, it is now clear that Liberals have given up on GM workers and their families in Oshawa without even trying.Do members know what the government did in the U.S.? U.S. representatives fought and succeeded in pressuring GM to extend the operation of the Detroit-Hamtramck plant for the life of the current collective agreement. That is the bare minimum that workers in Oshawa have been asking for and the Liberals did not even try to secure that with GM. Canadian workers deserve better than this. Layoffs start in two weeks.Why will the Prime Minister not fight for their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, as I will continue to say, members of the justice committee from both sides of the House are working together. They are asking witnesses to appear. Witnesses are appearing and they are responding to questions. We, on this side, will always have confidence in our committee system. It is important work that they do. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is also looking at this file. We, on this side, will not undermine that work.That is a clear contrast between the Conservatives and the Liberals. We will not undermine committees. We will not undermine officers of Parliament. We will not undermine the independence of the justice system.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her tireless advocacy on behalf of caregivers.Thousands of families rely on caregivers to care for their loved ones. Caregivers have often faced too many barriers to reuniting with their own families. Our government is introducing a program that will provide a faster path for permanent residency, better protections against abuse, and for the first time, we will allow caregivers to bring their own spouses and children with them.Our government has eliminated the caregiver backlog left behind by the Conservatives, from five years to 12 months. We will always stand for family reunification.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his hard work and tireless advocacy to help protect our climate.Economists are virtually unanimous that the best thing we can be doing to transition to a low-carbon economy is to put a price on pollution that will bring emissions down and put more money in the pockets of Canadian families. However, it is only one of 50 measures that we are taking to fight climate change, along with phasing out coal, so we can get to 90% generation of our electricity by clean sources by 2030. We are improving public transit, with the largest investment in the history of Canada. We are investing in energy efficiency, clean technologies and green infrastructure. While some Conservatives want to oppose meaningful action on climate change, like Doug Ford and the leader of the
Mr. Speaker, our answers were indeed relevant.What I said was that members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights asked questions.They asked for witnesses. The witnesses are appearing. We know members are asking these questions. That is what I am saying. We need to have confidence in the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.Those of us on this side of the House have confidence in them, but apparently the Conservatives do not.
Mr. Speaker, we know that Michael Wernick spoke to the former attorney general on the afternoon of December 19. He said he called her about the SNC-Lavalin file. Wernick also said the former attorney general advised the Prime Minister on September 17 that she was not going to intervene.Why did the Prime Minister instruct the clerk to make the phone call if she had already made up her mind?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the member opposite demonstrates that he does not quite understand what he is talking about.We always take seriously our responsibilities, standing up for jobs and growing the economy. The justice department's official backgrounder on remediation agreements states two of the main purposes for remediation agreements: one, to hold the organization accountable for wrongdoing; and, two, reduce the harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties that did not take part in the event. That is what is in the law.
Mr. Speaker, there is no more important job than to care for our loved ones. We welcome caregivers to Canada every year, mainly from the Philippines, to care for our children and our parents. However, as they care for our families they leave their own behind, often enduring a painful separation of years before they can be reunited. I have met these caregivers and heard their stories. Canada needs to do better. Could the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship tell us what the government is doing to reunite caregiver families?
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to confirm that the Conservatives will speculate rather than look at the facts. We on this side have respect for the justice committee and we have respect for the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner because they are doing their important work. We know that both the justice committee and the commissioner are looking at this file. We will not undermine the work of the justice committee. We on this side will not undermine the work of officers of Parliament. We on this side will not undermine the independence of the judicial system, as the Conservatives continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, we all know that we campaigned in the last election on a commitment to protect our environment and grow the economy at the same time. That includes steps that are going to get our resources to new markets so that our provinces in the western part of our country do not take a haircut on their resources.However, I want to highlight for the member that we are moving forward with a number of measures, including over 50 to contribute to the fight against climate change. We are putting a price on pollution. We are making the largest investment in the history of public transit in Canada. By 2030, 90% of our electricity will be generated from clean resources. We are in a new age in Canadian politics when it comes to protecting our environment. I invite the NDP to join the train.
Mr. Speaker, as the Attorney General of Canada, I cannot interfere in matters currently before the courts. It would be highly inappropriate for me to comment.
Mr. Speaker, that was interesting and all, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the question.The issue is this: last week, Canada's top bureaucrat testified that the Liberal scandal was never ever discussed in cabinet. That is what the top bureaucrat said last week, but two weeks ago, the Minister of National Revenue said on the radio that it had indeed been discussed in cabinet, and three weeks ago, when the scandal broke, the Prime Minister said nobody could talk about it because of cabinet confidence. Which government member is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, the member can accuse me, but the one thing we Conservatives want is the truth, her truth.The Prime Minister changed his story every day for two weeks. No two versions have been the same. On top of that, he has given himself the right to speak on behalf of the former attorney general.Will the former attorney general be allowed to speak freely at this much-touted committee?
Mr. Speaker, we have consistently done what we have always promised Canadians we would do, which is to stand up for good jobs and create economic growth while upholding the integrity and independence of our judicial system and respect for our institutions.That is what this government has always done, and that is what this government will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, I went to Detroit and met with Mary Barra just a few weeks ago and I made it very clear that they are making a big mistake by leaving Oshawa. We as a government will not make that mistake and turn our backs on auto workers. We will continue to defend auto workers. We have been very clear, with Jerry Dias's involvement when it comes to Unifor that for any solution that it has between the unions and GM, we will be at the table as part of the solution. We will continue to defend auto workers and we will continue to invest in this very important sector.
Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister cannot answer these questions, perhaps the government House leader can answer the question.If she has so much faith in the justice committee now that it is finally starting to allow witnesses to appear, even though originally it seems her office directed the committee members not to allow that to happenif she has so much confidence and faith in the justice committee's work, will Liberal members be supporting this motion before the House today to force the Prime Minister to attend and explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring of course that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Cambridge for highlighting the challenges that people with disabilities in Canada face when it comes to finding an accessible home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy a year ago. That is why the national co-investment fund requires 25% of the newly constructed or repaired units to be fully accessible. That is why we will continue to fight very hard so that every Canadian with a disability has access to a safe, affordable and accessible home.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said from the very beginning, we have consistently and continually stood up for the close to 9,000 jobs at SNC-Lavalin, indeed, good jobs right across the country. That is what Canadians expect of this government, to stick up for jobs, to create new ones and to make sure we grow our economy in ways that benefit everyone. That is exactly what we will continue to do and we will continue to do it in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary, that respects the integrity of our judicial systems and always respects the rules and norms that govern our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, only the Prime Minister can answer these questions, and that is why we are asking him to appear before the justice committee.The second question I would like to ask is this. Between September 4 and October 10, did the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office or the Clerk of the Privy Council give assurances to SNC-Lavalin that they would overturn the decision of the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that it was actually this government under the leadership of this Prime Minister that increased resources to committees.The record should also show that it was that member's party that put out a rule book that would undermine the work of committees. They had no respect for committees over 10 years of Stephen Harper. What is clear is that the Conservatives have chosen
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm that the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that two active court cases are not jeopardized. We will continue to work with the studies by the justice committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what the Prime Minister just said. Later today the government will confirm that the member will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, once again, we on this side respect the work of the justice committee. We on this side have increased resources for all committees, because we know that they do important work. We on this side will also defend and uphold the principles of judicial independence as well as the rule of law. We know that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and the justice committee. We also know that we on this side will fully co-operate with these two investigations, because they are doing important work. What is clear is that the member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine their work. We will not do that on this side. Canadians have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, there are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee.That member, very new to this place, should also know that those members have come together to ask for a list of witnesses. It is also important to know that witnesses are appearing at the justice committee. Members of Parliament from both sides are asking tough questions. Witnesses are answering those questions.That member also knows that the Conservatives had a rule book to undermine committees. We have not done such a thing. We have actually increased resources to committees to ensure that committees can do their important work and Canadians can have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, once again, he cannot provide simple, straightforward answers. Contrary to the Prime Minister's assertions, the report is true. He met with the Clerk of the Privy Council at noon on December 19. Immediately afterward, the clerk called the former attorney general to inform her that the Prime Minister was quite anxious.When the Prime Minister ordered the clerk to call the former attorney general, what did he tell him?
Mr. Speaker, many young Canadians dream of home ownership, yet that dream is becoming more difficult every day. Many residents are concerned that the mortgage stress test has made home ownership for the first time extremely difficult and has contributed to a slowdown in the housing market.Will the finance minister please update the House on what measures the government is exploring to help Canadians become homeowners?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that that member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine the work of the justice committee as well as the work of the commissioner. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is looking at this matter. The justice committee is looking at this matter. We are the government that increased resources.Let the record show that on this side we respect the work of committees, we respect the work of officers of Parliament and we respect the independence of the judicial system. That is a clear contrast from what the Conservatives stand for.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to say that we have been very focused on ensuring that our housing market is effective so Canadians can not only recognize that their investment in their home is stable, but also so they can have an aspiration to acquiring a home for them and their families.Over the last three years, we have put in measures for affordable housing across our country. We have put in measures to make sure people are protected. We will continue to think about how we can ensure that middle-class Canadians have the possibility to raise their families and have home ownership as part of that dream.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that the director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan consideration. It also important to note that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner as well as the justice committee. The justice committee has members from both sides present. They are working together to ensure that witnesses are appearing. Witnesses are being called and are answering tough questions from members of Parliament on both sides. I am not sure why the member is undermining that work.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has told Canadians to heed very carefully the words of Privy Council clerk Michael Wernick. Last week, that clerk said, I do not see where the former Attorney General was a solicitor. The matter was never discussed at cabinet...So she was not giving advice to cabinet. She was not advising the Prime Minister. Therefore, he concluded that solicitor-client privilege did not even apply here.Since the Prime Minister has said we should heed the clerk, I have a simple question. Will he allow the former attorney general to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, after changing his story every day for nearly three weeks now, the Prime Minister spent the weekend telling people they should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council.The Clerk of the Privy Council said very clearly that, in his opinion, solicitor-client privilege and cabinet privilege do not apply to the former attorney general. Will the Prime Minister listen to the clerk and allow the former attorney general to tell Canadians the truth?Will he finally allow her to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, on December 5, Gerry Butts met with the former attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin matter. On December 6, the Prime Minister's Office and the Prime Minister himself wrote a letter to SNC-Lavalin, refusing to meet with SNC-Lavalin anymore and directing SNC-Lavalin to the Attorney General's office.I would like to know what happened between December 5 and December 6 that caused the Prime Minister to make that decision.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. Later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians living with disabilities face unique challenges when it comes to finding accessible, affordable housing. In my riding of Cambridge, there has been significant investment in projects targeted to help, like the new accessible, affordable housing at 175 Hespeler Road.Could the minister responsible for housing tell the House how Canada's national housing strategy is helping people living with disabilities find places to call home that meet their unique needs?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times in the House, this is a complex matter. There are two ongoing court cases. I cannot comment on this.
Mr. Speaker, we fight day in and day out for our auto workers. Since 2015, we have seen historic investments of $6 billion in the automotive sector because our Prime Minister has made the automotive sector a priority for our government. We have seen significant investments in the auto supply sector, and this has resulted in thousands of jobs being created.Compare that with the Conservatives. For the first three years of their mandate, they lost 50,000 jobs in the automotive sector and 20,000 before the recession even hit. We have seen thousands of jobs created since 2015. We will continue to fight for the auto worker.
Mr. Speaker, on February 7, the Prime Minister stated that The Globe and Mail report about how he pressured the former attorney general on the SNC-Lavalin case was false.On Thursday, we learned from the Clerk of the Privy Council that there was in fact a concerted effort to interfere in the case against SNC-Lavalin by seeking to influence the then attorney general. Can the Prime Minister tell us which version of the story is true?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that Canadians should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council. During his appearance at committee, the clerk said that cabinet never discussed SNC-Lavalin. However, the Minister of National Revenue said during a radio interview that the decision regarding SNC was made at cabinet.I have a simple question. Who is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, Michael Wernick testified that on December 19, he met with the Prime Minister and immediately following this meeting he picked up the phone and called the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter. What instructions did the Prime Minister provide Wernick to initiate this call?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what we know. We know that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company. We know that the leader of the NDP met with representatives of the company. We know that the Conservative deputy leader herself said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin.We also know that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed, At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We on this side will continue to respect the independence of the judicial system and the rule of law.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights are doing their job. Our government increased resources to committees so that they could do this important work. The clerk told the committee last week that the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the justice minister to make. Although this member claims to have no intention of hurting SNC-Lavalin employees, the member for Carleton said something altogether different.
Mr. Speaker, here is a very simple and easy question for the Prime Minister to answer. On December 5, the Prime Minister's principal secretary met with the former attorney general in the bar at the Château Laurier. It appears that the purpose of that meeting was to put even more pressure on the former attorney general to change her mind and to allow a special deal to be made over the objections of independent Crown prosecutors.Was the Prime Minister aware that his principal secretary was meeting with the former attorney general on December 5?
Mr. Speaker, I think it is a good thing that we take seriously our responsibility to stand up for jobs and grow the economy. That is what we will continue to do, in a way that respects our institutions and the independence of our judiciary.Those are the responsibilities that we have accepted from the very beginning, and that is the work we are doing to create economic growth for all Canadians while defending our institutions, which are so important for our democracy.
Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, I was pleased to support the initiative just read out by my colleague. It is interesting it came from him. However, I want to read out a slightly different resolution and maybe this will have the full support of the House: That the House call on the Government of Canada to strongly push for the full implementation of Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 within a clearly-specified time frame; call on the Government of Sri Lanka to implement resolution 30/1 within a clearly specified time frame, recognizing the resolution was co-sponsored by the Government of Sri Lanka; and invites the Minister of International Development to table a report in the House at her earliest convenience explaining development projects funded in Sri Lanka and their impact on the implementation of resolution 30/1 and on peace and reconciliation in general.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I request unanimous consent for the following motion: Recognizing that 2019 marks the 10th anniversary of the end of armed conflict in Sri Lanka and honouring the tens of thousands of lives lost and countless victims displaced during this 26-year war; and recognizing further that the Government of Sri Lanka has made insufficient progress in implementing its commitments on reconciliation, accountability and transitional justice and that frustrations persist among those seeking to heal the wounds of all those who have suffered; therefore, the House of Commons calls on the Government of Sri Lanka to fully implement its obligations under the Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 and to set a clear timeline bound strategy for ensuring a process of accountability that has the trust and confidence of the victims, including the families of those who have disappeared.
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, the director of public prosecutions decided that SNC-Lavalin was not entitled to a remediation agreement, and the blitz to try to influence the former attorney general began. The Prime Minister tried to influence her at a meeting on September 17, and his top adviser and friend followed suit on December 5. Many others in the Prime Minister's inner circle also tried the same trick. Did the Prime Minister clearly try to influence the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been speaking widely about the SNC-Lavalin affair, telling his side of the story, not concerned at all about court proceedings, privilege or cabinet confidence. Apparently that does not matter when he is telling his side of the story. However, now he is saying that he is going to constrain his former attorney general's testimony by limiting it to what he considers to be relevant matters. Could he confirm if relevant matters will include all communications between his office and the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, we are following the clear guidelines that have been given to us by the Federal Court of Appeal. We instructed the National Energy Board to undertake this review, and they have given us that report on Friday. We will carefully analyze and look at it.At the same time, we are moving forward with meaningful consultation with indigenous communities to understand their concerns and offer accommodation and work with them to find solutions to the outstanding issues.
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to make claims, but let us look at the facts. The director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently. The Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the former Minister of Justice to take. On this side of the House, we respect the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. We know that the members are capable of doing their job, and we have confidence in their work.
Mr. Speaker, once again, I confirm what the Prime Minister said earlier today in question period, that the member will be able to address relevant matters in front of the committee while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the work of the justice committee, as well as that of the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, as we said, we respect the work of the committees. We have confidence in the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and all the other committees. We will allow them to do their work, because we respect their work.We can see the Conservatives feel differently.
Mr. Speaker, last week the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We will consistently, and regularly, stand up for jobs across the country, and will do so in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary and the integrity of our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, I have met with representatives of a variety of communities across the country about community safety initiatives, including special constables and other forms of augmenting regular police service. I am certainly happy to meet with any community in the hon. member's riding if people have concerns they wish to pursue. However, I would note that for the first nations policing program, we have just made the largest investment in Canadian history to try to bring better policing services to indigenous communities across the country.
Mr. Speaker, the answer is always the same: no comment.The government's primary responsibility is to protect the people. It is disgusting to see the opposition parties bashing SNC-Lavalin workers, who have done nothing wrong. This affects them. They are going to pay the price come the election. The Attorney General is responsible for this matter. He has the power to take over the SNC-Lavalin case at any time and to negotiate a remediation agreement to ensure that the guilty are punished, not thousands of workers.When will he take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, right now, the government is changing its story day by day, getting up to all kinds of monkey business in an attempt to influence our justice system. The director of public prosecutions made her decision on September 4. She confirmed that decision on October 9. Nevertheless, the Prime Minister and his cronies repeatedly tried to get her to change her mind.We want to know whether the Prime Minister will agree to appear before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to answer all of the opposition's questions.
Mr. Speaker, the director of public prosecutions confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently.The Conservatives keep talking out of both sides of their mouths. In French, they claim they would not dream of hurting the employees of SNC-Lavalin, as the member for CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles says. However, in English, it is a different story, as we heard from the member for Carleton, who is not hiding the fact that he wants to shut this company down. The Conservatives need to stop their doublespeak and start being clear with Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. Canadians deserve transparency. Canadians deserve answers about the Prime Minister's involvement in this sordid affair. Again, what did the Prime Minister say to Wernick that prompted him to pick up the phone and call the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter? What did he say?
Mr. Speaker, everyone here agrees that the former SNC-Lavalin executives who committed crimes must be brought to justice. However, it seems like everyone here also thinks that thousands of workers should pay for crimes committed by a handful of individuals. SNC-Lavalin has lost $1.6 billion since this crisis started. Next, it will be cutting jobs or having a fire sale and opening itself up to a foreign takeover.Will the Attorney General finally take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals do not support the RCMP and community safety programs, people and communities suffer.In Pelican Narrows, the community safety officer program is responsible for recruiting and training officers to do nightly patrols, but they lack the resources to bring in the talent they need. People's safety should be a priority, yet the Liberal government is failing to act. When will the Liberals commit to the safety of people in northern Saskatchewan and dedicate funding for their community safety programs?
Mr. Speaker, what a milestone. The Phoenix fiasco began three years ago, and the Liberal government still has yet to find a solution.Public servants have been living this nightmare for three years, and the government refuses to say when this fiasco will be fixed. An internal government memo says it could take 10 years. Public servants continue to provide services every day, and they are still having problems getting paid properly.The government has turned its back on these families. Public servants must get the money they are owed immediately.When will the Liberals fix this, once and for all?
It certainly is not speculation, Mr. Speaker, because those were Wernick's words.Canadians need to know what is not being said by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. It is clear that there was a concerted and sustained effort by the Prime Minister and his senior operatives to make the former attorney general change her mind.If we are not going to get answers in this place, will the Prime Minister appear before the justice committee and finally tell the truth?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are suffering the consequences of climate change and paying the price for the Liberal government's half measures. Last week, the National Energy Board once again recommended that the government move forward with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We know what is coming next. The Liberals are going to hide behind the NEB to justify their bad decision regarding the Trans Mountain pipeline and their failure to protect the environment as they should.How can Quebeckers trust the Liberals not to do the same in the case of energy east?
Mr. Speaker, it has been three years since the ill-fated Phoenix rollout and we are still hearing the same answers we heard three years ago when the whole thing started. It is a shame. Federal workers have lost homes and have had strain put on their families. Even some simple things would help, like changing the law so that they do not have to pay back the gross pay on the net pay that they received.When SNC-Lavalin wanted legal changes to get out of criminal charges, that got done. In fact, they rolled out the red carpet. Why should workers continue to have their lives put on hold while the government is distracted protecting its well-connected buddies?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has finally found a line that it seems like he might stick with for more than a day. His story has changed nearly every single day since this scandal first broke, and Canadians deserve answers.The Prime Minister first said that the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail story were false, that no direction or even pressure was applied on the former attorney general. Now we find out from the Clerk of the Privy Council that the Prime Minister's fingerprints are all over this sleazy affair to let his friends off the hook.Once again, if the decision was the former attorney general's and hers alone to make, why did the Prime Minister try so often to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, SNC was told there was no deal. On September 17, the Prime Minister and Privy Council clerk met with the former attorney general to discuss SNC. On December 5, the Prime Minister's top staffer, Gerry Butts, met with her to discuss it. On December 18, the Prime Minister's two top staffers met with her chief of staff to discuss it. On December 19, the Privy Council clerk called her to discuss it. On January 14, the former attorney general was fired from her role. How can Canadians, who are reviewing these facts, not conclude there was relentless pressure to have her change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister cannot seem to take no for an answer. When the former attorney general said that, no, she was not going to give SNC-Lavalin a deal, he was not happy, so he sent in his two top people, Telford and Butts, the two people who spoke directly for him, to do some persuading. On December 18, they meet with the chief of staff to the then attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin deal. What did Telford and Butts say at that meeting, and what did they threaten would happen if SNC-Lavalin did not get the deal?
Mr. Speaker, after the Prime Minister moved the former attorney general out of her position, she wrote a letter to the public saying that she had spoken truth to power. She rose recently and said that she would like to speak her truth to all Canadians.So far, the Prime Minister has been silencing her, invoking solicitor-client privilege, real or imagined. Today, he says that he will finally allow her to speak, but only to say things that he considers relevant.Will the Prime Minister remove these obstacles to the former attorney general's free speech and let her speak?
Mr. Speaker, the key words are relevant matter.This is not the first time the Liberals have rewritten our laws to suit their friends, but this time they are truly pulling out all the stops.Not only did the Liberals change the Criminal Code to help SNC-Lavalin executives, but once the former attorney general said no, they decided to also change our procurement systems to help SNC-Lavalin.When their rich friends ask for help, the Liberals leap to their aid, but when it comes to ordinary Canadians, the Liberals tell them to wait.When will the Liberals tell the truth and show some transparency?
Mr. Speaker, whatever the justification the Prime Minister is going to try to use, he needs to remember one thing: interfering in a criminal court case is always wrong.The Prime Minister thinks he is above the law, that he can use his power to get his well-connected friends off the hook. That is not the way Canada works.If the decision was the former attorney general's to make and hers alone, then why did the Prime Minister continually apply pressure to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to halt the criminal trial of a corporation accused of corruption.My question has to do with the December 18 meeting between the PMO and the office of the former attorney general. We know that Gerald Butts and Katie Telford spoke on behalf of the Prime Minister. We also know that they, along with the Prime Minister, have all the power in the Liberal government.Canadians want to know why the Prime Minister asked those two individuals to meet with the chief of staff to the former attorney general on December 18.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has claimed that climate change is the fight of his life. He has claimed that there is no relationship more important to him than that with indigenous peoples and he has claimed that he really, really cares about protecting our west coast.When the National Energy Board said that the Trans Mountain pipeline will, one, have major impacts on our climate; two, significantly damage indigenous rights and title; and three, potentially wipe out the southern resident killer whale population, it seems like this decision would be a no-brainer. This is a test for the Prime Minister. Between the principles he claims to hold and a pipeline he so desperately wants to build, what is it going to be?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, that is exactly what we are doing.We will stand up for good jobs, including jobs at SNC-Lavalin across the country, for the nearly 10,000 Canadians who work there.As far as remediation agreements are concerned, the Department of Justice's official backgrounder confirms that there are two purposes for such agreements: to hold the organization accountable for the wrongdoing; and, importantly, to reduce harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties who did not take part
Mr. Speaker, that member just confirmed that the Conservative Party and its members will continue to speculate rather than look at the facts. That is something Canadians know very well and that is exactly why they are sitting on the opposition benches. That is the party that chose to undermine committees. They put out a rule book to make sure that they could undermine and destroy the work of committees. We on this side will not do that. We are the government that increased resources to committees. We know that they do important work. We know that members on both sides are asking witnesses to appear and we know that witnesses are answering. Let them do their work.
Mr. Speaker, it is true that just a few days ago, Liberal MPs described getting the former attorney general to testify at parliamentary committee as a witch hunt, a fishing expedition and a distraction. However, if the minister and the Liberal government are so open to hearing from everyone at committee, will they allow the Prime Minister to have his say?
Mr. Speaker, we know the Prime Minister sent in his highest-ranking people, who speak on his behalf, to pressure and persuade the former attorney general through her chief of staff. Canadians deserve to know what kind of pressure was applied to their attorney general. The only person who knows is the Prime Minister, and the buck stops with him. Therefore, will he come to the justice committee? Will he finally stop evading and answer some questions truthfully and openly?
Mr. Speaker, climate change is real and the cost of inaction is enormous. It is disappointing that while climate change is having a real impact on the health and well-being of Canadians, Conservative politicians are wasting millions of taxpayer dollars fighting climate action in court. Meanwhile, the party opposite still has no plan to protect the environment. Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment please update the House on the actions our government is taking to flight climate change while growing our economy?
Mr. Speaker, last month the NDP secured a request to have General Motors CEO Mary Barra appear before committee to answer questions on the closure of the Oshawa plant. Instead, the Liberals cut a private deal to excuse her and now we get a lobbyist, and this is because the Prime Minister could not even get his own meeting. So much for not interfering with committees. Meanwhile, U.S. political pressure gets a new deal to extend plant operations and now Canada is left out in the cold. Why are the Liberals letting CEO Barra off the hook?Would the Prime Minister care to explain to Canadians his failures for Oshawa versus the workers of Detroit-Hamtramck, who are getting a new life on their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, I completely agree that Canada's public servants deserve to be paid on time and accurately for the important work they do. More than 170,000 cases have been cleared from the backlog since January 2018, and we are working very hard to accelerate the progress being made every month.We continue doing this important work. We will not stop until this is fixed.
Mr. Speaker, that is speculation.We know very well that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed when he was at the justice committee last week that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the Minister of Justice to take.There are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are appearing and answering tough questions.We, on this side, know that Canadians should have confidence in their institutions. We will not undermine that work because we know the committee is working hard. The Conservatives should stop their doublespeak.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, since January 2018, the backlog has gone down by 160,000 cases. We are doing whatever we possibly can to make sure our public servants are paid on time and accurately. In May of this year, all the departments will be serviced by pay pods. Employees are satisfied by this movement. It was an employee-generated idea.This will be resolved. We will stabilize the system. Yes, it is taking longer than we wish, but rest assured, this is my number one priority.
Mr. Speaker, what is important to note is that the justice committee has members from all parties recognized in this House. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are answering tough questions.However, it is also important to note that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company and the NDP leader met with representatives of the company. The Conservative deputy leader herself, who just asked the question, said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin....At the justice committee, the Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not seem to understand that it is not the Prime Minister's role to direct prosecutors and judges to give special deals to their friends.The independent Crown prosecutor determined that SNC-Lavalin did not qualify. The former attorney general seems to have made up her mind that it did not qualify. That is when the Prime Minister and his office went to work with unwanted, coordinated and sustained pressure to force the former attorney general to let his well-connected friends off the hook.If the Prime Minister is so sure that he did nothing wrong, will he appear before the justice committee to explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, we will consistently stand up for hard-working Canadians right across the country and be not the least bit apologetic about standing up for good jobs, wherever they are, across the country.I am pleased also to confirm that later today the government will confirm that the member for Vancouver Granville will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We of course continue to welcome the studies by the Ethics Commissioner and the parliamentary committee.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that under 10 years of Stephen Harper, they had no respect for committees. The Conservatives have chosen a new leader, but it remains a party of Stephen Harper that has no regard for committees, and the Conservatives continue to undermine their work. We on this side know that Canadians should have confidence in their decisions. We will let the committees do their important work.
Mr. Speaker, it is now clear that Liberals have given up on GM workers and their families in Oshawa without even trying.Do members know what the government did in the U.S.? U.S. representatives fought and succeeded in pressuring GM to extend the operation of the Detroit-Hamtramck plant for the life of the current collective agreement. That is the bare minimum that workers in Oshawa have been asking for and the Liberals did not even try to secure that with GM. Canadian workers deserve better than this. Layoffs start in two weeks.Why will the Prime Minister not fight for their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, as I will continue to say, members of the justice committee from both sides of the House are working together. They are asking witnesses to appear. Witnesses are appearing and they are responding to questions. We, on this side, will always have confidence in our committee system. It is important work that they do. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is also looking at this file. We, on this side, will not undermine that work.That is a clear contrast between the Conservatives and the Liberals. We will not undermine committees. We will not undermine officers of Parliament. We will not undermine the independence of the justice system.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her tireless advocacy on behalf of caregivers.Thousands of families rely on caregivers to care for their loved ones. Caregivers have often faced too many barriers to reuniting with their own families. Our government is introducing a program that will provide a faster path for permanent residency, better protections against abuse, and for the first time, we will allow caregivers to bring their own spouses and children with them.Our government has eliminated the caregiver backlog left behind by the Conservatives, from five years to 12 months. We will always stand for family reunification.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his hard work and tireless advocacy to help protect our climate.Economists are virtually unanimous that the best thing we can be doing to transition to a low-carbon economy is to put a price on pollution that will bring emissions down and put more money in the pockets of Canadian families. However, it is only one of 50 measures that we are taking to fight climate change, along with phasing out coal, so we can get to 90% generation of our electricity by clean sources by 2030. We are improving public transit, with the largest investment in the history of Canada. We are investing in energy efficiency, clean technologies and green infrastructure. While some Conservatives want to oppose meaningful action on climate change, like Doug Ford and the leader of the
Mr. Speaker, our answers were indeed relevant.What I said was that members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights asked questions.They asked for witnesses. The witnesses are appearing. We know members are asking these questions. That is what I am saying. We need to have confidence in the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.Those of us on this side of the House have confidence in them, but apparently the Conservatives do not.
Mr. Speaker, we know that Michael Wernick spoke to the former attorney general on the afternoon of December 19. He said he called her about the SNC-Lavalin file. Wernick also said the former attorney general advised the Prime Minister on September 17 that she was not going to intervene.Why did the Prime Minister instruct the clerk to make the phone call if she had already made up her mind?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the member opposite demonstrates that he does not quite understand what he is talking about.We always take seriously our responsibilities, standing up for jobs and growing the economy. The justice department's official backgrounder on remediation agreements states two of the main purposes for remediation agreements: one, to hold the organization accountable for wrongdoing; and, two, reduce the harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties that did not take part in the event. That is what is in the law.
Mr. Speaker, there is no more important job than to care for our loved ones. We welcome caregivers to Canada every year, mainly from the Philippines, to care for our children and our parents. However, as they care for our families they leave their own behind, often enduring a painful separation of years before they can be reunited. I have met these caregivers and heard their stories. Canada needs to do better. Could the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship tell us what the government is doing to reunite caregiver families?
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to confirm that the Conservatives will speculate rather than look at the facts. We on this side have respect for the justice committee and we have respect for the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner because they are doing their important work. We know that both the justice committee and the commissioner are looking at this file. We will not undermine the work of the justice committee. We on this side will not undermine the work of officers of Parliament. We on this side will not undermine the independence of the judicial system, as the Conservatives continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, we all know that we campaigned in the last election on a commitment to protect our environment and grow the economy at the same time. That includes steps that are going to get our resources to new markets so that our provinces in the western part of our country do not take a haircut on their resources.However, I want to highlight for the member that we are moving forward with a number of measures, including over 50 to contribute to the fight against climate change. We are putting a price on pollution. We are making the largest investment in the history of public transit in Canada. By 2030, 90% of our electricity will be generated from clean resources. We are in a new age in Canadian politics when it comes to protecting our environment. I invite the NDP to join the train.
Mr. Speaker, as the Attorney General of Canada, I cannot interfere in matters currently before the courts. It would be highly inappropriate for me to comment.
Mr. Speaker, that was interesting and all, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the question.The issue is this: last week, Canada's top bureaucrat testified that the Liberal scandal was never ever discussed in cabinet. That is what the top bureaucrat said last week, but two weeks ago, the Minister of National Revenue said on the radio that it had indeed been discussed in cabinet, and three weeks ago, when the scandal broke, the Prime Minister said nobody could talk about it because of cabinet confidence. Which government member is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, the member can accuse me, but the one thing we Conservatives want is the truth, her truth.The Prime Minister changed his story every day for two weeks. No two versions have been the same. On top of that, he has given himself the right to speak on behalf of the former attorney general.Will the former attorney general be allowed to speak freely at this much-touted committee?
Mr. Speaker, we have consistently done what we have always promised Canadians we would do, which is to stand up for good jobs and create economic growth while upholding the integrity and independence of our judicial system and respect for our institutions.That is what this government has always done, and that is what this government will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, I went to Detroit and met with Mary Barra just a few weeks ago and I made it very clear that they are making a big mistake by leaving Oshawa. We as a government will not make that mistake and turn our backs on auto workers. We will continue to defend auto workers. We have been very clear, with Jerry Dias's involvement when it comes to Unifor that for any solution that it has between the unions and GM, we will be at the table as part of the solution. We will continue to defend auto workers and we will continue to invest in this very important sector.
Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister cannot answer these questions, perhaps the government House leader can answer the question.If she has so much faith in the justice committee now that it is finally starting to allow witnesses to appear, even though originally it seems her office directed the committee members not to allow that to happenif she has so much confidence and faith in the justice committee's work, will Liberal members be supporting this motion before the House today to force the Prime Minister to attend and explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring of course that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Cambridge for highlighting the challenges that people with disabilities in Canada face when it comes to finding an accessible home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy a year ago. That is why the national co-investment fund requires 25% of the newly constructed or repaired units to be fully accessible. That is why we will continue to fight very hard so that every Canadian with a disability has access to a safe, affordable and accessible home.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said from the very beginning, we have consistently and continually stood up for the close to 9,000 jobs at SNC-Lavalin, indeed, good jobs right across the country. That is what Canadians expect of this government, to stick up for jobs, to create new ones and to make sure we grow our economy in ways that benefit everyone. That is exactly what we will continue to do and we will continue to do it in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary, that respects the integrity of our judicial systems and always respects the rules and norms that govern our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, only the Prime Minister can answer these questions, and that is why we are asking him to appear before the justice committee.The second question I would like to ask is this. Between September 4 and October 10, did the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office or the Clerk of the Privy Council give assurances to SNC-Lavalin that they would overturn the decision of the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that it was actually this government under the leadership of this Prime Minister that increased resources to committees.The record should also show that it was that member's party that put out a rule book that would undermine the work of committees. They had no respect for committees over 10 years of Stephen Harper. What is clear is that the Conservatives have chosen
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm that the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that two active court cases are not jeopardized. We will continue to work with the studies by the justice committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what the Prime Minister just said. Later today the government will confirm that the member will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, once again, we on this side respect the work of the justice committee. We on this side have increased resources for all committees, because we know that they do important work. We on this side will also defend and uphold the principles of judicial independence as well as the rule of law. We know that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and the justice committee. We also know that we on this side will fully co-operate with these two investigations, because they are doing important work. What is clear is that the member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine their work. We will not do that on this side. Canadians have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, there are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee.That member, very new to this place, should also know that those members have come together to ask for a list of witnesses. It is also important to know that witnesses are appearing at the justice committee. Members of Parliament from both sides are asking tough questions. Witnesses are answering those questions.That member also knows that the Conservatives had a rule book to undermine committees. We have not done such a thing. We have actually increased resources to committees to ensure that committees can do their important work and Canadians can have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, once again, he cannot provide simple, straightforward answers. Contrary to the Prime Minister's assertions, the report is true. He met with the Clerk of the Privy Council at noon on December 19. Immediately afterward, the clerk called the former attorney general to inform her that the Prime Minister was quite anxious.When the Prime Minister ordered the clerk to call the former attorney general, what did he tell him?
Mr. Speaker, many young Canadians dream of home ownership, yet that dream is becoming more difficult every day. Many residents are concerned that the mortgage stress test has made home ownership for the first time extremely difficult and has contributed to a slowdown in the housing market.Will the finance minister please update the House on what measures the government is exploring to help Canadians become homeowners?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that that member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine the work of the justice committee as well as the work of the commissioner. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is looking at this matter. The justice committee is looking at this matter. We are the government that increased resources.Let the record show that on this side we respect the work of committees, we respect the work of officers of Parliament and we respect the independence of the judicial system. That is a clear contrast from what the Conservatives stand for.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to say that we have been very focused on ensuring that our housing market is effective so Canadians can not only recognize that their investment in their home is stable, but also so they can have an aspiration to acquiring a home for them and their families.Over the last three years, we have put in measures for affordable housing across our country. We have put in measures to make sure people are protected. We will continue to think about how we can ensure that middle-class Canadians have the possibility to raise their families and have home ownership as part of that dream.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that the director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan consideration. It also important to note that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner as well as the justice committee. The justice committee has members from both sides present. They are working together to ensure that witnesses are appearing. Witnesses are being called and are answering tough questions from members of Parliament on both sides. I am not sure why the member is undermining that work.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has told Canadians to heed very carefully the words of Privy Council clerk Michael Wernick. Last week, that clerk said, I do not see where the former Attorney General was a solicitor. The matter was never discussed at cabinet...So she was not giving advice to cabinet. She was not advising the Prime Minister. Therefore, he concluded that solicitor-client privilege did not even apply here.Since the Prime Minister has said we should heed the clerk, I have a simple question. Will he allow the former attorney general to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, after changing his story every day for nearly three weeks now, the Prime Minister spent the weekend telling people they should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council.The Clerk of the Privy Council said very clearly that, in his opinion, solicitor-client privilege and cabinet privilege do not apply to the former attorney general. Will the Prime Minister listen to the clerk and allow the former attorney general to tell Canadians the truth?Will he finally allow her to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, on December 5, Gerry Butts met with the former attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin matter. On December 6, the Prime Minister's Office and the Prime Minister himself wrote a letter to SNC-Lavalin, refusing to meet with SNC-Lavalin anymore and directing SNC-Lavalin to the Attorney General's office.I would like to know what happened between December 5 and December 6 that caused the Prime Minister to make that decision.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. Later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians living with disabilities face unique challenges when it comes to finding accessible, affordable housing. In my riding of Cambridge, there has been significant investment in projects targeted to help, like the new accessible, affordable housing at 175 Hespeler Road.Could the minister responsible for housing tell the House how Canada's national housing strategy is helping people living with disabilities find places to call home that meet their unique needs?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times in the House, this is a complex matter. There are two ongoing court cases. I cannot comment on this.
Mr. Speaker, we fight day in and day out for our auto workers. Since 2015, we have seen historic investments of $6 billion in the automotive sector because our Prime Minister has made the automotive sector a priority for our government. We have seen significant investments in the auto supply sector, and this has resulted in thousands of jobs being created.Compare that with the Conservatives. For the first three years of their mandate, they lost 50,000 jobs in the automotive sector and 20,000 before the recession even hit. We have seen thousands of jobs created since 2015. We will continue to fight for the auto worker.
Mr. Speaker, on February 7, the Prime Minister stated that The Globe and Mail report about how he pressured the former attorney general on the SNC-Lavalin case was false.On Thursday, we learned from the Clerk of the Privy Council that there was in fact a concerted effort to interfere in the case against SNC-Lavalin by seeking to influence the then attorney general. Can the Prime Minister tell us which version of the story is true?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that Canadians should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council. During his appearance at committee, the clerk said that cabinet never discussed SNC-Lavalin. However, the Minister of National Revenue said during a radio interview that the decision regarding SNC was made at cabinet.I have a simple question. Who is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, Michael Wernick testified that on December 19, he met with the Prime Minister and immediately following this meeting he picked up the phone and called the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter. What instructions did the Prime Minister provide Wernick to initiate this call?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what we know. We know that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company. We know that the leader of the NDP met with representatives of the company. We know that the Conservative deputy leader herself said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin.We also know that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed, At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We on this side will continue to respect the independence of the judicial system and the rule of law.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights are doing their job. Our government increased resources to committees so that they could do this important work. The clerk told the committee last week that the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the justice minister to make. Although this member claims to have no intention of hurting SNC-Lavalin employees, the member for Carleton said something altogether different.
Mr. Speaker, here is a very simple and easy question for the Prime Minister to answer. On December 5, the Prime Minister's principal secretary met with the former attorney general in the bar at the Château Laurier. It appears that the purpose of that meeting was to put even more pressure on the former attorney general to change her mind and to allow a special deal to be made over the objections of independent Crown prosecutors.Was the Prime Minister aware that his principal secretary was meeting with the former attorney general on December 5?
Mr. Speaker, I think it is a good thing that we take seriously our responsibility to stand up for jobs and grow the economy. That is what we will continue to do, in a way that respects our institutions and the independence of our judiciary.Those are the responsibilities that we have accepted from the very beginning, and that is the work we are doing to create economic growth for all Canadians while defending our institutions, which are so important for our democracy.
Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, I was pleased to support the initiative just read out by my colleague. It is interesting it came from him. However, I want to read out a slightly different resolution and maybe this will have the full support of the House: That the House call on the Government of Canada to strongly push for the full implementation of Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 within a clearly-specified time frame; call on the Government of Sri Lanka to implement resolution 30/1 within a clearly specified time frame, recognizing the resolution was co-sponsored by the Government of Sri Lanka; and invites the Minister of International Development to table a report in the House at her earliest convenience explaining development projects funded in Sri Lanka and their impact on the implementation of resolution 30/1 and on peace and reconciliation in general.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I request unanimous consent for the following motion: Recognizing that 2019 marks the 10th anniversary of the end of armed conflict in Sri Lanka and honouring the tens of thousands of lives lost and countless victims displaced during this 26-year war; and recognizing further that the Government of Sri Lanka has made insufficient progress in implementing its commitments on reconciliation, accountability and transitional justice and that frustrations persist among those seeking to heal the wounds of all those who have suffered; therefore, the House of Commons calls on the Government of Sri Lanka to fully implement its obligations under the Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 and to set a clear timeline bound strategy for ensuring a process of accountability that has the trust and confidence of the victims, including the families of those who have disappeared.
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, the director of public prosecutions decided that SNC-Lavalin was not entitled to a remediation agreement, and the blitz to try to influence the former attorney general began. The Prime Minister tried to influence her at a meeting on September 17, and his top adviser and friend followed suit on December 5. Many others in the Prime Minister's inner circle also tried the same trick. Did the Prime Minister clearly try to influence the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been speaking widely about the SNC-Lavalin affair, telling his side of the story, not concerned at all about court proceedings, privilege or cabinet confidence. Apparently that does not matter when he is telling his side of the story. However, now he is saying that he is going to constrain his former attorney general's testimony by limiting it to what he considers to be relevant matters. Could he confirm if relevant matters will include all communications between his office and the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, we are following the clear guidelines that have been given to us by the Federal Court of Appeal. We instructed the National Energy Board to undertake this review, and they have given us that report on Friday. We will carefully analyze and look at it.At the same time, we are moving forward with meaningful consultation with indigenous communities to understand their concerns and offer accommodation and work with them to find solutions to the outstanding issues.
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to make claims, but let us look at the facts. The director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently. The Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the former Minister of Justice to take. On this side of the House, we respect the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. We know that the members are capable of doing their job, and we have confidence in their work.
Mr. Speaker, once again, I confirm what the Prime Minister said earlier today in question period, that the member will be able to address relevant matters in front of the committee while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the work of the justice committee, as well as that of the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, as we said, we respect the work of the committees. We have confidence in the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and all the other committees. We will allow them to do their work, because we respect their work.We can see the Conservatives feel differently.
Mr. Speaker, last week the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We will consistently, and regularly, stand up for jobs across the country, and will do so in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary and the integrity of our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, I have met with representatives of a variety of communities across the country about community safety initiatives, including special constables and other forms of augmenting regular police service. I am certainly happy to meet with any community in the hon. member's riding if people have concerns they wish to pursue. However, I would note that for the first nations policing program, we have just made the largest investment in Canadian history to try to bring better policing services to indigenous communities across the country.
Most negative speeches
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are suffering the consequences of climate change and paying the price for the Liberal government's half measures. Last week, the National Energy Board once again recommended that the government move forward with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We know what is coming next. The Liberals are going to hide behind the NEB to justify their bad decision regarding the Trans Mountain pipeline and their failure to protect the environment as they should.How can Quebeckers trust the Liberals not to do the same in the case of energy east?
Mr. Speaker, the answer is always the same: no comment.The government's primary responsibility is to protect the people. It is disgusting to see the opposition parties bashing SNC-Lavalin workers, who have done nothing wrong. This affects them. They are going to pay the price come the election. The Attorney General is responsible for this matter. He has the power to take over the SNC-Lavalin case at any time and to negotiate a remediation agreement to ensure that the guilty are punished, not thousands of workers.When will he take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. Canadians deserve transparency. Canadians deserve answers about the Prime Minister's involvement in this sordid affair. Again, what did the Prime Minister say to Wernick that prompted him to pick up the phone and call the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter? What did he say?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the member opposite demonstrates that he does not quite understand what he is talking about.We always take seriously our responsibilities, standing up for jobs and growing the economy. The justice department's official backgrounder on remediation agreements states two of the main purposes for remediation agreements: one, to hold the organization accountable for wrongdoing; and, two, reduce the harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties that did not take part in the event. That is what is in the law.
Mr. Speaker, everyone here agrees that the former SNC-Lavalin executives who committed crimes must be brought to justice. However, it seems like everyone here also thinks that thousands of workers should pay for crimes committed by a handful of individuals. SNC-Lavalin has lost $1.6 billion since this crisis started. Next, it will be cutting jobs or having a fire sale and opening itself up to a foreign takeover.Will the Attorney General finally take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, whatever the justification the Prime Minister is going to try to use, he needs to remember one thing: interfering in a criminal court case is always wrong.The Prime Minister thinks he is above the law, that he can use his power to get his well-connected friends off the hook. That is not the way Canada works.If the decision was the former attorney general's to make and hers alone, then why did the Prime Minister continually apply pressure to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to halt the criminal trial of a corporation accused of corruption.My question has to do with the December 18 meeting between the PMO and the office of the former attorney general. We know that Gerald Butts and Katie Telford spoke on behalf of the Prime Minister. We also know that they, along with the Prime Minister, have all the power in the Liberal government.Canadians want to know why the Prime Minister asked those two individuals to meet with the chief of staff to the former attorney general on December 18.
It certainly is not speculation, Mr. Speaker, because those were Wernick's words.Canadians need to know what is not being said by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. It is clear that there was a concerted and sustained effort by the Prime Minister and his senior operatives to make the former attorney general change her mind.If we are not going to get answers in this place, will the Prime Minister appear before the justice committee and finally tell the truth?
Mr. Speaker, as we said, we respect the work of the committees. We have confidence in the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and all the other committees. We will allow them to do their work, because we respect their work.We can see the Conservatives feel differently.
Mr. Speaker, climate change is real and the cost of inaction is enormous. It is disappointing that while climate change is having a real impact on the health and well-being of Canadians, Conservative politicians are wasting millions of taxpayer dollars fighting climate action in court. Meanwhile, the party opposite still has no plan to protect the environment. Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment please update the House on the actions our government is taking to flight climate change while growing our economy?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has told Canadians to heed very carefully the words of Privy Council clerk Michael Wernick. Last week, that clerk said, I do not see where the former Attorney General was a solicitor. The matter was never discussed at cabinet...So she was not giving advice to cabinet. She was not advising the Prime Minister. Therefore, he concluded that solicitor-client privilege did not even apply here.Since the Prime Minister has said we should heed the clerk, I have a simple question. Will he allow the former attorney general to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, it has been three years since the ill-fated Phoenix rollout and we are still hearing the same answers we heard three years ago when the whole thing started. It is a shame. Federal workers have lost homes and have had strain put on their families. Even some simple things would help, like changing the law so that they do not have to pay back the gross pay on the net pay that they received.When SNC-Lavalin wanted legal changes to get out of criminal charges, that got done. In fact, they rolled out the red carpet. Why should workers continue to have their lives put on hold while the government is distracted protecting its well-connected buddies?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that Canadians should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council. During his appearance at committee, the clerk said that cabinet never discussed SNC-Lavalin. However, the Minister of National Revenue said during a radio interview that the decision regarding SNC was made at cabinet.I have a simple question. Who is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what we know. We know that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company. We know that the leader of the NDP met with representatives of the company. We know that the Conservative deputy leader herself said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin.We also know that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed, At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We on this side will continue to respect the independence of the judicial system and the rule of law.
Mr. Speaker, that is speculation.We know very well that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed when he was at the justice committee last week that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the Minister of Justice to take.There are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are appearing and answering tough questions.We, on this side, know that Canadians should have confidence in their institutions. We will not undermine that work because we know the committee is working hard. The Conservatives should stop their doublespeak.
Mr. Speaker, on February 7, the Prime Minister stated that The Globe and Mail report about how he pressured the former attorney general on the SNC-Lavalin case was false.On Thursday, we learned from the Clerk of the Privy Council that there was in fact a concerted effort to interfere in the case against SNC-Lavalin by seeking to influence the then attorney general. Can the Prime Minister tell us which version of the story is true?
Mr. Speaker, only the Prime Minister can answer these questions, and that is why we are asking him to appear before the justice committee.The second question I would like to ask is this. Between September 4 and October 10, did the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office or the Clerk of the Privy Council give assurances to SNC-Lavalin that they would overturn the decision of the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, Michael Wernick testified that on December 19, he met with the Prime Minister and immediately following this meeting he picked up the phone and called the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter. What instructions did the Prime Minister provide Wernick to initiate this call?
Mr. Speaker, our answers were indeed relevant.What I said was that members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights asked questions.They asked for witnesses. The witnesses are appearing. We know members are asking these questions. That is what I am saying. We need to have confidence in the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.Those of us on this side of the House have confidence in them, but apparently the Conservatives do not.
Mr. Speaker, what a milestone. The Phoenix fiasco began three years ago, and the Liberal government still has yet to find a solution.Public servants have been living this nightmare for three years, and the government refuses to say when this fiasco will be fixed. An internal government memo says it could take 10 years. Public servants continue to provide services every day, and they are still having problems getting paid properly.The government has turned its back on these families. Public servants must get the money they are owed immediately.When will the Liberals fix this, once and for all?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I request unanimous consent for the following motion: Recognizing that 2019 marks the 10th anniversary of the end of armed conflict in Sri Lanka and honouring the tens of thousands of lives lost and countless victims displaced during this 26-year war; and recognizing further that the Government of Sri Lanka has made insufficient progress in implementing its commitments on reconciliation, accountability and transitional justice and that frustrations persist among those seeking to heal the wounds of all those who have suffered; therefore, the House of Commons calls on the Government of Sri Lanka to fully implement its obligations under the Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 and to set a clear timeline bound strategy for ensuring a process of accountability that has the trust and confidence of the victims, including the families of those who have disappeared.
Mr. Speaker, we know that Michael Wernick spoke to the former attorney general on the afternoon of December 19. He said he called her about the SNC-Lavalin file. Wernick also said the former attorney general advised the Prime Minister on September 17 that she was not going to intervene.Why did the Prime Minister instruct the clerk to make the phone call if she had already made up her mind?
Mr. Speaker, after changing his story every day for nearly three weeks now, the Prime Minister spent the weekend telling people they should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council.The Clerk of the Privy Council said very clearly that, in his opinion, solicitor-client privilege and cabinet privilege do not apply to the former attorney general. Will the Prime Minister listen to the clerk and allow the former attorney general to tell Canadians the truth?Will he finally allow her to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, on December 5, Gerry Butts met with the former attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin matter. On December 6, the Prime Minister's Office and the Prime Minister himself wrote a letter to SNC-Lavalin, refusing to meet with SNC-Lavalin anymore and directing SNC-Lavalin to the Attorney General's office.I would like to know what happened between December 5 and December 6 that caused the Prime Minister to make that decision.
Mr. Speaker, it is true that just a few days ago, Liberal MPs described getting the former attorney general to testify at parliamentary committee as a witch hunt, a fishing expedition and a distraction. However, if the minister and the Liberal government are so open to hearing from everyone at committee, will they allow the Prime Minister to have his say?
Mr. Speaker, last month the NDP secured a request to have General Motors CEO Mary Barra appear before committee to answer questions on the closure of the Oshawa plant. Instead, the Liberals cut a private deal to excuse her and now we get a lobbyist, and this is because the Prime Minister could not even get his own meeting. So much for not interfering with committees. Meanwhile, U.S. political pressure gets a new deal to extend plant operations and now Canada is left out in the cold. Why are the Liberals letting CEO Barra off the hook?Would the Prime Minister care to explain to Canadians his failures for Oshawa versus the workers of Detroit-Hamtramck, who are getting a new life on their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, the key words are relevant matter.This is not the first time the Liberals have rewritten our laws to suit their friends, but this time they are truly pulling out all the stops.Not only did the Liberals change the Criminal Code to help SNC-Lavalin executives, but once the former attorney general said no, they decided to also change our procurement systems to help SNC-Lavalin.When their rich friends ask for help, the Liberals leap to their aid, but when it comes to ordinary Canadians, the Liberals tell them to wait.When will the Liberals tell the truth and show some transparency?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister cannot seem to take no for an answer. When the former attorney general said that, no, she was not going to give SNC-Lavalin a deal, he was not happy, so he sent in his two top people, Telford and Butts, the two people who spoke directly for him, to do some persuading. On December 18, they meet with the chief of staff to the then attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin deal. What did Telford and Butts say at that meeting, and what did they threaten would happen if SNC-Lavalin did not get the deal?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not seem to understand that it is not the Prime Minister's role to direct prosecutors and judges to give special deals to their friends.The independent Crown prosecutor determined that SNC-Lavalin did not qualify. The former attorney general seems to have made up her mind that it did not qualify. That is when the Prime Minister and his office went to work with unwanted, coordinated and sustained pressure to force the former attorney general to let his well-connected friends off the hook.If the Prime Minister is so sure that he did nothing wrong, will he appear before the justice committee to explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, what is important to note is that the justice committee has members from all parties recognized in this House. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are answering tough questions.However, it is also important to note that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company and the NDP leader met with representatives of the company. The Conservative deputy leader herself, who just asked the question, said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin....At the justice committee, the Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has finally found a line that it seems like he might stick with for more than a day. His story has changed nearly every single day since this scandal first broke, and Canadians deserve answers.The Prime Minister first said that the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail story were false, that no direction or even pressure was applied on the former attorney general. Now we find out from the Clerk of the Privy Council that the Prime Minister's fingerprints are all over this sleazy affair to let his friends off the hook.Once again, if the decision was the former attorney general's and hers alone to make, why did the Prime Minister try so often to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, the director of public prosecutions confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently.The Conservatives keep talking out of both sides of their mouths. In French, they claim they would not dream of hurting the employees of SNC-Lavalin, as the member for CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles says. However, in English, it is a different story, as we heard from the member for Carleton, who is not hiding the fact that he wants to shut this company down. The Conservatives need to stop their doublespeak and start being clear with Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, as the Attorney General of Canada, I cannot interfere in matters currently before the courts. It would be highly inappropriate for me to comment.
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm that the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that two active court cases are not jeopardized. We will continue to work with the studies by the justice committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, we all know that we campaigned in the last election on a commitment to protect our environment and grow the economy at the same time. That includes steps that are going to get our resources to new markets so that our provinces in the western part of our country do not take a haircut on their resources.However, I want to highlight for the member that we are moving forward with a number of measures, including over 50 to contribute to the fight against climate change. We are putting a price on pollution. We are making the largest investment in the history of public transit in Canada. By 2030, 90% of our electricity will be generated from clean resources. We are in a new age in Canadian politics when it comes to protecting our environment. I invite the NDP to join the train.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that the director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan consideration. It also important to note that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner as well as the justice committee. The justice committee has members from both sides present. They are working together to ensure that witnesses are appearing. Witnesses are being called and are answering tough questions from members of Parliament on both sides. I am not sure why the member is undermining that work.
Mr. Speaker, there are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee.That member, very new to this place, should also know that those members have come together to ask for a list of witnesses. It is also important to know that witnesses are appearing at the justice committee. Members of Parliament from both sides are asking tough questions. Witnesses are answering those questions.That member also knows that the Conservatives had a rule book to undermine committees. We have not done such a thing. We have actually increased resources to committees to ensure that committees can do their important work and Canadians can have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that that member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine the work of the justice committee as well as the work of the commissioner. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is looking at this matter. The justice committee is looking at this matter. We are the government that increased resources.Let the record show that on this side we respect the work of committees, we respect the work of officers of Parliament and we respect the independence of the judicial system. That is a clear contrast from what the Conservatives stand for.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights are doing their job. Our government increased resources to committees so that they could do this important work. The clerk told the committee last week that the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the justice minister to make. Although this member claims to have no intention of hurting SNC-Lavalin employees, the member for Carleton said something altogether different.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times in the House, this is a complex matter. There are two ongoing court cases. I cannot comment on this.
Mr. Speaker, after the Prime Minister moved the former attorney general out of her position, she wrote a letter to the public saying that she had spoken truth to power. She rose recently and said that she would like to speak her truth to all Canadians.So far, the Prime Minister has been silencing her, invoking solicitor-client privilege, real or imagined. Today, he says that he will finally allow her to speak, but only to say things that he considers relevant.Will the Prime Minister remove these obstacles to the former attorney general's free speech and let her speak?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been speaking widely about the SNC-Lavalin affair, telling his side of the story, not concerned at all about court proceedings, privilege or cabinet confidence. Apparently that does not matter when he is telling his side of the story. However, now he is saying that he is going to constrain his former attorney general's testimony by limiting it to what he considers to be relevant matters. Could he confirm if relevant matters will include all communications between his office and the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, that is exactly what we are doing.We will stand up for good jobs, including jobs at SNC-Lavalin across the country, for the nearly 10,000 Canadians who work there.As far as remediation agreements are concerned, the Department of Justice's official backgrounder confirms that there are two purposes for such agreements: to hold the organization accountable for the wrongdoing; and, importantly, to reduce harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties who did not take part
Mr. Speaker, I went to Detroit and met with Mary Barra just a few weeks ago and I made it very clear that they are making a big mistake by leaving Oshawa. We as a government will not make that mistake and turn our backs on auto workers. We will continue to defend auto workers. We have been very clear, with Jerry Dias's involvement when it comes to Unifor that for any solution that it has between the unions and GM, we will be at the table as part of the solution. We will continue to defend auto workers and we will continue to invest in this very important sector.
Mr. Speaker, once again, he cannot provide simple, straightforward answers. Contrary to the Prime Minister's assertions, the report is true. He met with the Clerk of the Privy Council at noon on December 19. Immediately afterward, the clerk called the former attorney general to inform her that the Prime Minister was quite anxious.When the Prime Minister ordered the clerk to call the former attorney general, what did he tell him?
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, the director of public prosecutions decided that SNC-Lavalin was not entitled to a remediation agreement, and the blitz to try to influence the former attorney general began. The Prime Minister tried to influence her at a meeting on September 17, and his top adviser and friend followed suit on December 5. Many others in the Prime Minister's inner circle also tried the same trick. Did the Prime Minister clearly try to influence the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, right now, the government is changing its story day by day, getting up to all kinds of monkey business in an attempt to influence our justice system. The director of public prosecutions made her decision on September 4. She confirmed that decision on October 9. Nevertheless, the Prime Minister and his cronies repeatedly tried to get her to change her mind.We want to know whether the Prime Minister will agree to appear before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to answer all of the opposition's questions.
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to make claims, but let us look at the facts. The director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently. The Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the former Minister of Justice to take. On this side of the House, we respect the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. We know that the members are capable of doing their job, and we have confidence in their work.
Mr. Speaker, here is a very simple and easy question for the Prime Minister to answer. On December 5, the Prime Minister's principal secretary met with the former attorney general in the bar at the Château Laurier. It appears that the purpose of that meeting was to put even more pressure on the former attorney general to change her mind and to allow a special deal to be made over the objections of independent Crown prosecutors.Was the Prime Minister aware that his principal secretary was meeting with the former attorney general on December 5?
Mr. Speaker, last week the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We will consistently, and regularly, stand up for jobs across the country, and will do so in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary and the integrity of our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, we know the Prime Minister sent in his highest-ranking people, who speak on his behalf, to pressure and persuade the former attorney general through her chief of staff. Canadians deserve to know what kind of pressure was applied to their attorney general. The only person who knows is the Prime Minister, and the buck stops with him. Therefore, will he come to the justice committee? Will he finally stop evading and answer some questions truthfully and openly?
Mr. Speaker, many young Canadians dream of home ownership, yet that dream is becoming more difficult every day. Many residents are concerned that the mortgage stress test has made home ownership for the first time extremely difficult and has contributed to a slowdown in the housing market.Will the finance minister please update the House on what measures the government is exploring to help Canadians become homeowners?
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that it was actually this government under the leadership of this Prime Minister that increased resources to committees.The record should also show that it was that member's party that put out a rule book that would undermine the work of committees. They had no respect for committees over 10 years of Stephen Harper. What is clear is that the Conservatives have chosen
Mr. Speaker, we are following the clear guidelines that have been given to us by the Federal Court of Appeal. We instructed the National Energy Board to undertake this review, and they have given us that report on Friday. We will carefully analyze and look at it.At the same time, we are moving forward with meaningful consultation with indigenous communities to understand their concerns and offer accommodation and work with them to find solutions to the outstanding issues.
Mr. Speaker, the member can accuse me, but the one thing we Conservatives want is the truth, her truth.The Prime Minister changed his story every day for two weeks. No two versions have been the same. On top of that, he has given himself the right to speak on behalf of the former attorney general.Will the former attorney general be allowed to speak freely at this much-touted committee?
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, SNC was told there was no deal. On September 17, the Prime Minister and Privy Council clerk met with the former attorney general to discuss SNC. On December 5, the Prime Minister's top staffer, Gerry Butts, met with her to discuss it. On December 18, the Prime Minister's two top staffers met with her chief of staff to discuss it. On December 19, the Privy Council clerk called her to discuss it. On January 14, the former attorney general was fired from her role. How can Canadians, who are reviewing these facts, not conclude there was relentless pressure to have her change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, I completely agree that Canada's public servants deserve to be paid on time and accurately for the important work they do. More than 170,000 cases have been cleared from the backlog since January 2018, and we are working very hard to accelerate the progress being made every month.We continue doing this important work. We will not stop until this is fixed.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his hard work and tireless advocacy to help protect our climate.Economists are virtually unanimous that the best thing we can be doing to transition to a low-carbon economy is to put a price on pollution that will bring emissions down and put more money in the pockets of Canadian families. However, it is only one of 50 measures that we are taking to fight climate change, along with phasing out coal, so we can get to 90% generation of our electricity by clean sources by 2030. We are improving public transit, with the largest investment in the history of Canada. We are investing in energy efficiency, clean technologies and green infrastructure. While some Conservatives want to oppose meaningful action on climate change, like Doug Ford and the leader of the
Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals do not support the RCMP and community safety programs, people and communities suffer.In Pelican Narrows, the community safety officer program is responsible for recruiting and training officers to do nightly patrols, but they lack the resources to bring in the talent they need. People's safety should be a priority, yet the Liberal government is failing to act. When will the Liberals commit to the safety of people in northern Saskatchewan and dedicate funding for their community safety programs?
Mr. Speaker, there is no more important job than to care for our loved ones. We welcome caregivers to Canada every year, mainly from the Philippines, to care for our children and our parents. However, as they care for our families they leave their own behind, often enduring a painful separation of years before they can be reunited. I have met these caregivers and heard their stories. Canada needs to do better. Could the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship tell us what the government is doing to reunite caregiver families?
Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister cannot answer these questions, perhaps the government House leader can answer the question.If she has so much faith in the justice committee now that it is finally starting to allow witnesses to appear, even though originally it seems her office directed the committee members not to allow that to happenif she has so much confidence and faith in the justice committee's work, will Liberal members be supporting this motion before the House today to force the Prime Minister to attend and explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, as I said, since January 2018, the backlog has gone down by 160,000 cases. We are doing whatever we possibly can to make sure our public servants are paid on time and accurately. In May of this year, all the departments will be serviced by pay pods. Employees are satisfied by this movement. It was an employee-generated idea.This will be resolved. We will stabilize the system. Yes, it is taking longer than we wish, but rest assured, this is my number one priority.
Mr. Speaker, we fight day in and day out for our auto workers. Since 2015, we have seen historic investments of $6 billion in the automotive sector because our Prime Minister has made the automotive sector a priority for our government. We have seen significant investments in the auto supply sector, and this has resulted in thousands of jobs being created.Compare that with the Conservatives. For the first three years of their mandate, they lost 50,000 jobs in the automotive sector and 20,000 before the recession even hit. We have seen thousands of jobs created since 2015. We will continue to fight for the auto worker.
Mr. Speaker, it is now clear that Liberals have given up on GM workers and their families in Oshawa without even trying.Do members know what the government did in the U.S.? U.S. representatives fought and succeeded in pressuring GM to extend the operation of the Detroit-Hamtramck plant for the life of the current collective agreement. That is the bare minimum that workers in Oshawa have been asking for and the Liberals did not even try to secure that with GM. Canadian workers deserve better than this. Layoffs start in two weeks.Why will the Prime Minister not fight for their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that under 10 years of Stephen Harper, they had no respect for committees. The Conservatives have chosen a new leader, but it remains a party of Stephen Harper that has no regard for committees, and the Conservatives continue to undermine their work. We on this side know that Canadians should have confidence in their decisions. We will let the committees do their important work.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. Later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has claimed that climate change is the fight of his life. He has claimed that there is no relationship more important to him than that with indigenous peoples and he has claimed that he really, really cares about protecting our west coast.When the National Energy Board said that the Trans Mountain pipeline will, one, have major impacts on our climate; two, significantly damage indigenous rights and title; and three, potentially wipe out the southern resident killer whale population, it seems like this decision would be a no-brainer. This is a test for the Prime Minister. Between the principles he claims to hold and a pipeline he so desperately wants to build, what is it going to be?
Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, I was pleased to support the initiative just read out by my colleague. It is interesting it came from him. However, I want to read out a slightly different resolution and maybe this will have the full support of the House: That the House call on the Government of Canada to strongly push for the full implementation of Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 within a clearly-specified time frame; call on the Government of Sri Lanka to implement resolution 30/1 within a clearly specified time frame, recognizing the resolution was co-sponsored by the Government of Sri Lanka; and invites the Minister of International Development to table a report in the House at her earliest convenience explaining development projects funded in Sri Lanka and their impact on the implementation of resolution 30/1 and on peace and reconciliation in general.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Cambridge for highlighting the challenges that people with disabilities in Canada face when it comes to finding an accessible home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy a year ago. That is why the national co-investment fund requires 25% of the newly constructed or repaired units to be fully accessible. That is why we will continue to fight very hard so that every Canadian with a disability has access to a safe, affordable and accessible home.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is a good thing that we take seriously our responsibility to stand up for jobs and grow the economy. That is what we will continue to do, in a way that respects our institutions and the independence of our judiciary.Those are the responsibilities that we have accepted from the very beginning, and that is the work we are doing to create economic growth for all Canadians while defending our institutions, which are so important for our democracy.
Mr. Speaker, as I will continue to say, members of the justice committee from both sides of the House are working together. They are asking witnesses to appear. Witnesses are appearing and they are responding to questions. We, on this side, will always have confidence in our committee system. It is important work that they do. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is also looking at this file. We, on this side, will not undermine that work.That is a clear contrast between the Conservatives and the Liberals. We will not undermine committees. We will not undermine officers of Parliament. We will not undermine the independence of the justice system.
Mr. Speaker, that member just confirmed that the Conservative Party and its members will continue to speculate rather than look at the facts. That is something Canadians know very well and that is exactly why they are sitting on the opposition benches. That is the party that chose to undermine committees. They put out a rule book to make sure that they could undermine and destroy the work of committees. We on this side will not do that. We are the government that increased resources to committees. We know that they do important work. We know that members on both sides are asking witnesses to appear and we know that witnesses are answering. Let them do their work.
Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what the Prime Minister just said. Later today the government will confirm that the member will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring of course that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, that was interesting and all, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the question.The issue is this: last week, Canada's top bureaucrat testified that the Liberal scandal was never ever discussed in cabinet. That is what the top bureaucrat said last week, but two weeks ago, the Minister of National Revenue said on the radio that it had indeed been discussed in cabinet, and three weeks ago, when the scandal broke, the Prime Minister said nobody could talk about it because of cabinet confidence. Which government member is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, I have met with representatives of a variety of communities across the country about community safety initiatives, including special constables and other forms of augmenting regular police service. I am certainly happy to meet with any community in the hon. member's riding if people have concerns they wish to pursue. However, I would note that for the first nations policing program, we have just made the largest investment in Canadian history to try to bring better policing services to indigenous communities across the country.
Mr. Speaker, once again, we on this side respect the work of the justice committee. We on this side have increased resources for all committees, because we know that they do important work. We on this side will also defend and uphold the principles of judicial independence as well as the rule of law. We know that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and the justice committee. We also know that we on this side will fully co-operate with these two investigations, because they are doing important work. What is clear is that the member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine their work. We will not do that on this side. Canadians have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, we will consistently stand up for hard-working Canadians right across the country and be not the least bit apologetic about standing up for good jobs, wherever they are, across the country.I am pleased also to confirm that later today the government will confirm that the member for Vancouver Granville will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We of course continue to welcome the studies by the Ethics Commissioner and the parliamentary committee.
Mr. Speaker, once again, I confirm what the Prime Minister said earlier today in question period, that the member will be able to address relevant matters in front of the committee while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the work of the justice committee, as well as that of the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians living with disabilities face unique challenges when it comes to finding accessible, affordable housing. In my riding of Cambridge, there has been significant investment in projects targeted to help, like the new accessible, affordable housing at 175 Hespeler Road.Could the minister responsible for housing tell the House how Canada's national housing strategy is helping people living with disabilities find places to call home that meet their unique needs?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said from the very beginning, we have consistently and continually stood up for the close to 9,000 jobs at SNC-Lavalin, indeed, good jobs right across the country. That is what Canadians expect of this government, to stick up for jobs, to create new ones and to make sure we grow our economy in ways that benefit everyone. That is exactly what we will continue to do and we will continue to do it in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary, that respects the integrity of our judicial systems and always respects the rules and norms that govern our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her tireless advocacy on behalf of caregivers.Thousands of families rely on caregivers to care for their loved ones. Caregivers have often faced too many barriers to reuniting with their own families. Our government is introducing a program that will provide a faster path for permanent residency, better protections against abuse, and for the first time, we will allow caregivers to bring their own spouses and children with them.Our government has eliminated the caregiver backlog left behind by the Conservatives, from five years to 12 months. We will always stand for family reunification.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to say that we have been very focused on ensuring that our housing market is effective so Canadians can not only recognize that their investment in their home is stable, but also so they can have an aspiration to acquiring a home for them and their families.Over the last three years, we have put in measures for affordable housing across our country. We have put in measures to make sure people are protected. We will continue to think about how we can ensure that middle-class Canadians have the possibility to raise their families and have home ownership as part of that dream.
Mr. Speaker, we have consistently done what we have always promised Canadians we would do, which is to stand up for good jobs and create economic growth while upholding the integrity and independence of our judicial system and respect for our institutions.That is what this government has always done, and that is what this government will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to confirm that the Conservatives will speculate rather than look at the facts. We on this side have respect for the justice committee and we have respect for the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner because they are doing their important work. We know that both the justice committee and the commissioner are looking at this file. We will not undermine the work of the justice committee. We on this side will not undermine the work of officers of Parliament. We on this side will not undermine the independence of the judicial system, as the Conservatives continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are suffering the consequences of climate change and paying the price for the Liberal government's half measures. Last week, the National Energy Board once again recommended that the government move forward with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We know what is coming next. The Liberals are going to hide behind the NEB to justify their bad decision regarding the Trans Mountain pipeline and their failure to protect the environment as they should.How can Quebeckers trust the Liberals not to do the same in the case of energy east?
Mr. Speaker, the answer is always the same: no comment.The government's primary responsibility is to protect the people. It is disgusting to see the opposition parties bashing SNC-Lavalin workers, who have done nothing wrong. This affects them. They are going to pay the price come the election. The Attorney General is responsible for this matter. He has the power to take over the SNC-Lavalin case at any time and to negotiate a remediation agreement to ensure that the guilty are punished, not thousands of workers.When will he take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. Canadians deserve transparency. Canadians deserve answers about the Prime Minister's involvement in this sordid affair. Again, what did the Prime Minister say to Wernick that prompted him to pick up the phone and call the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter? What did he say?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the member opposite demonstrates that he does not quite understand what he is talking about.We always take seriously our responsibilities, standing up for jobs and growing the economy. The justice department's official backgrounder on remediation agreements states two of the main purposes for remediation agreements: one, to hold the organization accountable for wrongdoing; and, two, reduce the harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties that did not take part in the event. That is what is in the law.
Mr. Speaker, everyone here agrees that the former SNC-Lavalin executives who committed crimes must be brought to justice. However, it seems like everyone here also thinks that thousands of workers should pay for crimes committed by a handful of individuals. SNC-Lavalin has lost $1.6 billion since this crisis started. Next, it will be cutting jobs or having a fire sale and opening itself up to a foreign takeover.Will the Attorney General finally take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, whatever the justification the Prime Minister is going to try to use, he needs to remember one thing: interfering in a criminal court case is always wrong.The Prime Minister thinks he is above the law, that he can use his power to get his well-connected friends off the hook. That is not the way Canada works.If the decision was the former attorney general's to make and hers alone, then why did the Prime Minister continually apply pressure to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to halt the criminal trial of a corporation accused of corruption.My question has to do with the December 18 meeting between the PMO and the office of the former attorney general. We know that Gerald Butts and Katie Telford spoke on behalf of the Prime Minister. We also know that they, along with the Prime Minister, have all the power in the Liberal government.Canadians want to know why the Prime Minister asked those two individuals to meet with the chief of staff to the former attorney general on December 18.
It certainly is not speculation, Mr. Speaker, because those were Wernick's words.Canadians need to know what is not being said by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. It is clear that there was a concerted and sustained effort by the Prime Minister and his senior operatives to make the former attorney general change her mind.If we are not going to get answers in this place, will the Prime Minister appear before the justice committee and finally tell the truth?
Mr. Speaker, as we said, we respect the work of the committees. We have confidence in the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and all the other committees. We will allow them to do their work, because we respect their work.We can see the Conservatives feel differently.
Mr. Speaker, climate change is real and the cost of inaction is enormous. It is disappointing that while climate change is having a real impact on the health and well-being of Canadians, Conservative politicians are wasting millions of taxpayer dollars fighting climate action in court. Meanwhile, the party opposite still has no plan to protect the environment. Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment please update the House on the actions our government is taking to flight climate change while growing our economy?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has told Canadians to heed very carefully the words of Privy Council clerk Michael Wernick. Last week, that clerk said, I do not see where the former Attorney General was a solicitor. The matter was never discussed at cabinet...So she was not giving advice to cabinet. She was not advising the Prime Minister. Therefore, he concluded that solicitor-client privilege did not even apply here.Since the Prime Minister has said we should heed the clerk, I have a simple question. Will he allow the former attorney general to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, it has been three years since the ill-fated Phoenix rollout and we are still hearing the same answers we heard three years ago when the whole thing started. It is a shame. Federal workers have lost homes and have had strain put on their families. Even some simple things would help, like changing the law so that they do not have to pay back the gross pay on the net pay that they received.When SNC-Lavalin wanted legal changes to get out of criminal charges, that got done. In fact, they rolled out the red carpet. Why should workers continue to have their lives put on hold while the government is distracted protecting its well-connected buddies?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that Canadians should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council. During his appearance at committee, the clerk said that cabinet never discussed SNC-Lavalin. However, the Minister of National Revenue said during a radio interview that the decision regarding SNC was made at cabinet.I have a simple question. Who is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what we know. We know that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company. We know that the leader of the NDP met with representatives of the company. We know that the Conservative deputy leader herself said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin.We also know that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed, At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We on this side will continue to respect the independence of the judicial system and the rule of law.
Mr. Speaker, that is speculation.We know very well that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed when he was at the justice committee last week that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the Minister of Justice to take.There are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are appearing and answering tough questions.We, on this side, know that Canadians should have confidence in their institutions. We will not undermine that work because we know the committee is working hard. The Conservatives should stop their doublespeak.
Mr. Speaker, on February 7, the Prime Minister stated that The Globe and Mail report about how he pressured the former attorney general on the SNC-Lavalin case was false.On Thursday, we learned from the Clerk of the Privy Council that there was in fact a concerted effort to interfere in the case against SNC-Lavalin by seeking to influence the then attorney general. Can the Prime Minister tell us which version of the story is true?
Mr. Speaker, only the Prime Minister can answer these questions, and that is why we are asking him to appear before the justice committee.The second question I would like to ask is this. Between September 4 and October 10, did the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office or the Clerk of the Privy Council give assurances to SNC-Lavalin that they would overturn the decision of the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, Michael Wernick testified that on December 19, he met with the Prime Minister and immediately following this meeting he picked up the phone and called the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter. What instructions did the Prime Minister provide Wernick to initiate this call?
Mr. Speaker, our answers were indeed relevant.What I said was that members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights asked questions.They asked for witnesses. The witnesses are appearing. We know members are asking these questions. That is what I am saying. We need to have confidence in the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.Those of us on this side of the House have confidence in them, but apparently the Conservatives do not.
Mr. Speaker, what a milestone. The Phoenix fiasco began three years ago, and the Liberal government still has yet to find a solution.Public servants have been living this nightmare for three years, and the government refuses to say when this fiasco will be fixed. An internal government memo says it could take 10 years. Public servants continue to provide services every day, and they are still having problems getting paid properly.The government has turned its back on these families. Public servants must get the money they are owed immediately.When will the Liberals fix this, once and for all?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I request unanimous consent for the following motion: Recognizing that 2019 marks the 10th anniversary of the end of armed conflict in Sri Lanka and honouring the tens of thousands of lives lost and countless victims displaced during this 26-year war; and recognizing further that the Government of Sri Lanka has made insufficient progress in implementing its commitments on reconciliation, accountability and transitional justice and that frustrations persist among those seeking to heal the wounds of all those who have suffered; therefore, the House of Commons calls on the Government of Sri Lanka to fully implement its obligations under the Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 and to set a clear timeline bound strategy for ensuring a process of accountability that has the trust and confidence of the victims, including the families of those who have disappeared.
Mr. Speaker, we know that Michael Wernick spoke to the former attorney general on the afternoon of December 19. He said he called her about the SNC-Lavalin file. Wernick also said the former attorney general advised the Prime Minister on September 17 that she was not going to intervene.Why did the Prime Minister instruct the clerk to make the phone call if she had already made up her mind?
Mr. Speaker, after changing his story every day for nearly three weeks now, the Prime Minister spent the weekend telling people they should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council.The Clerk of the Privy Council said very clearly that, in his opinion, solicitor-client privilege and cabinet privilege do not apply to the former attorney general. Will the Prime Minister listen to the clerk and allow the former attorney general to tell Canadians the truth?Will he finally allow her to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, on December 5, Gerry Butts met with the former attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin matter. On December 6, the Prime Minister's Office and the Prime Minister himself wrote a letter to SNC-Lavalin, refusing to meet with SNC-Lavalin anymore and directing SNC-Lavalin to the Attorney General's office.I would like to know what happened between December 5 and December 6 that caused the Prime Minister to make that decision.
Mr. Speaker, it is true that just a few days ago, Liberal MPs described getting the former attorney general to testify at parliamentary committee as a witch hunt, a fishing expedition and a distraction. However, if the minister and the Liberal government are so open to hearing from everyone at committee, will they allow the Prime Minister to have his say?
Mr. Speaker, last month the NDP secured a request to have General Motors CEO Mary Barra appear before committee to answer questions on the closure of the Oshawa plant. Instead, the Liberals cut a private deal to excuse her and now we get a lobbyist, and this is because the Prime Minister could not even get his own meeting. So much for not interfering with committees. Meanwhile, U.S. political pressure gets a new deal to extend plant operations and now Canada is left out in the cold. Why are the Liberals letting CEO Barra off the hook?Would the Prime Minister care to explain to Canadians his failures for Oshawa versus the workers of Detroit-Hamtramck, who are getting a new life on their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, the key words are relevant matter.This is not the first time the Liberals have rewritten our laws to suit their friends, but this time they are truly pulling out all the stops.Not only did the Liberals change the Criminal Code to help SNC-Lavalin executives, but once the former attorney general said no, they decided to also change our procurement systems to help SNC-Lavalin.When their rich friends ask for help, the Liberals leap to their aid, but when it comes to ordinary Canadians, the Liberals tell them to wait.When will the Liberals tell the truth and show some transparency?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister cannot seem to take no for an answer. When the former attorney general said that, no, she was not going to give SNC-Lavalin a deal, he was not happy, so he sent in his two top people, Telford and Butts, the two people who spoke directly for him, to do some persuading. On December 18, they meet with the chief of staff to the then attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin deal. What did Telford and Butts say at that meeting, and what did they threaten would happen if SNC-Lavalin did not get the deal?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not seem to understand that it is not the Prime Minister's role to direct prosecutors and judges to give special deals to their friends.The independent Crown prosecutor determined that SNC-Lavalin did not qualify. The former attorney general seems to have made up her mind that it did not qualify. That is when the Prime Minister and his office went to work with unwanted, coordinated and sustained pressure to force the former attorney general to let his well-connected friends off the hook.If the Prime Minister is so sure that he did nothing wrong, will he appear before the justice committee to explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, what is important to note is that the justice committee has members from all parties recognized in this House. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are answering tough questions.However, it is also important to note that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company and the NDP leader met with representatives of the company. The Conservative deputy leader herself, who just asked the question, said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin....At the justice committee, the Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has finally found a line that it seems like he might stick with for more than a day. His story has changed nearly every single day since this scandal first broke, and Canadians deserve answers.The Prime Minister first said that the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail story were false, that no direction or even pressure was applied on the former attorney general. Now we find out from the Clerk of the Privy Council that the Prime Minister's fingerprints are all over this sleazy affair to let his friends off the hook.Once again, if the decision was the former attorney general's and hers alone to make, why did the Prime Minister try so often to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, the director of public prosecutions confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently.The Conservatives keep talking out of both sides of their mouths. In French, they claim they would not dream of hurting the employees of SNC-Lavalin, as the member for CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles says. However, in English, it is a different story, as we heard from the member for Carleton, who is not hiding the fact that he wants to shut this company down. The Conservatives need to stop their doublespeak and start being clear with Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, as the Attorney General of Canada, I cannot interfere in matters currently before the courts. It would be highly inappropriate for me to comment.
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm that the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that two active court cases are not jeopardized. We will continue to work with the studies by the justice committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, we all know that we campaigned in the last election on a commitment to protect our environment and grow the economy at the same time. That includes steps that are going to get our resources to new markets so that our provinces in the western part of our country do not take a haircut on their resources.However, I want to highlight for the member that we are moving forward with a number of measures, including over 50 to contribute to the fight against climate change. We are putting a price on pollution. We are making the largest investment in the history of public transit in Canada. By 2030, 90% of our electricity will be generated from clean resources. We are in a new age in Canadian politics when it comes to protecting our environment. I invite the NDP to join the train.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that the director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan consideration. It also important to note that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner as well as the justice committee. The justice committee has members from both sides present. They are working together to ensure that witnesses are appearing. Witnesses are being called and are answering tough questions from members of Parliament on both sides. I am not sure why the member is undermining that work.
Mr. Speaker, there are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee.That member, very new to this place, should also know that those members have come together to ask for a list of witnesses. It is also important to know that witnesses are appearing at the justice committee. Members of Parliament from both sides are asking tough questions. Witnesses are answering those questions.That member also knows that the Conservatives had a rule book to undermine committees. We have not done such a thing. We have actually increased resources to committees to ensure that committees can do their important work and Canadians can have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that that member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine the work of the justice committee as well as the work of the commissioner. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is looking at this matter. The justice committee is looking at this matter. We are the government that increased resources.Let the record show that on this side we respect the work of committees, we respect the work of officers of Parliament and we respect the independence of the judicial system. That is a clear contrast from what the Conservatives stand for.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights are doing their job. Our government increased resources to committees so that they could do this important work. The clerk told the committee last week that the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the justice minister to make. Although this member claims to have no intention of hurting SNC-Lavalin employees, the member for Carleton said something altogether different.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times in the House, this is a complex matter. There are two ongoing court cases. I cannot comment on this.
Mr. Speaker, after the Prime Minister moved the former attorney general out of her position, she wrote a letter to the public saying that she had spoken truth to power. She rose recently and said that she would like to speak her truth to all Canadians.So far, the Prime Minister has been silencing her, invoking solicitor-client privilege, real or imagined. Today, he says that he will finally allow her to speak, but only to say things that he considers relevant.Will the Prime Minister remove these obstacles to the former attorney general's free speech and let her speak?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been speaking widely about the SNC-Lavalin affair, telling his side of the story, not concerned at all about court proceedings, privilege or cabinet confidence. Apparently that does not matter when he is telling his side of the story. However, now he is saying that he is going to constrain his former attorney general's testimony by limiting it to what he considers to be relevant matters. Could he confirm if relevant matters will include all communications between his office and the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, that is exactly what we are doing.We will stand up for good jobs, including jobs at SNC-Lavalin across the country, for the nearly 10,000 Canadians who work there.As far as remediation agreements are concerned, the Department of Justice's official backgrounder confirms that there are two purposes for such agreements: to hold the organization accountable for the wrongdoing; and, importantly, to reduce harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties who did not take part
Mr. Speaker, I went to Detroit and met with Mary Barra just a few weeks ago and I made it very clear that they are making a big mistake by leaving Oshawa. We as a government will not make that mistake and turn our backs on auto workers. We will continue to defend auto workers. We have been very clear, with Jerry Dias's involvement when it comes to Unifor that for any solution that it has between the unions and GM, we will be at the table as part of the solution. We will continue to defend auto workers and we will continue to invest in this very important sector.
Mr. Speaker, once again, he cannot provide simple, straightforward answers. Contrary to the Prime Minister's assertions, the report is true. He met with the Clerk of the Privy Council at noon on December 19. Immediately afterward, the clerk called the former attorney general to inform her that the Prime Minister was quite anxious.When the Prime Minister ordered the clerk to call the former attorney general, what did he tell him?
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, the director of public prosecutions decided that SNC-Lavalin was not entitled to a remediation agreement, and the blitz to try to influence the former attorney general began. The Prime Minister tried to influence her at a meeting on September 17, and his top adviser and friend followed suit on December 5. Many others in the Prime Minister's inner circle also tried the same trick. Did the Prime Minister clearly try to influence the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, right now, the government is changing its story day by day, getting up to all kinds of monkey business in an attempt to influence our justice system. The director of public prosecutions made her decision on September 4. She confirmed that decision on October 9. Nevertheless, the Prime Minister and his cronies repeatedly tried to get her to change her mind.We want to know whether the Prime Minister will agree to appear before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to answer all of the opposition's questions.
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to make claims, but let us look at the facts. The director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently. The Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the former Minister of Justice to take. On this side of the House, we respect the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. We know that the members are capable of doing their job, and we have confidence in their work.
Mr. Speaker, here is a very simple and easy question for the Prime Minister to answer. On December 5, the Prime Minister's principal secretary met with the former attorney general in the bar at the Château Laurier. It appears that the purpose of that meeting was to put even more pressure on the former attorney general to change her mind and to allow a special deal to be made over the objections of independent Crown prosecutors.Was the Prime Minister aware that his principal secretary was meeting with the former attorney general on December 5?
Mr. Speaker, last week the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We will consistently, and regularly, stand up for jobs across the country, and will do so in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary and the integrity of our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, we know the Prime Minister sent in his highest-ranking people, who speak on his behalf, to pressure and persuade the former attorney general through her chief of staff. Canadians deserve to know what kind of pressure was applied to their attorney general. The only person who knows is the Prime Minister, and the buck stops with him. Therefore, will he come to the justice committee? Will he finally stop evading and answer some questions truthfully and openly?
Mr. Speaker, many young Canadians dream of home ownership, yet that dream is becoming more difficult every day. Many residents are concerned that the mortgage stress test has made home ownership for the first time extremely difficult and has contributed to a slowdown in the housing market.Will the finance minister please update the House on what measures the government is exploring to help Canadians become homeowners?
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that it was actually this government under the leadership of this Prime Minister that increased resources to committees.The record should also show that it was that member's party that put out a rule book that would undermine the work of committees. They had no respect for committees over 10 years of Stephen Harper. What is clear is that the Conservatives have chosen
Mr. Speaker, we are following the clear guidelines that have been given to us by the Federal Court of Appeal. We instructed the National Energy Board to undertake this review, and they have given us that report on Friday. We will carefully analyze and look at it.At the same time, we are moving forward with meaningful consultation with indigenous communities to understand their concerns and offer accommodation and work with them to find solutions to the outstanding issues.
Mr. Speaker, the member can accuse me, but the one thing we Conservatives want is the truth, her truth.The Prime Minister changed his story every day for two weeks. No two versions have been the same. On top of that, he has given himself the right to speak on behalf of the former attorney general.Will the former attorney general be allowed to speak freely at this much-touted committee?
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, SNC was told there was no deal. On September 17, the Prime Minister and Privy Council clerk met with the former attorney general to discuss SNC. On December 5, the Prime Minister's top staffer, Gerry Butts, met with her to discuss it. On December 18, the Prime Minister's two top staffers met with her chief of staff to discuss it. On December 19, the Privy Council clerk called her to discuss it. On January 14, the former attorney general was fired from her role. How can Canadians, who are reviewing these facts, not conclude there was relentless pressure to have her change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, I completely agree that Canada's public servants deserve to be paid on time and accurately for the important work they do. More than 170,000 cases have been cleared from the backlog since January 2018, and we are working very hard to accelerate the progress being made every month.We continue doing this important work. We will not stop until this is fixed.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his hard work and tireless advocacy to help protect our climate.Economists are virtually unanimous that the best thing we can be doing to transition to a low-carbon economy is to put a price on pollution that will bring emissions down and put more money in the pockets of Canadian families. However, it is only one of 50 measures that we are taking to fight climate change, along with phasing out coal, so we can get to 90% generation of our electricity by clean sources by 2030. We are improving public transit, with the largest investment in the history of Canada. We are investing in energy efficiency, clean technologies and green infrastructure. While some Conservatives want to oppose meaningful action on climate change, like Doug Ford and the leader of the
Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals do not support the RCMP and community safety programs, people and communities suffer.In Pelican Narrows, the community safety officer program is responsible for recruiting and training officers to do nightly patrols, but they lack the resources to bring in the talent they need. People's safety should be a priority, yet the Liberal government is failing to act. When will the Liberals commit to the safety of people in northern Saskatchewan and dedicate funding for their community safety programs?
Mr. Speaker, there is no more important job than to care for our loved ones. We welcome caregivers to Canada every year, mainly from the Philippines, to care for our children and our parents. However, as they care for our families they leave their own behind, often enduring a painful separation of years before they can be reunited. I have met these caregivers and heard their stories. Canada needs to do better. Could the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship tell us what the government is doing to reunite caregiver families?
Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister cannot answer these questions, perhaps the government House leader can answer the question.If she has so much faith in the justice committee now that it is finally starting to allow witnesses to appear, even though originally it seems her office directed the committee members not to allow that to happenif she has so much confidence and faith in the justice committee's work, will Liberal members be supporting this motion before the House today to force the Prime Minister to attend and explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, as I said, since January 2018, the backlog has gone down by 160,000 cases. We are doing whatever we possibly can to make sure our public servants are paid on time and accurately. In May of this year, all the departments will be serviced by pay pods. Employees are satisfied by this movement. It was an employee-generated idea.This will be resolved. We will stabilize the system. Yes, it is taking longer than we wish, but rest assured, this is my number one priority.
Mr. Speaker, we fight day in and day out for our auto workers. Since 2015, we have seen historic investments of $6 billion in the automotive sector because our Prime Minister has made the automotive sector a priority for our government. We have seen significant investments in the auto supply sector, and this has resulted in thousands of jobs being created.Compare that with the Conservatives. For the first three years of their mandate, they lost 50,000 jobs in the automotive sector and 20,000 before the recession even hit. We have seen thousands of jobs created since 2015. We will continue to fight for the auto worker.
Mr. Speaker, it is now clear that Liberals have given up on GM workers and their families in Oshawa without even trying.Do members know what the government did in the U.S.? U.S. representatives fought and succeeded in pressuring GM to extend the operation of the Detroit-Hamtramck plant for the life of the current collective agreement. That is the bare minimum that workers in Oshawa have been asking for and the Liberals did not even try to secure that with GM. Canadian workers deserve better than this. Layoffs start in two weeks.Why will the Prime Minister not fight for their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that under 10 years of Stephen Harper, they had no respect for committees. The Conservatives have chosen a new leader, but it remains a party of Stephen Harper that has no regard for committees, and the Conservatives continue to undermine their work. We on this side know that Canadians should have confidence in their decisions. We will let the committees do their important work.
Yes, Mr. Speaker. Later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has claimed that climate change is the fight of his life. He has claimed that there is no relationship more important to him than that with indigenous peoples and he has claimed that he really, really cares about protecting our west coast.When the National Energy Board said that the Trans Mountain pipeline will, one, have major impacts on our climate; two, significantly damage indigenous rights and title; and three, potentially wipe out the southern resident killer whale population, it seems like this decision would be a no-brainer. This is a test for the Prime Minister. Between the principles he claims to hold and a pipeline he so desperately wants to build, what is it going to be?
Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, I was pleased to support the initiative just read out by my colleague. It is interesting it came from him. However, I want to read out a slightly different resolution and maybe this will have the full support of the House: That the House call on the Government of Canada to strongly push for the full implementation of Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 within a clearly-specified time frame; call on the Government of Sri Lanka to implement resolution 30/1 within a clearly specified time frame, recognizing the resolution was co-sponsored by the Government of Sri Lanka; and invites the Minister of International Development to table a report in the House at her earliest convenience explaining development projects funded in Sri Lanka and their impact on the implementation of resolution 30/1 and on peace and reconciliation in general.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Cambridge for highlighting the challenges that people with disabilities in Canada face when it comes to finding an accessible home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy a year ago. That is why the national co-investment fund requires 25% of the newly constructed or repaired units to be fully accessible. That is why we will continue to fight very hard so that every Canadian with a disability has access to a safe, affordable and accessible home.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is a good thing that we take seriously our responsibility to stand up for jobs and grow the economy. That is what we will continue to do, in a way that respects our institutions and the independence of our judiciary.Those are the responsibilities that we have accepted from the very beginning, and that is the work we are doing to create economic growth for all Canadians while defending our institutions, which are so important for our democracy.
Mr. Speaker, as I will continue to say, members of the justice committee from both sides of the House are working together. They are asking witnesses to appear. Witnesses are appearing and they are responding to questions. We, on this side, will always have confidence in our committee system. It is important work that they do. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is also looking at this file. We, on this side, will not undermine that work.That is a clear contrast between the Conservatives and the Liberals. We will not undermine committees. We will not undermine officers of Parliament. We will not undermine the independence of the justice system.
Mr. Speaker, that member just confirmed that the Conservative Party and its members will continue to speculate rather than look at the facts. That is something Canadians know very well and that is exactly why they are sitting on the opposition benches. That is the party that chose to undermine committees. They put out a rule book to make sure that they could undermine and destroy the work of committees. We on this side will not do that. We are the government that increased resources to committees. We know that they do important work. We know that members on both sides are asking witnesses to appear and we know that witnesses are answering. Let them do their work.
Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what the Prime Minister just said. Later today the government will confirm that the member will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring of course that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, that was interesting and all, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the question.The issue is this: last week, Canada's top bureaucrat testified that the Liberal scandal was never ever discussed in cabinet. That is what the top bureaucrat said last week, but two weeks ago, the Minister of National Revenue said on the radio that it had indeed been discussed in cabinet, and three weeks ago, when the scandal broke, the Prime Minister said nobody could talk about it because of cabinet confidence. Which government member is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, I have met with representatives of a variety of communities across the country about community safety initiatives, including special constables and other forms of augmenting regular police service. I am certainly happy to meet with any community in the hon. member's riding if people have concerns they wish to pursue. However, I would note that for the first nations policing program, we have just made the largest investment in Canadian history to try to bring better policing services to indigenous communities across the country.
Mr. Speaker, once again, we on this side respect the work of the justice committee. We on this side have increased resources for all committees, because we know that they do important work. We on this side will also defend and uphold the principles of judicial independence as well as the rule of law. We know that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and the justice committee. We also know that we on this side will fully co-operate with these two investigations, because they are doing important work. What is clear is that the member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine their work. We will not do that on this side. Canadians have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, we will consistently stand up for hard-working Canadians right across the country and be not the least bit apologetic about standing up for good jobs, wherever they are, across the country.I am pleased also to confirm that later today the government will confirm that the member for Vancouver Granville will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We of course continue to welcome the studies by the Ethics Commissioner and the parliamentary committee.
Mr. Speaker, once again, I confirm what the Prime Minister said earlier today in question period, that the member will be able to address relevant matters in front of the committee while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the work of the justice committee, as well as that of the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians living with disabilities face unique challenges when it comes to finding accessible, affordable housing. In my riding of Cambridge, there has been significant investment in projects targeted to help, like the new accessible, affordable housing at 175 Hespeler Road.Could the minister responsible for housing tell the House how Canada's national housing strategy is helping people living with disabilities find places to call home that meet their unique needs?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said from the very beginning, we have consistently and continually stood up for the close to 9,000 jobs at SNC-Lavalin, indeed, good jobs right across the country. That is what Canadians expect of this government, to stick up for jobs, to create new ones and to make sure we grow our economy in ways that benefit everyone. That is exactly what we will continue to do and we will continue to do it in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary, that respects the integrity of our judicial systems and always respects the rules and norms that govern our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her tireless advocacy on behalf of caregivers.Thousands of families rely on caregivers to care for their loved ones. Caregivers have often faced too many barriers to reuniting with their own families. Our government is introducing a program that will provide a faster path for permanent residency, better protections against abuse, and for the first time, we will allow caregivers to bring their own spouses and children with them.Our government has eliminated the caregiver backlog left behind by the Conservatives, from five years to 12 months. We will always stand for family reunification.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to say that we have been very focused on ensuring that our housing market is effective so Canadians can not only recognize that their investment in their home is stable, but also so they can have an aspiration to acquiring a home for them and their families.Over the last three years, we have put in measures for affordable housing across our country. We have put in measures to make sure people are protected. We will continue to think about how we can ensure that middle-class Canadians have the possibility to raise their families and have home ownership as part of that dream.
Mr. Speaker, we have consistently done what we have always promised Canadians we would do, which is to stand up for good jobs and create economic growth while upholding the integrity and independence of our judicial system and respect for our institutions.That is what this government has always done, and that is what this government will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to confirm that the Conservatives will speculate rather than look at the facts. We on this side have respect for the justice committee and we have respect for the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner because they are doing their important work. We know that both the justice committee and the commissioner are looking at this file. We will not undermine the work of the justice committee. We on this side will not undermine the work of officers of Parliament. We on this side will not undermine the independence of the judicial system, as the Conservatives continue to do.
Most positive speeches
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to confirm that the Conservatives will speculate rather than look at the facts. We on this side have respect for the justice committee and we have respect for the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner because they are doing their important work. We know that both the justice committee and the commissioner are looking at this file. We will not undermine the work of the justice committee. We on this side will not undermine the work of officers of Parliament. We on this side will not undermine the independence of the judicial system, as the Conservatives continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, we have consistently done what we have always promised Canadians we would do, which is to stand up for good jobs and create economic growth while upholding the integrity and independence of our judicial system and respect for our institutions.That is what this government has always done, and that is what this government will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to say that we have been very focused on ensuring that our housing market is effective so Canadians can not only recognize that their investment in their home is stable, but also so they can have an aspiration to acquiring a home for them and their families.Over the last three years, we have put in measures for affordable housing across our country. We have put in measures to make sure people are protected. We will continue to think about how we can ensure that middle-class Canadians have the possibility to raise their families and have home ownership as part of that dream.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her tireless advocacy on behalf of caregivers.Thousands of families rely on caregivers to care for their loved ones. Caregivers have often faced too many barriers to reuniting with their own families. Our government is introducing a program that will provide a faster path for permanent residency, better protections against abuse, and for the first time, we will allow caregivers to bring their own spouses and children with them.Our government has eliminated the caregiver backlog left behind by the Conservatives, from five years to 12 months. We will always stand for family reunification.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said from the very beginning, we have consistently and continually stood up for the close to 9,000 jobs at SNC-Lavalin, indeed, good jobs right across the country. That is what Canadians expect of this government, to stick up for jobs, to create new ones and to make sure we grow our economy in ways that benefit everyone. That is exactly what we will continue to do and we will continue to do it in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary, that respects the integrity of our judicial systems and always respects the rules and norms that govern our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians living with disabilities face unique challenges when it comes to finding accessible, affordable housing. In my riding of Cambridge, there has been significant investment in projects targeted to help, like the new accessible, affordable housing at 175 Hespeler Road.Could the minister responsible for housing tell the House how Canada's national housing strategy is helping people living with disabilities find places to call home that meet their unique needs?
Mr. Speaker, once again, I confirm what the Prime Minister said earlier today in question period, that the member will be able to address relevant matters in front of the committee while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the work of the justice committee, as well as that of the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, we will consistently stand up for hard-working Canadians right across the country and be not the least bit apologetic about standing up for good jobs, wherever they are, across the country.I am pleased also to confirm that later today the government will confirm that the member for Vancouver Granville will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We of course continue to welcome the studies by the Ethics Commissioner and the parliamentary committee.
Mr. Speaker, once again, we on this side respect the work of the justice committee. We on this side have increased resources for all committees, because we know that they do important work. We on this side will also defend and uphold the principles of judicial independence as well as the rule of law. We know that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and the justice committee. We also know that we on this side will fully co-operate with these two investigations, because they are doing important work. What is clear is that the member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine their work. We will not do that on this side. Canadians have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, I have met with representatives of a variety of communities across the country about community safety initiatives, including special constables and other forms of augmenting regular police service. I am certainly happy to meet with any community in the hon. member's riding if people have concerns they wish to pursue. However, I would note that for the first nations policing program, we have just made the largest investment in Canadian history to try to bring better policing services to indigenous communities across the country.
Mr. Speaker, that was interesting and all, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the question.The issue is this: last week, Canada's top bureaucrat testified that the Liberal scandal was never ever discussed in cabinet. That is what the top bureaucrat said last week, but two weeks ago, the Minister of National Revenue said on the radio that it had indeed been discussed in cabinet, and three weeks ago, when the scandal broke, the Prime Minister said nobody could talk about it because of cabinet confidence. Which government member is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring of course that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what the Prime Minister just said. Later today the government will confirm that the member will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, that member just confirmed that the Conservative Party and its members will continue to speculate rather than look at the facts. That is something Canadians know very well and that is exactly why they are sitting on the opposition benches. That is the party that chose to undermine committees. They put out a rule book to make sure that they could undermine and destroy the work of committees. We on this side will not do that. We are the government that increased resources to committees. We know that they do important work. We know that members on both sides are asking witnesses to appear and we know that witnesses are answering. Let them do their work.
Mr. Speaker, as I will continue to say, members of the justice committee from both sides of the House are working together. They are asking witnesses to appear. Witnesses are appearing and they are responding to questions. We, on this side, will always have confidence in our committee system. It is important work that they do. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is also looking at this file. We, on this side, will not undermine that work.That is a clear contrast between the Conservatives and the Liberals. We will not undermine committees. We will not undermine officers of Parliament. We will not undermine the independence of the justice system.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is a good thing that we take seriously our responsibility to stand up for jobs and grow the economy. That is what we will continue to do, in a way that respects our institutions and the independence of our judiciary.Those are the responsibilities that we have accepted from the very beginning, and that is the work we are doing to create economic growth for all Canadians while defending our institutions, which are so important for our democracy.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Cambridge for highlighting the challenges that people with disabilities in Canada face when it comes to finding an accessible home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy a year ago. That is why the national co-investment fund requires 25% of the newly constructed or repaired units to be fully accessible. That is why we will continue to fight very hard so that every Canadian with a disability has access to a safe, affordable and accessible home.
Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, I was pleased to support the initiative just read out by my colleague. It is interesting it came from him. However, I want to read out a slightly different resolution and maybe this will have the full support of the House: That the House call on the Government of Canada to strongly push for the full implementation of Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 within a clearly-specified time frame; call on the Government of Sri Lanka to implement resolution 30/1 within a clearly specified time frame, recognizing the resolution was co-sponsored by the Government of Sri Lanka; and invites the Minister of International Development to table a report in the House at her earliest convenience explaining development projects funded in Sri Lanka and their impact on the implementation of resolution 30/1 and on peace and reconciliation in general.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has claimed that climate change is the fight of his life. He has claimed that there is no relationship more important to him than that with indigenous peoples and he has claimed that he really, really cares about protecting our west coast.When the National Energy Board said that the Trans Mountain pipeline will, one, have major impacts on our climate; two, significantly damage indigenous rights and title; and three, potentially wipe out the southern resident killer whale population, it seems like this decision would be a no-brainer. This is a test for the Prime Minister. Between the principles he claims to hold and a pipeline he so desperately wants to build, what is it going to be?
Yes, Mr. Speaker. Later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that under 10 years of Stephen Harper, they had no respect for committees. The Conservatives have chosen a new leader, but it remains a party of Stephen Harper that has no regard for committees, and the Conservatives continue to undermine their work. We on this side know that Canadians should have confidence in their decisions. We will let the committees do their important work.
Mr. Speaker, it is now clear that Liberals have given up on GM workers and their families in Oshawa without even trying.Do members know what the government did in the U.S.? U.S. representatives fought and succeeded in pressuring GM to extend the operation of the Detroit-Hamtramck plant for the life of the current collective agreement. That is the bare minimum that workers in Oshawa have been asking for and the Liberals did not even try to secure that with GM. Canadian workers deserve better than this. Layoffs start in two weeks.Why will the Prime Minister not fight for their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, we fight day in and day out for our auto workers. Since 2015, we have seen historic investments of $6 billion in the automotive sector because our Prime Minister has made the automotive sector a priority for our government. We have seen significant investments in the auto supply sector, and this has resulted in thousands of jobs being created.Compare that with the Conservatives. For the first three years of their mandate, they lost 50,000 jobs in the automotive sector and 20,000 before the recession even hit. We have seen thousands of jobs created since 2015. We will continue to fight for the auto worker.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, since January 2018, the backlog has gone down by 160,000 cases. We are doing whatever we possibly can to make sure our public servants are paid on time and accurately. In May of this year, all the departments will be serviced by pay pods. Employees are satisfied by this movement. It was an employee-generated idea.This will be resolved. We will stabilize the system. Yes, it is taking longer than we wish, but rest assured, this is my number one priority.
Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister cannot answer these questions, perhaps the government House leader can answer the question.If she has so much faith in the justice committee now that it is finally starting to allow witnesses to appear, even though originally it seems her office directed the committee members not to allow that to happenif she has so much confidence and faith in the justice committee's work, will Liberal members be supporting this motion before the House today to force the Prime Minister to attend and explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, there is no more important job than to care for our loved ones. We welcome caregivers to Canada every year, mainly from the Philippines, to care for our children and our parents. However, as they care for our families they leave their own behind, often enduring a painful separation of years before they can be reunited. I have met these caregivers and heard their stories. Canada needs to do better. Could the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship tell us what the government is doing to reunite caregiver families?
Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals do not support the RCMP and community safety programs, people and communities suffer.In Pelican Narrows, the community safety officer program is responsible for recruiting and training officers to do nightly patrols, but they lack the resources to bring in the talent they need. People's safety should be a priority, yet the Liberal government is failing to act. When will the Liberals commit to the safety of people in northern Saskatchewan and dedicate funding for their community safety programs?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his hard work and tireless advocacy to help protect our climate.Economists are virtually unanimous that the best thing we can be doing to transition to a low-carbon economy is to put a price on pollution that will bring emissions down and put more money in the pockets of Canadian families. However, it is only one of 50 measures that we are taking to fight climate change, along with phasing out coal, so we can get to 90% generation of our electricity by clean sources by 2030. We are improving public transit, with the largest investment in the history of Canada. We are investing in energy efficiency, clean technologies and green infrastructure. While some Conservatives want to oppose meaningful action on climate change, like Doug Ford and the leader of the
Mr. Speaker, I completely agree that Canada's public servants deserve to be paid on time and accurately for the important work they do. More than 170,000 cases have been cleared from the backlog since January 2018, and we are working very hard to accelerate the progress being made every month.We continue doing this important work. We will not stop until this is fixed.
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, SNC was told there was no deal. On September 17, the Prime Minister and Privy Council clerk met with the former attorney general to discuss SNC. On December 5, the Prime Minister's top staffer, Gerry Butts, met with her to discuss it. On December 18, the Prime Minister's two top staffers met with her chief of staff to discuss it. On December 19, the Privy Council clerk called her to discuss it. On January 14, the former attorney general was fired from her role. How can Canadians, who are reviewing these facts, not conclude there was relentless pressure to have her change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, the member can accuse me, but the one thing we Conservatives want is the truth, her truth.The Prime Minister changed his story every day for two weeks. No two versions have been the same. On top of that, he has given himself the right to speak on behalf of the former attorney general.Will the former attorney general be allowed to speak freely at this much-touted committee?
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that it was actually this government under the leadership of this Prime Minister that increased resources to committees.The record should also show that it was that member's party that put out a rule book that would undermine the work of committees. They had no respect for committees over 10 years of Stephen Harper. What is clear is that the Conservatives have chosen
Mr. Speaker, we are following the clear guidelines that have been given to us by the Federal Court of Appeal. We instructed the National Energy Board to undertake this review, and they have given us that report on Friday. We will carefully analyze and look at it.At the same time, we are moving forward with meaningful consultation with indigenous communities to understand their concerns and offer accommodation and work with them to find solutions to the outstanding issues.
Mr. Speaker, many young Canadians dream of home ownership, yet that dream is becoming more difficult every day. Many residents are concerned that the mortgage stress test has made home ownership for the first time extremely difficult and has contributed to a slowdown in the housing market.Will the finance minister please update the House on what measures the government is exploring to help Canadians become homeowners?
Mr. Speaker, last week the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We will consistently, and regularly, stand up for jobs across the country, and will do so in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary and the integrity of our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, we know the Prime Minister sent in his highest-ranking people, who speak on his behalf, to pressure and persuade the former attorney general through her chief of staff. Canadians deserve to know what kind of pressure was applied to their attorney general. The only person who knows is the Prime Minister, and the buck stops with him. Therefore, will he come to the justice committee? Will he finally stop evading and answer some questions truthfully and openly?
Mr. Speaker, here is a very simple and easy question for the Prime Minister to answer. On December 5, the Prime Minister's principal secretary met with the former attorney general in the bar at the Château Laurier. It appears that the purpose of that meeting was to put even more pressure on the former attorney general to change her mind and to allow a special deal to be made over the objections of independent Crown prosecutors.Was the Prime Minister aware that his principal secretary was meeting with the former attorney general on December 5?
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to make claims, but let us look at the facts. The director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently. The Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the former Minister of Justice to take. On this side of the House, we respect the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. We know that the members are capable of doing their job, and we have confidence in their work.
Mr. Speaker, right now, the government is changing its story day by day, getting up to all kinds of monkey business in an attempt to influence our justice system. The director of public prosecutions made her decision on September 4. She confirmed that decision on October 9. Nevertheless, the Prime Minister and his cronies repeatedly tried to get her to change her mind.We want to know whether the Prime Minister will agree to appear before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to answer all of the opposition's questions.
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, the director of public prosecutions decided that SNC-Lavalin was not entitled to a remediation agreement, and the blitz to try to influence the former attorney general began. The Prime Minister tried to influence her at a meeting on September 17, and his top adviser and friend followed suit on December 5. Many others in the Prime Minister's inner circle also tried the same trick. Did the Prime Minister clearly try to influence the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, once again, he cannot provide simple, straightforward answers. Contrary to the Prime Minister's assertions, the report is true. He met with the Clerk of the Privy Council at noon on December 19. Immediately afterward, the clerk called the former attorney general to inform her that the Prime Minister was quite anxious.When the Prime Minister ordered the clerk to call the former attorney general, what did he tell him?
Mr. Speaker, I went to Detroit and met with Mary Barra just a few weeks ago and I made it very clear that they are making a big mistake by leaving Oshawa. We as a government will not make that mistake and turn our backs on auto workers. We will continue to defend auto workers. We have been very clear, with Jerry Dias's involvement when it comes to Unifor that for any solution that it has between the unions and GM, we will be at the table as part of the solution. We will continue to defend auto workers and we will continue to invest in this very important sector.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, that is exactly what we are doing.We will stand up for good jobs, including jobs at SNC-Lavalin across the country, for the nearly 10,000 Canadians who work there.As far as remediation agreements are concerned, the Department of Justice's official backgrounder confirms that there are two purposes for such agreements: to hold the organization accountable for the wrongdoing; and, importantly, to reduce harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties who did not take part
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been speaking widely about the SNC-Lavalin affair, telling his side of the story, not concerned at all about court proceedings, privilege or cabinet confidence. Apparently that does not matter when he is telling his side of the story. However, now he is saying that he is going to constrain his former attorney general's testimony by limiting it to what he considers to be relevant matters. Could he confirm if relevant matters will include all communications between his office and the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, after the Prime Minister moved the former attorney general out of her position, she wrote a letter to the public saying that she had spoken truth to power. She rose recently and said that she would like to speak her truth to all Canadians.So far, the Prime Minister has been silencing her, invoking solicitor-client privilege, real or imagined. Today, he says that he will finally allow her to speak, but only to say things that he considers relevant.Will the Prime Minister remove these obstacles to the former attorney general's free speech and let her speak?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that that member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine the work of the justice committee as well as the work of the commissioner. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is looking at this matter. The justice committee is looking at this matter. We are the government that increased resources.Let the record show that on this side we respect the work of committees, we respect the work of officers of Parliament and we respect the independence of the judicial system. That is a clear contrast from what the Conservatives stand for.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights are doing their job. Our government increased resources to committees so that they could do this important work. The clerk told the committee last week that the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the justice minister to make. Although this member claims to have no intention of hurting SNC-Lavalin employees, the member for Carleton said something altogether different.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times in the House, this is a complex matter. There are two ongoing court cases. I cannot comment on this.
Mr. Speaker, there are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee.That member, very new to this place, should also know that those members have come together to ask for a list of witnesses. It is also important to know that witnesses are appearing at the justice committee. Members of Parliament from both sides are asking tough questions. Witnesses are answering those questions.That member also knows that the Conservatives had a rule book to undermine committees. We have not done such a thing. We have actually increased resources to committees to ensure that committees can do their important work and Canadians can have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that the director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan consideration. It also important to note that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner as well as the justice committee. The justice committee has members from both sides present. They are working together to ensure that witnesses are appearing. Witnesses are being called and are answering tough questions from members of Parliament on both sides. I am not sure why the member is undermining that work.
Mr. Speaker, we all know that we campaigned in the last election on a commitment to protect our environment and grow the economy at the same time. That includes steps that are going to get our resources to new markets so that our provinces in the western part of our country do not take a haircut on their resources.However, I want to highlight for the member that we are moving forward with a number of measures, including over 50 to contribute to the fight against climate change. We are putting a price on pollution. We are making the largest investment in the history of public transit in Canada. By 2030, 90% of our electricity will be generated from clean resources. We are in a new age in Canadian politics when it comes to protecting our environment. I invite the NDP to join the train.
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm that the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that two active court cases are not jeopardized. We will continue to work with the studies by the justice committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, as the Attorney General of Canada, I cannot interfere in matters currently before the courts. It would be highly inappropriate for me to comment.
Mr. Speaker, the director of public prosecutions confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently.The Conservatives keep talking out of both sides of their mouths. In French, they claim they would not dream of hurting the employees of SNC-Lavalin, as the member for CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles says. However, in English, it is a different story, as we heard from the member for Carleton, who is not hiding the fact that he wants to shut this company down. The Conservatives need to stop their doublespeak and start being clear with Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has finally found a line that it seems like he might stick with for more than a day. His story has changed nearly every single day since this scandal first broke, and Canadians deserve answers.The Prime Minister first said that the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail story were false, that no direction or even pressure was applied on the former attorney general. Now we find out from the Clerk of the Privy Council that the Prime Minister's fingerprints are all over this sleazy affair to let his friends off the hook.Once again, if the decision was the former attorney general's and hers alone to make, why did the Prime Minister try so often to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, what is important to note is that the justice committee has members from all parties recognized in this House. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are answering tough questions.However, it is also important to note that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company and the NDP leader met with representatives of the company. The Conservative deputy leader herself, who just asked the question, said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin....At the justice committee, the Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not seem to understand that it is not the Prime Minister's role to direct prosecutors and judges to give special deals to their friends.The independent Crown prosecutor determined that SNC-Lavalin did not qualify. The former attorney general seems to have made up her mind that it did not qualify. That is when the Prime Minister and his office went to work with unwanted, coordinated and sustained pressure to force the former attorney general to let his well-connected friends off the hook.If the Prime Minister is so sure that he did nothing wrong, will he appear before the justice committee to explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister cannot seem to take no for an answer. When the former attorney general said that, no, she was not going to give SNC-Lavalin a deal, he was not happy, so he sent in his two top people, Telford and Butts, the two people who spoke directly for him, to do some persuading. On December 18, they meet with the chief of staff to the then attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin deal. What did Telford and Butts say at that meeting, and what did they threaten would happen if SNC-Lavalin did not get the deal?
Mr. Speaker, the key words are relevant matter.This is not the first time the Liberals have rewritten our laws to suit their friends, but this time they are truly pulling out all the stops.Not only did the Liberals change the Criminal Code to help SNC-Lavalin executives, but once the former attorney general said no, they decided to also change our procurement systems to help SNC-Lavalin.When their rich friends ask for help, the Liberals leap to their aid, but when it comes to ordinary Canadians, the Liberals tell them to wait.When will the Liberals tell the truth and show some transparency?
Mr. Speaker, last month the NDP secured a request to have General Motors CEO Mary Barra appear before committee to answer questions on the closure of the Oshawa plant. Instead, the Liberals cut a private deal to excuse her and now we get a lobbyist, and this is because the Prime Minister could not even get his own meeting. So much for not interfering with committees. Meanwhile, U.S. political pressure gets a new deal to extend plant operations and now Canada is left out in the cold. Why are the Liberals letting CEO Barra off the hook?Would the Prime Minister care to explain to Canadians his failures for Oshawa versus the workers of Detroit-Hamtramck, who are getting a new life on their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, it is true that just a few days ago, Liberal MPs described getting the former attorney general to testify at parliamentary committee as a witch hunt, a fishing expedition and a distraction. However, if the minister and the Liberal government are so open to hearing from everyone at committee, will they allow the Prime Minister to have his say?
Mr. Speaker, on December 5, Gerry Butts met with the former attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin matter. On December 6, the Prime Minister's Office and the Prime Minister himself wrote a letter to SNC-Lavalin, refusing to meet with SNC-Lavalin anymore and directing SNC-Lavalin to the Attorney General's office.I would like to know what happened between December 5 and December 6 that caused the Prime Minister to make that decision.
Mr. Speaker, after changing his story every day for nearly three weeks now, the Prime Minister spent the weekend telling people they should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council.The Clerk of the Privy Council said very clearly that, in his opinion, solicitor-client privilege and cabinet privilege do not apply to the former attorney general. Will the Prime Minister listen to the clerk and allow the former attorney general to tell Canadians the truth?Will he finally allow her to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, we know that Michael Wernick spoke to the former attorney general on the afternoon of December 19. He said he called her about the SNC-Lavalin file. Wernick also said the former attorney general advised the Prime Minister on September 17 that she was not going to intervene.Why did the Prime Minister instruct the clerk to make the phone call if she had already made up her mind?
Mr. Speaker, what a milestone. The Phoenix fiasco began three years ago, and the Liberal government still has yet to find a solution.Public servants have been living this nightmare for three years, and the government refuses to say when this fiasco will be fixed. An internal government memo says it could take 10 years. Public servants continue to provide services every day, and they are still having problems getting paid properly.The government has turned its back on these families. Public servants must get the money they are owed immediately.When will the Liberals fix this, once and for all?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I request unanimous consent for the following motion: Recognizing that 2019 marks the 10th anniversary of the end of armed conflict in Sri Lanka and honouring the tens of thousands of lives lost and countless victims displaced during this 26-year war; and recognizing further that the Government of Sri Lanka has made insufficient progress in implementing its commitments on reconciliation, accountability and transitional justice and that frustrations persist among those seeking to heal the wounds of all those who have suffered; therefore, the House of Commons calls on the Government of Sri Lanka to fully implement its obligations under the Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 and to set a clear timeline bound strategy for ensuring a process of accountability that has the trust and confidence of the victims, including the families of those who have disappeared.
Mr. Speaker, Michael Wernick testified that on December 19, he met with the Prime Minister and immediately following this meeting he picked up the phone and called the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter. What instructions did the Prime Minister provide Wernick to initiate this call?
Mr. Speaker, our answers were indeed relevant.What I said was that members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights asked questions.They asked for witnesses. The witnesses are appearing. We know members are asking these questions. That is what I am saying. We need to have confidence in the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.Those of us on this side of the House have confidence in them, but apparently the Conservatives do not.
Mr. Speaker, only the Prime Minister can answer these questions, and that is why we are asking him to appear before the justice committee.The second question I would like to ask is this. Between September 4 and October 10, did the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office or the Clerk of the Privy Council give assurances to SNC-Lavalin that they would overturn the decision of the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, on February 7, the Prime Minister stated that The Globe and Mail report about how he pressured the former attorney general on the SNC-Lavalin case was false.On Thursday, we learned from the Clerk of the Privy Council that there was in fact a concerted effort to interfere in the case against SNC-Lavalin by seeking to influence the then attorney general. Can the Prime Minister tell us which version of the story is true?
Mr. Speaker, that is speculation.We know very well that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed when he was at the justice committee last week that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the Minister of Justice to take.There are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are appearing and answering tough questions.We, on this side, know that Canadians should have confidence in their institutions. We will not undermine that work because we know the committee is working hard. The Conservatives should stop their doublespeak.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what we know. We know that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company. We know that the leader of the NDP met with representatives of the company. We know that the Conservative deputy leader herself said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin.We also know that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed, At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We on this side will continue to respect the independence of the judicial system and the rule of law.
Mr. Speaker, it has been three years since the ill-fated Phoenix rollout and we are still hearing the same answers we heard three years ago when the whole thing started. It is a shame. Federal workers have lost homes and have had strain put on their families. Even some simple things would help, like changing the law so that they do not have to pay back the gross pay on the net pay that they received.When SNC-Lavalin wanted legal changes to get out of criminal charges, that got done. In fact, they rolled out the red carpet. Why should workers continue to have their lives put on hold while the government is distracted protecting its well-connected buddies?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that Canadians should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council. During his appearance at committee, the clerk said that cabinet never discussed SNC-Lavalin. However, the Minister of National Revenue said during a radio interview that the decision regarding SNC was made at cabinet.I have a simple question. Who is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has told Canadians to heed very carefully the words of Privy Council clerk Michael Wernick. Last week, that clerk said, I do not see where the former Attorney General was a solicitor. The matter was never discussed at cabinet...So she was not giving advice to cabinet. She was not advising the Prime Minister. Therefore, he concluded that solicitor-client privilege did not even apply here.Since the Prime Minister has said we should heed the clerk, I have a simple question. Will he allow the former attorney general to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, climate change is real and the cost of inaction is enormous. It is disappointing that while climate change is having a real impact on the health and well-being of Canadians, Conservative politicians are wasting millions of taxpayer dollars fighting climate action in court. Meanwhile, the party opposite still has no plan to protect the environment. Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment please update the House on the actions our government is taking to flight climate change while growing our economy?
Mr. Speaker, as we said, we respect the work of the committees. We have confidence in the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and all the other committees. We will allow them to do their work, because we respect their work.We can see the Conservatives feel differently.
It certainly is not speculation, Mr. Speaker, because those were Wernick's words.Canadians need to know what is not being said by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. It is clear that there was a concerted and sustained effort by the Prime Minister and his senior operatives to make the former attorney general change her mind.If we are not going to get answers in this place, will the Prime Minister appear before the justice committee and finally tell the truth?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to halt the criminal trial of a corporation accused of corruption.My question has to do with the December 18 meeting between the PMO and the office of the former attorney general. We know that Gerald Butts and Katie Telford spoke on behalf of the Prime Minister. We also know that they, along with the Prime Minister, have all the power in the Liberal government.Canadians want to know why the Prime Minister asked those two individuals to meet with the chief of staff to the former attorney general on December 18.
Mr. Speaker, whatever the justification the Prime Minister is going to try to use, he needs to remember one thing: interfering in a criminal court case is always wrong.The Prime Minister thinks he is above the law, that he can use his power to get his well-connected friends off the hook. That is not the way Canada works.If the decision was the former attorney general's to make and hers alone, then why did the Prime Minister continually apply pressure to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, everyone here agrees that the former SNC-Lavalin executives who committed crimes must be brought to justice. However, it seems like everyone here also thinks that thousands of workers should pay for crimes committed by a handful of individuals. SNC-Lavalin has lost $1.6 billion since this crisis started. Next, it will be cutting jobs or having a fire sale and opening itself up to a foreign takeover.Will the Attorney General finally take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the member opposite demonstrates that he does not quite understand what he is talking about.We always take seriously our responsibilities, standing up for jobs and growing the economy. The justice department's official backgrounder on remediation agreements states two of the main purposes for remediation agreements: one, to hold the organization accountable for wrongdoing; and, two, reduce the harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties that did not take part in the event. That is what is in the law.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. Canadians deserve transparency. Canadians deserve answers about the Prime Minister's involvement in this sordid affair. Again, what did the Prime Minister say to Wernick that prompted him to pick up the phone and call the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter? What did he say?
Mr. Speaker, the answer is always the same: no comment.The government's primary responsibility is to protect the people. It is disgusting to see the opposition parties bashing SNC-Lavalin workers, who have done nothing wrong. This affects them. They are going to pay the price come the election. The Attorney General is responsible for this matter. He has the power to take over the SNC-Lavalin case at any time and to negotiate a remediation agreement to ensure that the guilty are punished, not thousands of workers.When will he take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are suffering the consequences of climate change and paying the price for the Liberal government's half measures. Last week, the National Energy Board once again recommended that the government move forward with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We know what is coming next. The Liberals are going to hide behind the NEB to justify their bad decision regarding the Trans Mountain pipeline and their failure to protect the environment as they should.How can Quebeckers trust the Liberals not to do the same in the case of energy east?
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to confirm that the Conservatives will speculate rather than look at the facts. We on this side have respect for the justice committee and we have respect for the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner because they are doing their important work. We know that both the justice committee and the commissioner are looking at this file. We will not undermine the work of the justice committee. We on this side will not undermine the work of officers of Parliament. We on this side will not undermine the independence of the judicial system, as the Conservatives continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, we have consistently done what we have always promised Canadians we would do, which is to stand up for good jobs and create economic growth while upholding the integrity and independence of our judicial system and respect for our institutions.That is what this government has always done, and that is what this government will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to say that we have been very focused on ensuring that our housing market is effective so Canadians can not only recognize that their investment in their home is stable, but also so they can have an aspiration to acquiring a home for them and their families.Over the last three years, we have put in measures for affordable housing across our country. We have put in measures to make sure people are protected. We will continue to think about how we can ensure that middle-class Canadians have the possibility to raise their families and have home ownership as part of that dream.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her tireless advocacy on behalf of caregivers.Thousands of families rely on caregivers to care for their loved ones. Caregivers have often faced too many barriers to reuniting with their own families. Our government is introducing a program that will provide a faster path for permanent residency, better protections against abuse, and for the first time, we will allow caregivers to bring their own spouses and children with them.Our government has eliminated the caregiver backlog left behind by the Conservatives, from five years to 12 months. We will always stand for family reunification.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said from the very beginning, we have consistently and continually stood up for the close to 9,000 jobs at SNC-Lavalin, indeed, good jobs right across the country. That is what Canadians expect of this government, to stick up for jobs, to create new ones and to make sure we grow our economy in ways that benefit everyone. That is exactly what we will continue to do and we will continue to do it in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary, that respects the integrity of our judicial systems and always respects the rules and norms that govern our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians living with disabilities face unique challenges when it comes to finding accessible, affordable housing. In my riding of Cambridge, there has been significant investment in projects targeted to help, like the new accessible, affordable housing at 175 Hespeler Road.Could the minister responsible for housing tell the House how Canada's national housing strategy is helping people living with disabilities find places to call home that meet their unique needs?
Mr. Speaker, once again, I confirm what the Prime Minister said earlier today in question period, that the member will be able to address relevant matters in front of the committee while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the work of the justice committee, as well as that of the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, we will consistently stand up for hard-working Canadians right across the country and be not the least bit apologetic about standing up for good jobs, wherever they are, across the country.I am pleased also to confirm that later today the government will confirm that the member for Vancouver Granville will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We of course continue to welcome the studies by the Ethics Commissioner and the parliamentary committee.
Mr. Speaker, once again, we on this side respect the work of the justice committee. We on this side have increased resources for all committees, because we know that they do important work. We on this side will also defend and uphold the principles of judicial independence as well as the rule of law. We know that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and the justice committee. We also know that we on this side will fully co-operate with these two investigations, because they are doing important work. What is clear is that the member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine their work. We will not do that on this side. Canadians have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, I have met with representatives of a variety of communities across the country about community safety initiatives, including special constables and other forms of augmenting regular police service. I am certainly happy to meet with any community in the hon. member's riding if people have concerns they wish to pursue. However, I would note that for the first nations policing program, we have just made the largest investment in Canadian history to try to bring better policing services to indigenous communities across the country.
Mr. Speaker, that was interesting and all, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the question.The issue is this: last week, Canada's top bureaucrat testified that the Liberal scandal was never ever discussed in cabinet. That is what the top bureaucrat said last week, but two weeks ago, the Minister of National Revenue said on the radio that it had indeed been discussed in cabinet, and three weeks ago, when the scandal broke, the Prime Minister said nobody could talk about it because of cabinet confidence. Which government member is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring of course that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what the Prime Minister just said. Later today the government will confirm that the member will be able to address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized. We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, that member just confirmed that the Conservative Party and its members will continue to speculate rather than look at the facts. That is something Canadians know very well and that is exactly why they are sitting on the opposition benches. That is the party that chose to undermine committees. They put out a rule book to make sure that they could undermine and destroy the work of committees. We on this side will not do that. We are the government that increased resources to committees. We know that they do important work. We know that members on both sides are asking witnesses to appear and we know that witnesses are answering. Let them do their work.
Mr. Speaker, as I will continue to say, members of the justice committee from both sides of the House are working together. They are asking witnesses to appear. Witnesses are appearing and they are responding to questions. We, on this side, will always have confidence in our committee system. It is important work that they do. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is also looking at this file. We, on this side, will not undermine that work.That is a clear contrast between the Conservatives and the Liberals. We will not undermine committees. We will not undermine officers of Parliament. We will not undermine the independence of the justice system.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is a good thing that we take seriously our responsibility to stand up for jobs and grow the economy. That is what we will continue to do, in a way that respects our institutions and the independence of our judiciary.Those are the responsibilities that we have accepted from the very beginning, and that is the work we are doing to create economic growth for all Canadians while defending our institutions, which are so important for our democracy.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Cambridge for highlighting the challenges that people with disabilities in Canada face when it comes to finding an accessible home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy a year ago. That is why the national co-investment fund requires 25% of the newly constructed or repaired units to be fully accessible. That is why we will continue to fight very hard so that every Canadian with a disability has access to a safe, affordable and accessible home.
Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, I was pleased to support the initiative just read out by my colleague. It is interesting it came from him. However, I want to read out a slightly different resolution and maybe this will have the full support of the House: That the House call on the Government of Canada to strongly push for the full implementation of Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 within a clearly-specified time frame; call on the Government of Sri Lanka to implement resolution 30/1 within a clearly specified time frame, recognizing the resolution was co-sponsored by the Government of Sri Lanka; and invites the Minister of International Development to table a report in the House at her earliest convenience explaining development projects funded in Sri Lanka and their impact on the implementation of resolution 30/1 and on peace and reconciliation in general.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has claimed that climate change is the fight of his life. He has claimed that there is no relationship more important to him than that with indigenous peoples and he has claimed that he really, really cares about protecting our west coast.When the National Energy Board said that the Trans Mountain pipeline will, one, have major impacts on our climate; two, significantly damage indigenous rights and title; and three, potentially wipe out the southern resident killer whale population, it seems like this decision would be a no-brainer. This is a test for the Prime Minister. Between the principles he claims to hold and a pipeline he so desperately wants to build, what is it going to be?
Yes, Mr. Speaker. Later today the government will confirm the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that the two active court cases are not jeopardized.We continue to welcome the studies by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that under 10 years of Stephen Harper, they had no respect for committees. The Conservatives have chosen a new leader, but it remains a party of Stephen Harper that has no regard for committees, and the Conservatives continue to undermine their work. We on this side know that Canadians should have confidence in their decisions. We will let the committees do their important work.
Mr. Speaker, it is now clear that Liberals have given up on GM workers and their families in Oshawa without even trying.Do members know what the government did in the U.S.? U.S. representatives fought and succeeded in pressuring GM to extend the operation of the Detroit-Hamtramck plant for the life of the current collective agreement. That is the bare minimum that workers in Oshawa have been asking for and the Liberals did not even try to secure that with GM. Canadian workers deserve better than this. Layoffs start in two weeks.Why will the Prime Minister not fight for their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, we fight day in and day out for our auto workers. Since 2015, we have seen historic investments of $6 billion in the automotive sector because our Prime Minister has made the automotive sector a priority for our government. We have seen significant investments in the auto supply sector, and this has resulted in thousands of jobs being created.Compare that with the Conservatives. For the first three years of their mandate, they lost 50,000 jobs in the automotive sector and 20,000 before the recession even hit. We have seen thousands of jobs created since 2015. We will continue to fight for the auto worker.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, since January 2018, the backlog has gone down by 160,000 cases. We are doing whatever we possibly can to make sure our public servants are paid on time and accurately. In May of this year, all the departments will be serviced by pay pods. Employees are satisfied by this movement. It was an employee-generated idea.This will be resolved. We will stabilize the system. Yes, it is taking longer than we wish, but rest assured, this is my number one priority.
Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister cannot answer these questions, perhaps the government House leader can answer the question.If she has so much faith in the justice committee now that it is finally starting to allow witnesses to appear, even though originally it seems her office directed the committee members not to allow that to happenif she has so much confidence and faith in the justice committee's work, will Liberal members be supporting this motion before the House today to force the Prime Minister to attend and explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, there is no more important job than to care for our loved ones. We welcome caregivers to Canada every year, mainly from the Philippines, to care for our children and our parents. However, as they care for our families they leave their own behind, often enduring a painful separation of years before they can be reunited. I have met these caregivers and heard their stories. Canada needs to do better. Could the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship tell us what the government is doing to reunite caregiver families?
Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals do not support the RCMP and community safety programs, people and communities suffer.In Pelican Narrows, the community safety officer program is responsible for recruiting and training officers to do nightly patrols, but they lack the resources to bring in the talent they need. People's safety should be a priority, yet the Liberal government is failing to act. When will the Liberals commit to the safety of people in northern Saskatchewan and dedicate funding for their community safety programs?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his hard work and tireless advocacy to help protect our climate.Economists are virtually unanimous that the best thing we can be doing to transition to a low-carbon economy is to put a price on pollution that will bring emissions down and put more money in the pockets of Canadian families. However, it is only one of 50 measures that we are taking to fight climate change, along with phasing out coal, so we can get to 90% generation of our electricity by clean sources by 2030. We are improving public transit, with the largest investment in the history of Canada. We are investing in energy efficiency, clean technologies and green infrastructure. While some Conservatives want to oppose meaningful action on climate change, like Doug Ford and the leader of the
Mr. Speaker, I completely agree that Canada's public servants deserve to be paid on time and accurately for the important work they do. More than 170,000 cases have been cleared from the backlog since January 2018, and we are working very hard to accelerate the progress being made every month.We continue doing this important work. We will not stop until this is fixed.
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, SNC was told there was no deal. On September 17, the Prime Minister and Privy Council clerk met with the former attorney general to discuss SNC. On December 5, the Prime Minister's top staffer, Gerry Butts, met with her to discuss it. On December 18, the Prime Minister's two top staffers met with her chief of staff to discuss it. On December 19, the Privy Council clerk called her to discuss it. On January 14, the former attorney general was fired from her role. How can Canadians, who are reviewing these facts, not conclude there was relentless pressure to have her change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, the member can accuse me, but the one thing we Conservatives want is the truth, her truth.The Prime Minister changed his story every day for two weeks. No two versions have been the same. On top of that, he has given himself the right to speak on behalf of the former attorney general.Will the former attorney general be allowed to speak freely at this much-touted committee?
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that it was actually this government under the leadership of this Prime Minister that increased resources to committees.The record should also show that it was that member's party that put out a rule book that would undermine the work of committees. They had no respect for committees over 10 years of Stephen Harper. What is clear is that the Conservatives have chosen
Mr. Speaker, we are following the clear guidelines that have been given to us by the Federal Court of Appeal. We instructed the National Energy Board to undertake this review, and they have given us that report on Friday. We will carefully analyze and look at it.At the same time, we are moving forward with meaningful consultation with indigenous communities to understand their concerns and offer accommodation and work with them to find solutions to the outstanding issues.
Mr. Speaker, many young Canadians dream of home ownership, yet that dream is becoming more difficult every day. Many residents are concerned that the mortgage stress test has made home ownership for the first time extremely difficult and has contributed to a slowdown in the housing market.Will the finance minister please update the House on what measures the government is exploring to help Canadians become homeowners?
Mr. Speaker, last week the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We will consistently, and regularly, stand up for jobs across the country, and will do so in a way that respects the independence of our judiciary and the integrity of our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, we know the Prime Minister sent in his highest-ranking people, who speak on his behalf, to pressure and persuade the former attorney general through her chief of staff. Canadians deserve to know what kind of pressure was applied to their attorney general. The only person who knows is the Prime Minister, and the buck stops with him. Therefore, will he come to the justice committee? Will he finally stop evading and answer some questions truthfully and openly?
Mr. Speaker, here is a very simple and easy question for the Prime Minister to answer. On December 5, the Prime Minister's principal secretary met with the former attorney general in the bar at the Château Laurier. It appears that the purpose of that meeting was to put even more pressure on the former attorney general to change her mind and to allow a special deal to be made over the objections of independent Crown prosecutors.Was the Prime Minister aware that his principal secretary was meeting with the former attorney general on December 5?
Mr. Speaker, the member continues to make claims, but let us look at the facts. The director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently. The Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the former Minister of Justice to take. On this side of the House, we respect the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. We know that the members are capable of doing their job, and we have confidence in their work.
Mr. Speaker, right now, the government is changing its story day by day, getting up to all kinds of monkey business in an attempt to influence our justice system. The director of public prosecutions made her decision on September 4. She confirmed that decision on October 9. Nevertheless, the Prime Minister and his cronies repeatedly tried to get her to change her mind.We want to know whether the Prime Minister will agree to appear before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to answer all of the opposition's questions.
Mr. Speaker, on September 4, the director of public prosecutions decided that SNC-Lavalin was not entitled to a remediation agreement, and the blitz to try to influence the former attorney general began. The Prime Minister tried to influence her at a meeting on September 17, and his top adviser and friend followed suit on December 5. Many others in the Prime Minister's inner circle also tried the same trick. Did the Prime Minister clearly try to influence the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, once again, he cannot provide simple, straightforward answers. Contrary to the Prime Minister's assertions, the report is true. He met with the Clerk of the Privy Council at noon on December 19. Immediately afterward, the clerk called the former attorney general to inform her that the Prime Minister was quite anxious.When the Prime Minister ordered the clerk to call the former attorney general, what did he tell him?
Mr. Speaker, I went to Detroit and met with Mary Barra just a few weeks ago and I made it very clear that they are making a big mistake by leaving Oshawa. We as a government will not make that mistake and turn our backs on auto workers. We will continue to defend auto workers. We have been very clear, with Jerry Dias's involvement when it comes to Unifor that for any solution that it has between the unions and GM, we will be at the table as part of the solution. We will continue to defend auto workers and we will continue to invest in this very important sector.
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, that is exactly what we are doing.We will stand up for good jobs, including jobs at SNC-Lavalin across the country, for the nearly 10,000 Canadians who work there.As far as remediation agreements are concerned, the Department of Justice's official backgrounder confirms that there are two purposes for such agreements: to hold the organization accountable for the wrongdoing; and, importantly, to reduce harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties who did not take part
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been speaking widely about the SNC-Lavalin affair, telling his side of the story, not concerned at all about court proceedings, privilege or cabinet confidence. Apparently that does not matter when he is telling his side of the story. However, now he is saying that he is going to constrain his former attorney general's testimony by limiting it to what he considers to be relevant matters. Could he confirm if relevant matters will include all communications between his office and the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, after the Prime Minister moved the former attorney general out of her position, she wrote a letter to the public saying that she had spoken truth to power. She rose recently and said that she would like to speak her truth to all Canadians.So far, the Prime Minister has been silencing her, invoking solicitor-client privilege, real or imagined. Today, he says that he will finally allow her to speak, but only to say things that he considers relevant.Will the Prime Minister remove these obstacles to the former attorney general's free speech and let her speak?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that that member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine the work of the justice committee as well as the work of the commissioner. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is looking at this matter. The justice committee is looking at this matter. We are the government that increased resources.Let the record show that on this side we respect the work of committees, we respect the work of officers of Parliament and we respect the independence of the judicial system. That is a clear contrast from what the Conservatives stand for.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights are doing their job. Our government increased resources to committees so that they could do this important work. The clerk told the committee last week that the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the justice minister to make. Although this member claims to have no intention of hurting SNC-Lavalin employees, the member for Carleton said something altogether different.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times in the House, this is a complex matter. There are two ongoing court cases. I cannot comment on this.
Mr. Speaker, there are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee.That member, very new to this place, should also know that those members have come together to ask for a list of witnesses. It is also important to know that witnesses are appearing at the justice committee. Members of Parliament from both sides are asking tough questions. Witnesses are answering those questions.That member also knows that the Conservatives had a rule book to undermine committees. We have not done such a thing. We have actually increased resources to committees to ensure that committees can do their important work and Canadians can have confidence in their institutions.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that the record show that the director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan consideration. It also important to note that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner as well as the justice committee. The justice committee has members from both sides present. They are working together to ensure that witnesses are appearing. Witnesses are being called and are answering tough questions from members of Parliament on both sides. I am not sure why the member is undermining that work.
Mr. Speaker, we all know that we campaigned in the last election on a commitment to protect our environment and grow the economy at the same time. That includes steps that are going to get our resources to new markets so that our provinces in the western part of our country do not take a haircut on their resources.However, I want to highlight for the member that we are moving forward with a number of measures, including over 50 to contribute to the fight against climate change. We are putting a price on pollution. We are making the largest investment in the history of public transit in Canada. By 2030, 90% of our electricity will be generated from clean resources. We are in a new age in Canadian politics when it comes to protecting our environment. I invite the NDP to join the train.
Mr. Speaker, later today the government will confirm that the member can address relevant matters at the committee, while ensuring that two active court cases are not jeopardized. We will continue to work with the studies by the justice committee and the Ethics Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, as the Attorney General of Canada, I cannot interfere in matters currently before the courts. It would be highly inappropriate for me to comment.
Mr. Speaker, the director of public prosecutions confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently.The Conservatives keep talking out of both sides of their mouths. In French, they claim they would not dream of hurting the employees of SNC-Lavalin, as the member for CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles says. However, in English, it is a different story, as we heard from the member for Carleton, who is not hiding the fact that he wants to shut this company down. The Conservatives need to stop their doublespeak and start being clear with Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has finally found a line that it seems like he might stick with for more than a day. His story has changed nearly every single day since this scandal first broke, and Canadians deserve answers.The Prime Minister first said that the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail story were false, that no direction or even pressure was applied on the former attorney general. Now we find out from the Clerk of the Privy Council that the Prime Minister's fingerprints are all over this sleazy affair to let his friends off the hook.Once again, if the decision was the former attorney general's and hers alone to make, why did the Prime Minister try so often to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, what is important to note is that the justice committee has members from all parties recognized in this House. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are answering tough questions.However, it is also important to note that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company and the NDP leader met with representatives of the company. The Conservative deputy leader herself, who just asked the question, said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin....At the justice committee, the Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not seem to understand that it is not the Prime Minister's role to direct prosecutors and judges to give special deals to their friends.The independent Crown prosecutor determined that SNC-Lavalin did not qualify. The former attorney general seems to have made up her mind that it did not qualify. That is when the Prime Minister and his office went to work with unwanted, coordinated and sustained pressure to force the former attorney general to let his well-connected friends off the hook.If the Prime Minister is so sure that he did nothing wrong, will he appear before the justice committee to explain his actions?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister cannot seem to take no for an answer. When the former attorney general said that, no, she was not going to give SNC-Lavalin a deal, he was not happy, so he sent in his two top people, Telford and Butts, the two people who spoke directly for him, to do some persuading. On December 18, they meet with the chief of staff to the then attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin deal. What did Telford and Butts say at that meeting, and what did they threaten would happen if SNC-Lavalin did not get the deal?
Mr. Speaker, the key words are relevant matter.This is not the first time the Liberals have rewritten our laws to suit their friends, but this time they are truly pulling out all the stops.Not only did the Liberals change the Criminal Code to help SNC-Lavalin executives, but once the former attorney general said no, they decided to also change our procurement systems to help SNC-Lavalin.When their rich friends ask for help, the Liberals leap to their aid, but when it comes to ordinary Canadians, the Liberals tell them to wait.When will the Liberals tell the truth and show some transparency?
Mr. Speaker, last month the NDP secured a request to have General Motors CEO Mary Barra appear before committee to answer questions on the closure of the Oshawa plant. Instead, the Liberals cut a private deal to excuse her and now we get a lobbyist, and this is because the Prime Minister could not even get his own meeting. So much for not interfering with committees. Meanwhile, U.S. political pressure gets a new deal to extend plant operations and now Canada is left out in the cold. Why are the Liberals letting CEO Barra off the hook?Would the Prime Minister care to explain to Canadians his failures for Oshawa versus the workers of Detroit-Hamtramck, who are getting a new life on their jobs?
Mr. Speaker, it is true that just a few days ago, Liberal MPs described getting the former attorney general to testify at parliamentary committee as a witch hunt, a fishing expedition and a distraction. However, if the minister and the Liberal government are so open to hearing from everyone at committee, will they allow the Prime Minister to have his say?
Mr. Speaker, on December 5, Gerry Butts met with the former attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin matter. On December 6, the Prime Minister's Office and the Prime Minister himself wrote a letter to SNC-Lavalin, refusing to meet with SNC-Lavalin anymore and directing SNC-Lavalin to the Attorney General's office.I would like to know what happened between December 5 and December 6 that caused the Prime Minister to make that decision.
Mr. Speaker, after changing his story every day for nearly three weeks now, the Prime Minister spent the weekend telling people they should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council.The Clerk of the Privy Council said very clearly that, in his opinion, solicitor-client privilege and cabinet privilege do not apply to the former attorney general. Will the Prime Minister listen to the clerk and allow the former attorney general to tell Canadians the truth?Will he finally allow her to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, we know that Michael Wernick spoke to the former attorney general on the afternoon of December 19. He said he called her about the SNC-Lavalin file. Wernick also said the former attorney general advised the Prime Minister on September 17 that she was not going to intervene.Why did the Prime Minister instruct the clerk to make the phone call if she had already made up her mind?
Mr. Speaker, what a milestone. The Phoenix fiasco began three years ago, and the Liberal government still has yet to find a solution.Public servants have been living this nightmare for three years, and the government refuses to say when this fiasco will be fixed. An internal government memo says it could take 10 years. Public servants continue to provide services every day, and they are still having problems getting paid properly.The government has turned its back on these families. Public servants must get the money they are owed immediately.When will the Liberals fix this, once and for all?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I request unanimous consent for the following motion: Recognizing that 2019 marks the 10th anniversary of the end of armed conflict in Sri Lanka and honouring the tens of thousands of lives lost and countless victims displaced during this 26-year war; and recognizing further that the Government of Sri Lanka has made insufficient progress in implementing its commitments on reconciliation, accountability and transitional justice and that frustrations persist among those seeking to heal the wounds of all those who have suffered; therefore, the House of Commons calls on the Government of Sri Lanka to fully implement its obligations under the Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 and to set a clear timeline bound strategy for ensuring a process of accountability that has the trust and confidence of the victims, including the families of those who have disappeared.
Mr. Speaker, Michael Wernick testified that on December 19, he met with the Prime Minister and immediately following this meeting he picked up the phone and called the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter. What instructions did the Prime Minister provide Wernick to initiate this call?
Mr. Speaker, our answers were indeed relevant.What I said was that members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights asked questions.They asked for witnesses. The witnesses are appearing. We know members are asking these questions. That is what I am saying. We need to have confidence in the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.Those of us on this side of the House have confidence in them, but apparently the Conservatives do not.
Mr. Speaker, only the Prime Minister can answer these questions, and that is why we are asking him to appear before the justice committee.The second question I would like to ask is this. Between September 4 and October 10, did the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office or the Clerk of the Privy Council give assurances to SNC-Lavalin that they would overturn the decision of the former attorney general?
Mr. Speaker, on February 7, the Prime Minister stated that The Globe and Mail report about how he pressured the former attorney general on the SNC-Lavalin case was false.On Thursday, we learned from the Clerk of the Privy Council that there was in fact a concerted effort to interfere in the case against SNC-Lavalin by seeking to influence the then attorney general. Can the Prime Minister tell us which version of the story is true?
Mr. Speaker, that is speculation.We know very well that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed when he was at the justice committee last week that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the Minister of Justice to take.There are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are appearing and answering tough questions.We, on this side, know that Canadians should have confidence in their institutions. We will not undermine that work because we know the committee is working hard. The Conservatives should stop their doublespeak.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what we know. We know that the Conservative leader met with representatives of the company. We know that the leader of the NDP met with representatives of the company. We know that the Conservative deputy leader herself said at the justice committee, I do not want the impression to be on the record that I think there is anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin.We also know that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed, At every opportunity, verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.We on this side will continue to respect the independence of the judicial system and the rule of law.
Mr. Speaker, it has been three years since the ill-fated Phoenix rollout and we are still hearing the same answers we heard three years ago when the whole thing started. It is a shame. Federal workers have lost homes and have had strain put on their families. Even some simple things would help, like changing the law so that they do not have to pay back the gross pay on the net pay that they received.When SNC-Lavalin wanted legal changes to get out of criminal charges, that got done. In fact, they rolled out the red carpet. Why should workers continue to have their lives put on hold while the government is distracted protecting its well-connected buddies?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that Canadians should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council. During his appearance at committee, the clerk said that cabinet never discussed SNC-Lavalin. However, the Minister of National Revenue said during a radio interview that the decision regarding SNC was made at cabinet.I have a simple question. Who is telling the truth?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has told Canadians to heed very carefully the words of Privy Council clerk Michael Wernick. Last week, that clerk said, I do not see where the former Attorney General was a solicitor. The matter was never discussed at cabinet...So she was not giving advice to cabinet. She was not advising the Prime Minister. Therefore, he concluded that solicitor-client privilege did not even apply here.Since the Prime Minister has said we should heed the clerk, I have a simple question. Will he allow the former attorney general to speak her truth?
Mr. Speaker, climate change is real and the cost of inaction is enormous. It is disappointing that while climate change is having a real impact on the health and well-being of Canadians, Conservative politicians are wasting millions of taxpayer dollars fighting climate action in court. Meanwhile, the party opposite still has no plan to protect the environment. Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment please update the House on the actions our government is taking to flight climate change while growing our economy?
Mr. Speaker, as we said, we respect the work of the committees. We have confidence in the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and all the other committees. We will allow them to do their work, because we respect their work.We can see the Conservatives feel differently.
It certainly is not speculation, Mr. Speaker, because those were Wernick's words.Canadians need to know what is not being said by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. It is clear that there was a concerted and sustained effort by the Prime Minister and his senior operatives to make the former attorney general change her mind.If we are not going to get answers in this place, will the Prime Minister appear before the justice committee and finally tell the truth?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to halt the criminal trial of a corporation accused of corruption.My question has to do with the December 18 meeting between the PMO and the office of the former attorney general. We know that Gerald Butts and Katie Telford spoke on behalf of the Prime Minister. We also know that they, along with the Prime Minister, have all the power in the Liberal government.Canadians want to know why the Prime Minister asked those two individuals to meet with the chief of staff to the former attorney general on December 18.
Mr. Speaker, whatever the justification the Prime Minister is going to try to use, he needs to remember one thing: interfering in a criminal court case is always wrong.The Prime Minister thinks he is above the law, that he can use his power to get his well-connected friends off the hook. That is not the way Canada works.If the decision was the former attorney general's to make and hers alone, then why did the Prime Minister continually apply pressure to get her to change her mind?
Mr. Speaker, everyone here agrees that the former SNC-Lavalin executives who committed crimes must be brought to justice. However, it seems like everyone here also thinks that thousands of workers should pay for crimes committed by a handful of individuals. SNC-Lavalin has lost $1.6 billion since this crisis started. Next, it will be cutting jobs or having a fire sale and opening itself up to a foreign takeover.Will the Attorney General finally take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the member opposite demonstrates that he does not quite understand what he is talking about.We always take seriously our responsibilities, standing up for jobs and growing the economy. The justice department's official backgrounder on remediation agreements states two of the main purposes for remediation agreements: one, to hold the organization accountable for wrongdoing; and, two, reduce the harm that a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, shareholders and other third parties that did not take part in the event. That is what is in the law.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. Canadians deserve transparency. Canadians deserve answers about the Prime Minister's involvement in this sordid affair. Again, what did the Prime Minister say to Wernick that prompted him to pick up the phone and call the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter? What did he say?
Mr. Speaker, the answer is always the same: no comment.The government's primary responsibility is to protect the people. It is disgusting to see the opposition parties bashing SNC-Lavalin workers, who have done nothing wrong. This affects them. They are going to pay the price come the election. The Attorney General is responsible for this matter. He has the power to take over the SNC-Lavalin case at any time and to negotiate a remediation agreement to ensure that the guilty are punished, not thousands of workers.When will he take over this case?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are suffering the consequences of climate change and paying the price for the Liberal government's half measures. Last week, the National Energy Board once again recommended that the government move forward with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We know what is coming next. The Liberals are going to hide behind the NEB to justify their bad decision regarding the Trans Mountain pipeline and their failure to protect the environment as they should.How can Quebeckers trust the Liberals not to do the same in the case of energy east?