Most toxic speeches
Mr. Speaker, they stick it to Canadians.Amanda Stevenson, in Lundar, Manitoba, had her dairy fridge quit last week. She has watched these Liberals take money from her in the form of a carbon tax and increase taxes on her small business, and now she had to watch them give money to her competitor for the same thing she cannot afford. That is wrong. We are proud to stand for Amanda, not for SNC-Lavalin and for Loblaws.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, here is what I have to say about the truth: We put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract statements he made online about the Minister of Innovation. He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians. Misleading Canadians, as the opposition leader has done, is never virtuous.
Mr. Speaker, we put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract defamatory online statements he made against the Minister of Innovation.He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, after being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition not only refused to do so, but refused to even say the words.I will give him another opportunity to do so today through his deputy leader. Will he denounce white supremacy, the alt-right movement and finally apologize for sharing a platform with it?
Mr. Speaker, the member for Mount Royal finally dissociated himself from the shameful statements his friend, the mayor of Hampstead, made comparing secularism to ethnic cleansing. The Minister of Justice was asked to condemn the statements yesterday, but he chose not to.Insulting Quebec is apparently okay with the Minister of Justice.Will the minister condemn the statements made by the mayor of Hampstead and pledge not to challenge the secularism bill in court?
Mr. Speaker, after the biggest drug money-laundering case in Canadian history, the federal government is still not doing its part. Expert Peter German's report points out that no federal resources are being used. Literally, in the federal money-laundering unit, no one is working on money laundering. No wonder there are so few federal prosecutions. Drug money laundering is fuelling organized crime and putting communities at risk. Why have the Liberals failed to act?
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time the Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians with false and defamatory statements. As I have said, he has been forced to retract or cease making
Mr. Speaker, as I said, he has been forced to retract or cease making defamatory statements against members of our government repeatedly. The reason we put him on notice is because he is doing so again.Members of the opposition should not have to mislead Canadians in order to make political points. They should stick to the facts. That is what Canadians deserve.
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time this Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians by making false and defamatory statements. As I have already said at least twice, he was forced to withdraw or stop making defamatory statements about members of our government.We had to warn him because he did it again. We know the Conservatives have a history of doing this. It is important for the Conservatives to remember that this is not the right approach.
Mr. Speaker, putting the Conservative leader on notice is something we did because the truth was important.Here is the truth. After being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, climate leaders do not buy pipelines. Feminist prime ministers do not turf female colleagues because they speak truth to power. Humanitarian leaders do not shut their borders to asylum seekers during a refugee crisis. Now the Liberals have snuck in changes to refugee laws in the budget bill. That means people like Seidu Mohammed, an LGBTQ man from Ghana, whose asylum claim was accepted after he crossed irregularly from the U.S., will not even get a chance to apply. Lives are at risk. Will the Prime Minister do what is right and suspend the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's saga of corruption and political interference continues. After pulling out all the stops to kill the story and hide the truth from Canadians, the Prime Minister is now resorting to intimidation tactics in a bid to silence the Leader of the Opposition.Will the Prime Minister make good on his threat as soon as possible? Canadians want the truth.
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. He had to retract some statements he made online in December about the Minister of Innovation.We warned the Leader of the Opposition again because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. Once again, on March 31, the Leader of the Opposition deleted some tweets because he knows he did something he should not have.
Mr. Speaker, yes, we did put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. On March 31, they received a notice and on the same day the Leader of the Opposition deleted his tweets. He knows that he made defamatory remarks, he knows that he must not do this. He was put on notice so that he makes more judicious decisions that are more befitting of his position.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shown little regard for anyone but himself in this ever-deepening scandal. The banal excuses and empty platitudes about his respect for the rule of law and the independence of committees stand in stark contrast to the trail of resignations, removals and character smearing left in his self-serving wake. Again, will the Prime Minister finally order his minions to stand down and encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to freely vote their conscience?
Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that the minister talked about her plan, a plan that taxes Canadians for committing the sin of heating their homes in the winterwhich will do nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissionsand then gives that money to Loblaws to buy freezers. I am really, really good with that not being our plan. I am proud to say we will not do that.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, it is rather ironic that the Liberal Prime Minister is trying to lecture parliamentarians here in the House when he himself violated the Conflict of Interest Act four times. The Prime Minister is claiming that what our leader said is false. He reiterated that yesterday evening.If he wants to demonstrate even a little bit of leadership, will he follow through on his threat so that he can testify under oath in court, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and those Liberals talk about letting members on their side of the House make decisions without direction from the PMO. That certainly was not the case when the Prime Minister unilaterally turfed two female caucus members, in the process breaking the laws of this place. We know what the Prime Minister does to people who do not agree with him. He pressures, intimidates and then threatens them if they do not fall in line, and then he throws them out. Since the leader of the opposition will not be intimidated, and the Prime Minister cannot kick him out of caucus, the Prime Minister has threatened him with a lawsuit. A simple question: When are we going to see you is court?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians know what is happening to women under the Liberals. The former attorney general repeatedly said the pressure she was facing was inappropriate, yet the Prime Minister claimed no one had ever raised concerns with him. However, just last week he was forced to admit that was false. Now he is threatening to take our leader to court for pointing out that he has been misleading Canadians.When will the court case begin so the whole truth can come out?
Mr. Speaker, our Prime Minister is trying to intimidate our leader with threats of legal action. He wants to beef up his credibility because his lack of leadership is causing the government to make mistakes.He hid the truth from Canadians for weeks, if not months, but now we have the perfect opportunity to find out everything. He needs to present his evidence in court, follow through on his threat and testify under oath. When will he do that?
Mr. Speaker, someone obtained confidential information on the Supreme Court vetting process to smear Chief Justice Joyal and the former attorney general. There are political fingerprints all over this hatchet job, but the new Attorney General of Canada refuses to investigate. Why? He says he trusts the Prime Minister's Office and he trusts it will never happen again. God help the rule of law when we have an Attorney General who thinks his job is damage control. His job is to protect the integrity of the process. When will he launch an independent investigation into finding out who launched that leak and who ordered it?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is threatening a lawsuit to shut down the opposition from holding him accountable for his attempts to interfere in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. He says that it is libellous to say that the former attorney general told him and his top officials that their actions were political interference and entirely inappropriate. However, the taped phone call, texts and notes show that it is all true. Canadians look forward to the Prime Minister being forced to testify in open court under oath. When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been caught misleading Canadians. Having been caught, now the Prime Minister is trying to sue his critics. In his letter, he disputes the fact the Prime Minister had been informed by [the former attorney general] that his actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. Every single Canadian understands that this is in fact exactly what happened.When will the Prime Minister move forward with his threat to call a court case and get to business?
Mr. Speaker, there have been expulsions from caucus, shutting down debate in committees, a lawsuit, a leak of confidential information about a chief justice Supreme Court application and two months of Liberals doing everything they can to change the channel on the PMO scandal. However, leaking confidential information, that is a serious breach. The Minister of Justice does not seem to understand the seriousness of this act. Is the Attorney General comfortable with a leak that was intended to smear the former attorney general? The integrity of our courts is at stake. Will the Attorney General launch an investigation into this serious breach?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shut down every parliamentary opportunity to examine fully his attempted interference in the SNC-Lavalin corruption trial. By threatening a lawsuit, he suddenly seems to favour litigating details of his scandal under oath in a public courtwell, not really. We know it is just a desperate ruse. However, there is another opportunity this afternoon. Will the Prime Minister encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to support my motion to invite him and 11 other witnesses to speak without constraint about this sorry affair?
Mr. Speaker, although I find the actions of that side completely wrong and reprehensible, I will apologize for the fact that I did show disrespect for the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, one cannot be a lawmaker if one is a lawbreaker.We know that the Prime Minister has broken the law, not just the ethics law that he broke by accepting gifts from someone seeking a government grant, but he broke the Parliament of Canada Act to kick two of his members out of caucus as part of the cover-up in the SNC-Lavalin scandal.If the Prime Minister is so confident that anything he said in this matter is true, when will he launch his lawsuit so we can put him on the stand and question him under oath?
Mr. Speaker, we put the Conservative leader on notice because the truth is important. The truth is that, after being asked whether he would condemn white supremacist movements yesterday, the Conservative leader not only refused to do so, he refused to even say the words. We will give the Conservatives another opportunity to condemn white supremacist movements.Will they denounce them and apologize for sharing a platform with those who hold such beliefs?
Mr. Speaker, a new report points out that the Prime Minister's actions against former senior ministers is unprecedented in Canadian history. It has not been seen in a century. Senior former Liberal staffer Penny Collenette points out how this is highly unusual. The women ministers who spoke up about the truth about interference in criminal prosecution were kicked out for speaking up. The Liberals claim that there is nothing to see here. Clearly there is, and Canadians disagree with the government. Why will the government not call a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member is projecting. That member and his benches are minions of the leader of the official opposition. Rather than point fingers, the member should know very well that when it comes to our members, they make their own decisions. The Conservatives cannot fathom that people do not agree with them. They have not had to endure them often, but we in the Liberal benches have tough conversations. We agree to disagree and we try to find compromise where it is possible. It is with those qualities that we know that Canadians are better off today than they were under 10 years
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister now says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. I guess he will find out in October.In his letter threatening to sue the Conservative leader, he says that the former attorney general never told him that the political interference in an ongoing criminal proceeding was entirely inappropriate. However, the Prime Minister admitted to the House last week that in fact she told him that directly to his face. He says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. When will the Prime Minister take us to court so he can experience just what those are?
Mr. Speaker, they are twisting the truth. The problem is that the Prime Minister put our leader on notice for the statement he made on March 29.Stop sidestepping. Some facts were raised in the notice and we want to respond. The Leader of the Opposition is prepared to go to court right now.Go ahead, Mr. Prime Minister, we are waiting.
Mr. Speaker, last week I asked the government to address urgent food insecurity in our north because of climate change.Did it ever deliver, giving $12 million to Loblaws, a company headed up by the second-richest Canadian. The Liberals also gave $4.5 billion to a rich American oil company. In the eyes of the Liberal government, it is clear that every problem can be solved by giving money to its billionaire friends.Meanwhile, first nations already hurting from climate change get nothing. Instead of favours for the billionaire friends, when will the government stand up for first nations and Canadians already hurting?
Mr. Speaker, last year Loblaws made $3 billion in profit, yet yesterday the Minister of Environment gave Loblaws $12 millionto do what? It was to buy fridges. This money came from hard-working Canadians, seniors and low-income families who struggle to make ends meet.You tell mehow many Canadians can walk into the Prime Minister's Office and ask them to pay for a new fridge? How many? Why is it always the wealthy and well-connected who get handouts from these Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, for two months, the Prime Minister has been avoiding accountability in his involvement in the SNC-Lavalin corruption scandal, which has been engulfing his government now for months.Now he has indicated that he wishes to sue the Leader of the Opposition for the criticisms that the leader made. Let us get the ball rolling. The reason being is, quite frankly, that these allegations can be tested in court, a place the Prime Minister cannot shut down.Would the Prime Minister tell us when he will commence the action?
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the consequence of what happens when members opposite do not want to talk about the budget and do not even want to read the budget. They do not notice what is in the budget, including unprecedented measures to move forward on countering money laundering and the impacts of organized crime in the housing sector, particularly in British Columbia.We continue to work with our provincial counterparts and, indeed, with partners right across the country and around the world to crack down on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance and to make sure our system works for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, why does the party opposite not stand for the planet? Why does the party opposite not stand for our children and grandchildren? Why does the party opposite not stand for climate action that is creating good jobs and preparing us for the future?To the woman in Manitoba that the member opposite is misleading, let me tell her that a family of four in Manitoba will receive $339, more than 80% of what families will pay. We can take action on climate change and we can do it in a way that is affordable.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has sent a letter to our leader in which he threatens to sue him.In the letter, he states that the Leader of the Opposition accused him of having, and I quote, personally subverted the judicial process to interfere with a criminal prosecution. He seems to understand the situation, and the leader stands by what he said. When will we be going to court?
Mr. Speaker, I believe my hon. colleague's question has been answered. I imagine as the critic for the status of women, she is interested in what is happening to women in Canada. I am proud to report that there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people
Mr. Speaker, we found out yesterday that the Canadian Coast Guard is ill-equipped and does not have a concrete plan to deal with an aging fleet. This has resulted in reduced search-and-rescue coverage, ferry-service disruptions, cancelled resupply runs to Arctic and coastal communities and nearly $2 million in lost navigational buoys. The government's lack of funding for the Coast Guard is leaving coastal communities at a real risk. When will the government finally make sure that our Coast Guard is properly equipped, and why has the safety of our coastal communities not been a priority?
Mr. Speaker, in the letter where the Prime Minister threatens to sue the Conservative leader, he says that it is a lie that the Clerk of the Privy Council pressured the former attorney general and made it clear that her job was on the line. Well, Canadians could hear clearly on an audio recording that the Clerk of the Privy Council said exactly that. Truth is an absolute defence, and every word of the Conservative leader's statement on the Liberal's SNC-Lavalin scandal is true. If the Prime Minister believes otherwise, when will we see him in court?
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. To ensure that Canadians could hear the truth, the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. These meetings took place at the justice committee. They took place in public. That is exactly why the member is able to refer to them. It is important that Canadians be able to decide for themselves.Yes, we have put the leader of the official opposition on notice. That is because he is misleading Canadians. This is not the first time we have done so. We have done so previously because he was misleading Canadians when it came to the Minister of Innovation. Once he was put on notice, he deleted and retracted those comments. Once again, on March 31, he did the same thing afterwards
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order arising out of question period.I would have risen if I could have at the moment this event occurred, but under our standing rules, there are no points of order during Question Period. Under our standing rules, we are not to interrupt members when they are speaking. We are not to heckle. We are not to create a din. Just as a point of reference for you, Mr. Speaker, at the point that you were trying to bring the House to order, when the Minister of Finance was speaking, with the volume at my desk at full, as high as I could listen to it, as far as our technology would take it, I was unable to hear the minister over the heckling. That is just unacceptable, and I wish that we would find a way. We have the Standing Orders. It is disrespectful to this institution, to democracy itself and to our constituents that we allow this sort of bad behaviour to continue at high volume.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your reminder that members should be judicious in their wording. Outside of the chamber you are not always there to monitor the situation. However, that is exactly why Canadians can have confidence that when the leader of the official opposition is misleading Canadians, we will not stand idly by. That is exactly why the leader of the official opposition was put on notice. After he was put on notice, he deleted tweets. He actually edited his wording to be more judicious, just as you, Mr. Speaker, have reminded all members to do. This is not the first time the Conservatives have done this. They did this in December after the Minister of Innovation had served them notice.
Mr. Speaker, in 2018, Quebec took in roughly 22,000 asylum seekers. The Quebec government housed them, cared for them and looked after them. The budget does not offer Quebec a single cent for refugee settlement. In the budget implementation act, the Liberals do not address the problem of Roxham Road. Instead of making minor adjustments, why did the Minister of Immigration not just announce the suspension of the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, I was so excited when I saw the member stand up because I thought he was going to talk about the Conservatives' climate change plan. It has been 345 days since they announced a climate change plan. What is our plan? We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and providing a just transition for workers. We are investing in public transportation across the country. We are investing in clean-tech companies, and yes, we are investing in energy efficiency. This was an open tender, open to any company or organization across the country, to get bang for the buck, because guess what? Canadians want to reduce their emissions. It is only the party opposite
Mr. Speaker, on World Health Day, we celebrate universal public health care, something that Lester Pearson provided to all Canadians more than 50 years ago. We recognize that in Canada people are proud of their publicly funded health care system, one that is based on need and not on their ability to pay, and this government wants to strengthen that. That is why we are making historic investments in the area of mental health and home care, and we have just laid the foundational piece for a national pharmacare program. This government will continue to fight for a publicly funded health care system.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague brings up the issue of women. I want to point out that I am extremely proud that at Transport Canada 47% of the very large number of nominations that have been done under Transport Canada in the last three and a half years are women.
Mr. Speaker, when the IPCC report gave us 12 years to take action on global warming, how did the Liberals respond? They purchased a pipeline. When we learned that Canada is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the planet, how did the Liberals respond? They released a budget that keeps giving oil companies billions of dollars. Now we have learned that our glaciers in the far north are disappearing and melting twice as fast as the others around the world. What are the Liberals doing? They are giving Loblaws $12 million for refrigerators.What exactly is it going to take for the Liberals to do something? Does one of their multimillionaire buddies need to move to the far north?
Mr. Speaker, speaking of the truth, the Prime Minister said today that we cannot lie to Canadians. Obviously not, but the Prime Minister's own story has changed since the beginning. He himself admitted that his story was not accurate.If the Prime Minister thinks that Canadians want to know the truth, why is he refusing to launch a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, this matter has been addressed numerous times in the House, but I will definitely answer it once again. We believe that Canadians should get to hear the truth. That is exactly why the members of the justice committee themselves set parameters for a discussion: to ensure the truth could be shared with Canadians. That is exactly why the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. This is the first time in the history of the country that this has been done. However, it is important that Canadians get to know. That is exactly why all the facts are now public. The Conservatives are misleading Canadians, and that is what they continue to do. That is why they were served notice and then all of a sudden made some changes.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence.The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses, and the witnesses came and testified. All the facts are now public, and Canadians can hear them for themselves.The interesting thing is that after the Leader of the Opposition was served notice last week, he deleted the tweets because he knows he cannot make defamatory statements.
Mr. Speaker, ensuring that Canadians could hear and know the truth is precisely why the Prime Minister waived cabinet confidence and solicitor-client privilege.All the facts have now been made public. Members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights made their own decisions. That is how we operate on this side of the House.We can see that the Conservatives get direction from the Leader of the Opposition, but our MPs can make their own decisions. Members of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics will proceed as they see fit.
Mr. Speaker, I have a piece of paper too. It is misinformation the Prime Minister gave both during the last election and more recently. Let us start with balanced budgets, or maybe electoral reform or maybe the $10-billion deficit, all things that were promised to Canadians that did not come about.Then we have the most recent crucial issues, for example, the Prime Minister indicating that the former attorney general never went to him about her concerns. We know that to be patently false.Let us test this in court. When will the Prime Minister start this action?
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that question has already been answered. What he is not asking about is the budget. Perhaps he does not care about what we are doing for seniors because he already has a million-dollar pension. Those seniors are going to be better off because of their ability to keep more money in their pockets and they are going to be better off in the future because of this budget.For the member for Carleton, we know that the training benefit we are putting in place might help him when he looks for his next job. This is the sort of benefit that will help all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the party opposite wants to sticker it to Canadians like Doug Ford, but let us talk about what we are doing. We are putting a price on pollution and giving it all back to Ontarians. What does that mean? It means 90% of the money goes right back to families. A family of four will get $307, which is more than 80% of what families will pay.However, I have a question. The member for Milton was on television the other day and was asked if Conservatives would commit to meeting the Paris Agreement targets. She could not answer. Everyone in this House, except for one Conservative, voted for it. Will
Mr. Speaker, high-speed Internet and cellular services are a necessity, but access is anything but affordable and reliable. A single mother told me that she pays $102 a month for unreliable service. People deserve a government that has the courage to stand up to telecommunications companies.When will the Prime Minister find the courage to stand up for people and cut these costs?
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the official opposition was put on notice on March 31. That very same day, he deleted tweets and then edited them because he knew he should be more judicious in his words. His actions are clear. The Conservatives talk a tough game. The same thing happened with the Minister of Innovation . The Conservatives made those statements in the House. When they were asked to take those statements out of the House, they would not. Do you know what happened after they were served notice in December, Mr. Speaker? The leader of the official opposition retracted those comments. He deleted those tweets.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to once again remind Canadians that all information is public. Why is that information public? Because the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. All meetings of the justice committee that were on this issue were in public so Canadians could decide for themselves. They know very well who is misleading Canadians.That member talks a big game, but in February, when it came to comments on this file, it was his leader, the leader of the official opposition, who actually retracted that statement.
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people have jobs. More persons with disabilities are working. More newcomers and young people are working now than ever before. Part of that, my hon. critic will want to know, is because we believe that gender equality is a driver for economic growth.
Mr. Speaker, health care is something all Canadians are proud of, and no individual should be left behind when it comes to making sure they get the services they need. Sunday, April 7, was World Health Day, and the focus was on universal health coverage.Can the Minister of Health please advise this House on how she plans to make Canada's health care system even better?
Mr. Speaker, indeed, let us be clear. The Prime Minister has said that it is libellous for the opposition leader to say that the former attorney general was pressured by him and then fired for resisting. However, on the taped call, the clerk said that the Prime Minister was determined, in a firm frame of mind, that they were on a collision course and that he was going to get it done one way or another.When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat to sue or will he just finally admit that everything the opposition leader said is totally true?
Mr. Speaker, on March 29, our leader issued an official statement in a press release in which he said that the Prime Minister engaged in political interference, personally gave orders, denied the truth, and had therefore lost the moral authority to govern. Our leader stands by everything he said and even reiterated it yesterday.If the Prime Minister has the slightest sense of leadership, will he proceed with his lawsuit so we can all find out the truth of this matter?
Mr. Speaker, I will give some free advice to the Prime Minister. Yes, there has been a notice sent over, and the Leader of the Opposition has indicated that he stands by every single word in that press release. That is a problem for the Prime Minister. Therefore, I guess the ball is actually in his court.He can stand up here, wave his arms around and talk about putting us on notice, but why does he not actually show us? Let us get it on.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister says that he is going to sue the Leader of the Opposition for saying, [The former attorney general] repeatedly told the Prime Minister and his top officials that their actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. For him to sue, it would have to mean those comments were wrong, but last week the Prime Minister admitted that it was true.How can the Prime Minister sue someone for saying something the Prime Minister has already admitted is true?
Mr. Speaker, while Trois-Rivières is still waiting for an announcement on the high-frequency rail project, Transport Canada is funding a feasibility study on the Hyperloop project in Canada. Transport Canada has yet to publish the results of the studies on the HFR. The Hyperloop project is decades away from practical application, while the HFR is closer to reality.Since the minister is currently exploring the future, could he get back in his DeLorean, return to 2019 and tell us whether there is a high-frequency rail project on the horizon?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During question period, a falsehood was spoken, and I just wish to draw some attention to that. The Minister for Women and Gender Equality said that women are actually participating in the workforce to a greater extent. I have a document from the Library of Parliament that actually shows that women participated in the labour force to a greater extent when the former government was in place, and that number has declined since this new government came to power.I would ask for unanimous consent to table the document.
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics is an excellent place to disclose new information on the Prime Minister's political interference, especially when that information will help the Ethics Commissioner in his upcoming investigation.Will the Prime Minister waive any restrictions that might prevent witnesses from appearing and speaking freely before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics? Canadians still want to know the truth.
Mr. Speaker, every time we ask a question we see the Minister of Justice and Attorney General pick up his notes and repeat the answers written by the Prime Minister's office. That says a lot about the independence of the new attorney general vis-a-vis the Prime Minister. Could we please get a straight answer to a simple question?Will the Minister of Justice challenge Bill 21 or support a legal challenge, yes or no? It seems to me that he does not need notes to answer the question.
Mr. Speaker, as everyone well knows, we spent many weeks working to try and find a positive resolution on this issue. This is something that we understand had very strong opinions on multiple sides and we wanted to work forward and demonstrate that we truly believed that differences of opinion and diversity was a source of strength and resilience for an organization and for our country. That is what we worked very hard on. Unfortunately, we could not get to that place. The will of caucus was clear that those individuals could no longer be in caucus. At the same time, we are going to continue focusing on what matters to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, you should be able to confirm that you received a letter to inform you of the will of caucus on these measures. It is up to the Liberal caucus to decide our own affairs. I would encourage that member to focus on his caucus and its caucus matters. We have caucus discussions, and we know that what happens in caucus stays in caucus, but to satisfy the rules, Mr. Speaker, you were provided with a letter. What is clear is that we have gone through a whole question period, and the Conservatives will continue to focus on us. We will continue to focus on Canadians, and that is why we are so proud to be talking about the budget. We look forward to being able to share how we are going to improve the lives of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, our government has always stood up for Canadians' fundamental rights and will continue to do so. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects the rights of all citizens. We cannot choose which to protect and which to limit. Our position is clear. The state must not dictate what people can or cannot wear regardless of their beliefs.
Mr. Speaker, obviously leaks concern us. I can assure the House that leaks did not come from my ministry and I trust my colleagues when they tell me that leaks did not come from theirs. This is a situation of obvious concern and we are doing our best to make sure it does not happen in the future.
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Coast Guard members are at work every day across the country, and our government will continue to provide them with the tools that they need to keep Canadians and our waters safe and our economy moving. During the 2018 Arctic season, the Coast Guard was faced with more unusually difficult ice conditions than in other years, which led to some delay in resupply and escort missions. Canadians can be proud of the men and women of the Canadian Coast Guard and the important work that they do from coast to coast to coast.
Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to actually talk about climate change and the action our government is taking.We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and having a just transition for workers. We are investing in clean solutions so innovators, entrepreneurs across the country create good jobs. We are of course investing in energy efficiency.The program the member opposite is talking about was a fair and open competition. It was based on the most submissions, the most bang for the buck. It will remove 50,000 cars off the road. The company in question is paying three-quarters of the cost.The real question Canadians want answered is
Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the question of privilege raised this morning by the hon. member for MarkhamStouffville. In her intervention, the member referenced an alleged breach of the Parliament of Canada Act.As the Chair stated in a ruling on April 8, 2019, asking the House to deal with the possible expulsion of a member from caucus is not a proper subject for a question of privilege. The Chair stated that if a member believes that the House needs to put in place certain practices, perhaps by way of additional Standing Orders, this should be done through a substantive motion following proper notice.The Chair also made reference earlier today, as well as in the April 8 ruling, to the Speaker having no role in the interpretation of statute nor in the conduct of changes that were made to the Parliament of Canada Act. As the Chair pointed out, all that is allowed under subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act is that the Speaker be informed of the results of the caucus decision.As the hon. member pointed out, the Speaker confirmed on December 10, 2015, that all actions required by the Speaker as it relates to subsection 49.8(5) had been taken, which she stated is indicative that the chair of the Liberal caucus did indeed inform the Speaker of the decision of the Liberal caucus.Just to be absolutely clear I will state that, pursuant to subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act, the chair of the national Liberal caucus sent a letter to the Speaker over three years ago outlining the decisions of the Liberal caucus as they relate to sections 49.2, 49.3 and 49.4; subsections 49.5(1) to 49.5(4); and section 49.6 of the Parliament of Canada Act and their application to the 42nd Parliament. The Liberal caucus decided that the provisions would not apply for the 42nd Parliament. Given the fact that the Liberal caucus did not adopt these provisions, the points raised by the hon. member on this issue are moot. The hon. member also states that her question of privilege is with respect to which rules apply with regard to the expulsion and readmission of caucus members. I would contend that, given the Liberal caucus decided that the provisions of the Parliament of Canada Act would not apply for the 42nd Parliament and sent the Speaker a letter to confirm this, there is no confusion around which rules apply. Furthermore, as I said earlier, it is not the role of the Speaker to adjudicate these matters.
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to point out that we appointed a minister for rural communities who is responsible for ensuring that the entire country has access to affordable, high-speed Internet services. Along with the private sector, we will continue to make investments across the country to provide all Canadians with this vital access to services that have the quality and speed to meet the demands of the future.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Willowdale for his hard work on behalf of the people of Toronto.We believe that every Canadian should have a safe and affordable home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy, a $40 billion plan. Sorry, it is a $55 billion plan because of budget 2019. That is why we were so pleased last Friday to announce a very historic investment in the city of Toronto, helping to renovate, renew and reconstruct the community homes of 58,000 families in Toronto. That is why we will keep working very hard to give every Canadian a safe and affordable place to call home.
Mr. Speaker, on the same question of privilege, I am quite surprised by the position the government is taking. Apparently, the Liberal caucus reached a decision that the law did not apply to it and because it made the decision, the law does not apply. I would be very interested if the hon. member could provide the legal rationale.As a member of this place who was part of the discussion and debate on the Reform Act to change the rules under the Parliament of Canada Act, I have consistently bemoaned, and I know it may or may not be a matter for the Speaker to look at this, the larger question of how much power leaders of organized parties that are recognized have over the conduct of their individual members. However, the principle of Westminster democracy in this place is that all members are equal and the Prime Minister is merely first among equals. I assumed, when we passed the Parliament of Canada Act and the amendments found in section 49, that the recognized parties would comply with the requirements of section 49 in the Parliament of Canada Act and that surely they applied to every party once the law was passed and in place. It is quite distressing to hear now from this member that the caucus decided for itself to ignore the requirements of the law and feels that it has met all the requirements by sending a letter to the Speaker that details the caucus's decision to ignore the law.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the member for CumberlandColchester and thank him for his 30 years of outstanding service to Canadians. He has been a strong advocate for diversifying the local economy and is very passionate about growing the life sciences sector, particularly in producing life-saving treatments for serious illnesses. That is why, most recently, the Prime Minister made the announcement on BioVectra for $37.5 million, which helped leverage $144.6 million. More importantly, 450 good-quality, middle-class jobs were created.
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to maintaining a well-functioning refugee system, and that is why we have made significant investments in budget 2019 to improve the efficiency of the IRB in holding these hearings and to bring in regulation to encourage people to use the appropriate ways of entry to immigrate to this country. We will continue to invest in that system. We have achieved a significant level of success in significantly reducing the number of people who have presented themselves irregularly at our borders while maintaining a robust and efficient system of refugee determination.
Mr. Speaker, I am always happy to stand up and talk about our ambitious climate change plan. We are eliminating coal. We are investing in renewables. We are ensuring a just transition for communities and workers. We are investing in clean technology to create good jobs here. We are investing in energy efficiency measures.Yes, we launched some competitions to determine who could achieve the greatest emissions reductions. That is why the company that won the competition is going to achieve carbon reductions equal to taking 50,000 cars
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that this question has already been answered.What we want to do in the House is talk about the budget that we put forward for all Canadians. We put forward a budget that is going to help young people have the possibility of getting into their first home. We put in place a budget that is going to help students be able to retire their debt earlier in their post-student life. We put in place a budget that is going to help people get the sort of ability to face up to a changing world with the training that they need.We are proud of what we put forward for Canadians and we look forward to talking about it more.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have a long and proud history of medical developments and discoveries, like insulin and vaccines, which have saved lives at home and abroad.Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please tell us what investments our government is making in cutting-edge research and facilities to pave the way for new medical breakthroughs and to make treatments even more effective?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in the House, Canadians should have complete confidence in the integrity of our Supreme Court nomination process. It is merit based. It has led to the appointment of two exceptionally high-quality candidates thus far as well as a chief justice.Obviously, these leaks are of great concern to me. As I assured the House yesterday, I am confident that these leaks did not come from my office and the Prime Minister has assured the House that the leaks did not come from his office.
Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague is anxious about HFR. I keep telling him every week that we are working on this important file. When we have news, we will be sure to let my colleague know. In the meantime, we are interested in technologies of the future. We are a government that believes in science and research, and we want to explore all options for transportation in the future.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated yesterday, Canada is based on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is not up to the state to determine what people can or cannot wear no matter their beliefs. We have institutions to protect Canadians' fundamental rights. As Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Justice, I will support and protect these laws.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence. The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses. The witnesses came to testify
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to acknowledge the excellent partnership we have with the Province of Quebec and the City of Montreal. I wish to extend my sincere appreciation for that partnership and for their hard work.Canada has experienced an increase in people coming to this country as a result of situations going on all over the world. People are fleeing war and persecution. It is in partnership with municipalities and the provinces that Canada remains a welcoming country as we work to ensure that these individuals enjoy the full benefit of the rule of law in Canada and that at the same time, the system is operated
Mr. Speaker, we have always been very clear about this issue from the beginning. We are going to do two things at once. We will always stand up for jobs for Canadian workers across the country and we will respect our institutions and the rule of law. That is exactly what we did. We have a great deal of respect for the work that our parliamentary committees do and we also respect the Ethics Commissioner, who is looking into the matter. We will always participate in investigations because we know that we, on the government side of the House, are defending our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.In her response earlier, the hon. government House leader made reference to a piece of correspondence she had given you. I do not believe that the rest of us have seen this letter, but as you know, Mr. Speaker, and as she knows, any letter or any document that is made reference to in the House must be tabled for the benefit of all of us. We would now like to see this letter to determine whether this actually demonstrates that the Liberal Party was in fact in conformity with the Parliament of Canada Act. She was very careful not to make that clear in her comments, so we would like to see it for ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, the Toronto Community Housing Corporation is the largest social housing provider in Canada and the second-largest in North America. Last week, the Prime Minister was in Toronto to make a $1.3 billion housing announcement, the largest federal housing investment in Canadian history. Could the Minister of Families, Children, and Social Development inform the House how this record investment will provide tens of thousands of Toronto families safe and affordable homes?
Mr. Speaker, they stick it to Canadians.Amanda Stevenson, in Lundar, Manitoba, had her dairy fridge quit last week. She has watched these Liberals take money from her in the form of a carbon tax and increase taxes on her small business, and now she had to watch them give money to her competitor for the same thing she cannot afford. That is wrong. We are proud to stand for Amanda, not for SNC-Lavalin and for Loblaws.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, here is what I have to say about the truth: We put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract statements he made online about the Minister of Innovation. He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians. Misleading Canadians, as the opposition leader has done, is never virtuous.
Mr. Speaker, we put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract defamatory online statements he made against the Minister of Innovation.He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, after being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition not only refused to do so, but refused to even say the words.I will give him another opportunity to do so today through his deputy leader. Will he denounce white supremacy, the alt-right movement and finally apologize for sharing a platform with it?
Mr. Speaker, the member for Mount Royal finally dissociated himself from the shameful statements his friend, the mayor of Hampstead, made comparing secularism to ethnic cleansing. The Minister of Justice was asked to condemn the statements yesterday, but he chose not to.Insulting Quebec is apparently okay with the Minister of Justice.Will the minister condemn the statements made by the mayor of Hampstead and pledge not to challenge the secularism bill in court?
Mr. Speaker, after the biggest drug money-laundering case in Canadian history, the federal government is still not doing its part. Expert Peter German's report points out that no federal resources are being used. Literally, in the federal money-laundering unit, no one is working on money laundering. No wonder there are so few federal prosecutions. Drug money laundering is fuelling organized crime and putting communities at risk. Why have the Liberals failed to act?
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time the Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians with false and defamatory statements. As I have said, he has been forced to retract or cease making
Mr. Speaker, as I said, he has been forced to retract or cease making defamatory statements against members of our government repeatedly. The reason we put him on notice is because he is doing so again.Members of the opposition should not have to mislead Canadians in order to make political points. They should stick to the facts. That is what Canadians deserve.
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time this Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians by making false and defamatory statements. As I have already said at least twice, he was forced to withdraw or stop making defamatory statements about members of our government.We had to warn him because he did it again. We know the Conservatives have a history of doing this. It is important for the Conservatives to remember that this is not the right approach.
Mr. Speaker, putting the Conservative leader on notice is something we did because the truth was important.Here is the truth. After being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, climate leaders do not buy pipelines. Feminist prime ministers do not turf female colleagues because they speak truth to power. Humanitarian leaders do not shut their borders to asylum seekers during a refugee crisis. Now the Liberals have snuck in changes to refugee laws in the budget bill. That means people like Seidu Mohammed, an LGBTQ man from Ghana, whose asylum claim was accepted after he crossed irregularly from the U.S., will not even get a chance to apply. Lives are at risk. Will the Prime Minister do what is right and suspend the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's saga of corruption and political interference continues. After pulling out all the stops to kill the story and hide the truth from Canadians, the Prime Minister is now resorting to intimidation tactics in a bid to silence the Leader of the Opposition.Will the Prime Minister make good on his threat as soon as possible? Canadians want the truth.
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. He had to retract some statements he made online in December about the Minister of Innovation.We warned the Leader of the Opposition again because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. Once again, on March 31, the Leader of the Opposition deleted some tweets because he knows he did something he should not have.
Mr. Speaker, yes, we did put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. On March 31, they received a notice and on the same day the Leader of the Opposition deleted his tweets. He knows that he made defamatory remarks, he knows that he must not do this. He was put on notice so that he makes more judicious decisions that are more befitting of his position.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shown little regard for anyone but himself in this ever-deepening scandal. The banal excuses and empty platitudes about his respect for the rule of law and the independence of committees stand in stark contrast to the trail of resignations, removals and character smearing left in his self-serving wake. Again, will the Prime Minister finally order his minions to stand down and encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to freely vote their conscience?
Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that the minister talked about her plan, a plan that taxes Canadians for committing the sin of heating their homes in the winterwhich will do nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissionsand then gives that money to Loblaws to buy freezers. I am really, really good with that not being our plan. I am proud to say we will not do that.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, it is rather ironic that the Liberal Prime Minister is trying to lecture parliamentarians here in the House when he himself violated the Conflict of Interest Act four times. The Prime Minister is claiming that what our leader said is false. He reiterated that yesterday evening.If he wants to demonstrate even a little bit of leadership, will he follow through on his threat so that he can testify under oath in court, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and those Liberals talk about letting members on their side of the House make decisions without direction from the PMO. That certainly was not the case when the Prime Minister unilaterally turfed two female caucus members, in the process breaking the laws of this place. We know what the Prime Minister does to people who do not agree with him. He pressures, intimidates and then threatens them if they do not fall in line, and then he throws them out. Since the leader of the opposition will not be intimidated, and the Prime Minister cannot kick him out of caucus, the Prime Minister has threatened him with a lawsuit. A simple question: When are we going to see you is court?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians know what is happening to women under the Liberals. The former attorney general repeatedly said the pressure she was facing was inappropriate, yet the Prime Minister claimed no one had ever raised concerns with him. However, just last week he was forced to admit that was false. Now he is threatening to take our leader to court for pointing out that he has been misleading Canadians.When will the court case begin so the whole truth can come out?
Mr. Speaker, our Prime Minister is trying to intimidate our leader with threats of legal action. He wants to beef up his credibility because his lack of leadership is causing the government to make mistakes.He hid the truth from Canadians for weeks, if not months, but now we have the perfect opportunity to find out everything. He needs to present his evidence in court, follow through on his threat and testify under oath. When will he do that?
Mr. Speaker, someone obtained confidential information on the Supreme Court vetting process to smear Chief Justice Joyal and the former attorney general. There are political fingerprints all over this hatchet job, but the new Attorney General of Canada refuses to investigate. Why? He says he trusts the Prime Minister's Office and he trusts it will never happen again. God help the rule of law when we have an Attorney General who thinks his job is damage control. His job is to protect the integrity of the process. When will he launch an independent investigation into finding out who launched that leak and who ordered it?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is threatening a lawsuit to shut down the opposition from holding him accountable for his attempts to interfere in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. He says that it is libellous to say that the former attorney general told him and his top officials that their actions were political interference and entirely inappropriate. However, the taped phone call, texts and notes show that it is all true. Canadians look forward to the Prime Minister being forced to testify in open court under oath. When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been caught misleading Canadians. Having been caught, now the Prime Minister is trying to sue his critics. In his letter, he disputes the fact the Prime Minister had been informed by [the former attorney general] that his actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. Every single Canadian understands that this is in fact exactly what happened.When will the Prime Minister move forward with his threat to call a court case and get to business?
Mr. Speaker, there have been expulsions from caucus, shutting down debate in committees, a lawsuit, a leak of confidential information about a chief justice Supreme Court application and two months of Liberals doing everything they can to change the channel on the PMO scandal. However, leaking confidential information, that is a serious breach. The Minister of Justice does not seem to understand the seriousness of this act. Is the Attorney General comfortable with a leak that was intended to smear the former attorney general? The integrity of our courts is at stake. Will the Attorney General launch an investigation into this serious breach?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shut down every parliamentary opportunity to examine fully his attempted interference in the SNC-Lavalin corruption trial. By threatening a lawsuit, he suddenly seems to favour litigating details of his scandal under oath in a public courtwell, not really. We know it is just a desperate ruse. However, there is another opportunity this afternoon. Will the Prime Minister encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to support my motion to invite him and 11 other witnesses to speak without constraint about this sorry affair?
Mr. Speaker, although I find the actions of that side completely wrong and reprehensible, I will apologize for the fact that I did show disrespect for the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, one cannot be a lawmaker if one is a lawbreaker.We know that the Prime Minister has broken the law, not just the ethics law that he broke by accepting gifts from someone seeking a government grant, but he broke the Parliament of Canada Act to kick two of his members out of caucus as part of the cover-up in the SNC-Lavalin scandal.If the Prime Minister is so confident that anything he said in this matter is true, when will he launch his lawsuit so we can put him on the stand and question him under oath?
Mr. Speaker, we put the Conservative leader on notice because the truth is important. The truth is that, after being asked whether he would condemn white supremacist movements yesterday, the Conservative leader not only refused to do so, he refused to even say the words. We will give the Conservatives another opportunity to condemn white supremacist movements.Will they denounce them and apologize for sharing a platform with those who hold such beliefs?
Mr. Speaker, a new report points out that the Prime Minister's actions against former senior ministers is unprecedented in Canadian history. It has not been seen in a century. Senior former Liberal staffer Penny Collenette points out how this is highly unusual. The women ministers who spoke up about the truth about interference in criminal prosecution were kicked out for speaking up. The Liberals claim that there is nothing to see here. Clearly there is, and Canadians disagree with the government. Why will the government not call a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member is projecting. That member and his benches are minions of the leader of the official opposition. Rather than point fingers, the member should know very well that when it comes to our members, they make their own decisions. The Conservatives cannot fathom that people do not agree with them. They have not had to endure them often, but we in the Liberal benches have tough conversations. We agree to disagree and we try to find compromise where it is possible. It is with those qualities that we know that Canadians are better off today than they were under 10 years
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister now says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. I guess he will find out in October.In his letter threatening to sue the Conservative leader, he says that the former attorney general never told him that the political interference in an ongoing criminal proceeding was entirely inappropriate. However, the Prime Minister admitted to the House last week that in fact she told him that directly to his face. He says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. When will the Prime Minister take us to court so he can experience just what those are?
Mr. Speaker, they are twisting the truth. The problem is that the Prime Minister put our leader on notice for the statement he made on March 29.Stop sidestepping. Some facts were raised in the notice and we want to respond. The Leader of the Opposition is prepared to go to court right now.Go ahead, Mr. Prime Minister, we are waiting.
Mr. Speaker, last week I asked the government to address urgent food insecurity in our north because of climate change.Did it ever deliver, giving $12 million to Loblaws, a company headed up by the second-richest Canadian. The Liberals also gave $4.5 billion to a rich American oil company. In the eyes of the Liberal government, it is clear that every problem can be solved by giving money to its billionaire friends.Meanwhile, first nations already hurting from climate change get nothing. Instead of favours for the billionaire friends, when will the government stand up for first nations and Canadians already hurting?
Mr. Speaker, last year Loblaws made $3 billion in profit, yet yesterday the Minister of Environment gave Loblaws $12 millionto do what? It was to buy fridges. This money came from hard-working Canadians, seniors and low-income families who struggle to make ends meet.You tell mehow many Canadians can walk into the Prime Minister's Office and ask them to pay for a new fridge? How many? Why is it always the wealthy and well-connected who get handouts from these Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, for two months, the Prime Minister has been avoiding accountability in his involvement in the SNC-Lavalin corruption scandal, which has been engulfing his government now for months.Now he has indicated that he wishes to sue the Leader of the Opposition for the criticisms that the leader made. Let us get the ball rolling. The reason being is, quite frankly, that these allegations can be tested in court, a place the Prime Minister cannot shut down.Would the Prime Minister tell us when he will commence the action?
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the consequence of what happens when members opposite do not want to talk about the budget and do not even want to read the budget. They do not notice what is in the budget, including unprecedented measures to move forward on countering money laundering and the impacts of organized crime in the housing sector, particularly in British Columbia.We continue to work with our provincial counterparts and, indeed, with partners right across the country and around the world to crack down on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance and to make sure our system works for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, why does the party opposite not stand for the planet? Why does the party opposite not stand for our children and grandchildren? Why does the party opposite not stand for climate action that is creating good jobs and preparing us for the future?To the woman in Manitoba that the member opposite is misleading, let me tell her that a family of four in Manitoba will receive $339, more than 80% of what families will pay. We can take action on climate change and we can do it in a way that is affordable.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has sent a letter to our leader in which he threatens to sue him.In the letter, he states that the Leader of the Opposition accused him of having, and I quote, personally subverted the judicial process to interfere with a criminal prosecution. He seems to understand the situation, and the leader stands by what he said. When will we be going to court?
Mr. Speaker, I believe my hon. colleague's question has been answered. I imagine as the critic for the status of women, she is interested in what is happening to women in Canada. I am proud to report that there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people
Mr. Speaker, we found out yesterday that the Canadian Coast Guard is ill-equipped and does not have a concrete plan to deal with an aging fleet. This has resulted in reduced search-and-rescue coverage, ferry-service disruptions, cancelled resupply runs to Arctic and coastal communities and nearly $2 million in lost navigational buoys. The government's lack of funding for the Coast Guard is leaving coastal communities at a real risk. When will the government finally make sure that our Coast Guard is properly equipped, and why has the safety of our coastal communities not been a priority?
Mr. Speaker, in the letter where the Prime Minister threatens to sue the Conservative leader, he says that it is a lie that the Clerk of the Privy Council pressured the former attorney general and made it clear that her job was on the line. Well, Canadians could hear clearly on an audio recording that the Clerk of the Privy Council said exactly that. Truth is an absolute defence, and every word of the Conservative leader's statement on the Liberal's SNC-Lavalin scandal is true. If the Prime Minister believes otherwise, when will we see him in court?
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. To ensure that Canadians could hear the truth, the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. These meetings took place at the justice committee. They took place in public. That is exactly why the member is able to refer to them. It is important that Canadians be able to decide for themselves.Yes, we have put the leader of the official opposition on notice. That is because he is misleading Canadians. This is not the first time we have done so. We have done so previously because he was misleading Canadians when it came to the Minister of Innovation. Once he was put on notice, he deleted and retracted those comments. Once again, on March 31, he did the same thing afterwards
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order arising out of question period.I would have risen if I could have at the moment this event occurred, but under our standing rules, there are no points of order during Question Period. Under our standing rules, we are not to interrupt members when they are speaking. We are not to heckle. We are not to create a din. Just as a point of reference for you, Mr. Speaker, at the point that you were trying to bring the House to order, when the Minister of Finance was speaking, with the volume at my desk at full, as high as I could listen to it, as far as our technology would take it, I was unable to hear the minister over the heckling. That is just unacceptable, and I wish that we would find a way. We have the Standing Orders. It is disrespectful to this institution, to democracy itself and to our constituents that we allow this sort of bad behaviour to continue at high volume.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your reminder that members should be judicious in their wording. Outside of the chamber you are not always there to monitor the situation. However, that is exactly why Canadians can have confidence that when the leader of the official opposition is misleading Canadians, we will not stand idly by. That is exactly why the leader of the official opposition was put on notice. After he was put on notice, he deleted tweets. He actually edited his wording to be more judicious, just as you, Mr. Speaker, have reminded all members to do. This is not the first time the Conservatives have done this. They did this in December after the Minister of Innovation had served them notice.
Mr. Speaker, in 2018, Quebec took in roughly 22,000 asylum seekers. The Quebec government housed them, cared for them and looked after them. The budget does not offer Quebec a single cent for refugee settlement. In the budget implementation act, the Liberals do not address the problem of Roxham Road. Instead of making minor adjustments, why did the Minister of Immigration not just announce the suspension of the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, I was so excited when I saw the member stand up because I thought he was going to talk about the Conservatives' climate change plan. It has been 345 days since they announced a climate change plan. What is our plan? We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and providing a just transition for workers. We are investing in public transportation across the country. We are investing in clean-tech companies, and yes, we are investing in energy efficiency. This was an open tender, open to any company or organization across the country, to get bang for the buck, because guess what? Canadians want to reduce their emissions. It is only the party opposite
Mr. Speaker, on World Health Day, we celebrate universal public health care, something that Lester Pearson provided to all Canadians more than 50 years ago. We recognize that in Canada people are proud of their publicly funded health care system, one that is based on need and not on their ability to pay, and this government wants to strengthen that. That is why we are making historic investments in the area of mental health and home care, and we have just laid the foundational piece for a national pharmacare program. This government will continue to fight for a publicly funded health care system.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague brings up the issue of women. I want to point out that I am extremely proud that at Transport Canada 47% of the very large number of nominations that have been done under Transport Canada in the last three and a half years are women.
Mr. Speaker, when the IPCC report gave us 12 years to take action on global warming, how did the Liberals respond? They purchased a pipeline. When we learned that Canada is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the planet, how did the Liberals respond? They released a budget that keeps giving oil companies billions of dollars. Now we have learned that our glaciers in the far north are disappearing and melting twice as fast as the others around the world. What are the Liberals doing? They are giving Loblaws $12 million for refrigerators.What exactly is it going to take for the Liberals to do something? Does one of their multimillionaire buddies need to move to the far north?
Mr. Speaker, speaking of the truth, the Prime Minister said today that we cannot lie to Canadians. Obviously not, but the Prime Minister's own story has changed since the beginning. He himself admitted that his story was not accurate.If the Prime Minister thinks that Canadians want to know the truth, why is he refusing to launch a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, this matter has been addressed numerous times in the House, but I will definitely answer it once again. We believe that Canadians should get to hear the truth. That is exactly why the members of the justice committee themselves set parameters for a discussion: to ensure the truth could be shared with Canadians. That is exactly why the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. This is the first time in the history of the country that this has been done. However, it is important that Canadians get to know. That is exactly why all the facts are now public. The Conservatives are misleading Canadians, and that is what they continue to do. That is why they were served notice and then all of a sudden made some changes.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence.The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses, and the witnesses came and testified. All the facts are now public, and Canadians can hear them for themselves.The interesting thing is that after the Leader of the Opposition was served notice last week, he deleted the tweets because he knows he cannot make defamatory statements.
Mr. Speaker, ensuring that Canadians could hear and know the truth is precisely why the Prime Minister waived cabinet confidence and solicitor-client privilege.All the facts have now been made public. Members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights made their own decisions. That is how we operate on this side of the House.We can see that the Conservatives get direction from the Leader of the Opposition, but our MPs can make their own decisions. Members of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics will proceed as they see fit.
Mr. Speaker, I have a piece of paper too. It is misinformation the Prime Minister gave both during the last election and more recently. Let us start with balanced budgets, or maybe electoral reform or maybe the $10-billion deficit, all things that were promised to Canadians that did not come about.Then we have the most recent crucial issues, for example, the Prime Minister indicating that the former attorney general never went to him about her concerns. We know that to be patently false.Let us test this in court. When will the Prime Minister start this action?
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that question has already been answered. What he is not asking about is the budget. Perhaps he does not care about what we are doing for seniors because he already has a million-dollar pension. Those seniors are going to be better off because of their ability to keep more money in their pockets and they are going to be better off in the future because of this budget.For the member for Carleton, we know that the training benefit we are putting in place might help him when he looks for his next job. This is the sort of benefit that will help all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the party opposite wants to sticker it to Canadians like Doug Ford, but let us talk about what we are doing. We are putting a price on pollution and giving it all back to Ontarians. What does that mean? It means 90% of the money goes right back to families. A family of four will get $307, which is more than 80% of what families will pay.However, I have a question. The member for Milton was on television the other day and was asked if Conservatives would commit to meeting the Paris Agreement targets. She could not answer. Everyone in this House, except for one Conservative, voted for it. Will
Mr. Speaker, high-speed Internet and cellular services are a necessity, but access is anything but affordable and reliable. A single mother told me that she pays $102 a month for unreliable service. People deserve a government that has the courage to stand up to telecommunications companies.When will the Prime Minister find the courage to stand up for people and cut these costs?
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the official opposition was put on notice on March 31. That very same day, he deleted tweets and then edited them because he knew he should be more judicious in his words. His actions are clear. The Conservatives talk a tough game. The same thing happened with the Minister of Innovation . The Conservatives made those statements in the House. When they were asked to take those statements out of the House, they would not. Do you know what happened after they were served notice in December, Mr. Speaker? The leader of the official opposition retracted those comments. He deleted those tweets.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to once again remind Canadians that all information is public. Why is that information public? Because the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. All meetings of the justice committee that were on this issue were in public so Canadians could decide for themselves. They know very well who is misleading Canadians.That member talks a big game, but in February, when it came to comments on this file, it was his leader, the leader of the official opposition, who actually retracted that statement.
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people have jobs. More persons with disabilities are working. More newcomers and young people are working now than ever before. Part of that, my hon. critic will want to know, is because we believe that gender equality is a driver for economic growth.
Mr. Speaker, health care is something all Canadians are proud of, and no individual should be left behind when it comes to making sure they get the services they need. Sunday, April 7, was World Health Day, and the focus was on universal health coverage.Can the Minister of Health please advise this House on how she plans to make Canada's health care system even better?
Mr. Speaker, indeed, let us be clear. The Prime Minister has said that it is libellous for the opposition leader to say that the former attorney general was pressured by him and then fired for resisting. However, on the taped call, the clerk said that the Prime Minister was determined, in a firm frame of mind, that they were on a collision course and that he was going to get it done one way or another.When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat to sue or will he just finally admit that everything the opposition leader said is totally true?
Mr. Speaker, on March 29, our leader issued an official statement in a press release in which he said that the Prime Minister engaged in political interference, personally gave orders, denied the truth, and had therefore lost the moral authority to govern. Our leader stands by everything he said and even reiterated it yesterday.If the Prime Minister has the slightest sense of leadership, will he proceed with his lawsuit so we can all find out the truth of this matter?
Mr. Speaker, I will give some free advice to the Prime Minister. Yes, there has been a notice sent over, and the Leader of the Opposition has indicated that he stands by every single word in that press release. That is a problem for the Prime Minister. Therefore, I guess the ball is actually in his court.He can stand up here, wave his arms around and talk about putting us on notice, but why does he not actually show us? Let us get it on.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister says that he is going to sue the Leader of the Opposition for saying, [The former attorney general] repeatedly told the Prime Minister and his top officials that their actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. For him to sue, it would have to mean those comments were wrong, but last week the Prime Minister admitted that it was true.How can the Prime Minister sue someone for saying something the Prime Minister has already admitted is true?
Mr. Speaker, while Trois-Rivières is still waiting for an announcement on the high-frequency rail project, Transport Canada is funding a feasibility study on the Hyperloop project in Canada. Transport Canada has yet to publish the results of the studies on the HFR. The Hyperloop project is decades away from practical application, while the HFR is closer to reality.Since the minister is currently exploring the future, could he get back in his DeLorean, return to 2019 and tell us whether there is a high-frequency rail project on the horizon?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During question period, a falsehood was spoken, and I just wish to draw some attention to that. The Minister for Women and Gender Equality said that women are actually participating in the workforce to a greater extent. I have a document from the Library of Parliament that actually shows that women participated in the labour force to a greater extent when the former government was in place, and that number has declined since this new government came to power.I would ask for unanimous consent to table the document.
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics is an excellent place to disclose new information on the Prime Minister's political interference, especially when that information will help the Ethics Commissioner in his upcoming investigation.Will the Prime Minister waive any restrictions that might prevent witnesses from appearing and speaking freely before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics? Canadians still want to know the truth.
Mr. Speaker, every time we ask a question we see the Minister of Justice and Attorney General pick up his notes and repeat the answers written by the Prime Minister's office. That says a lot about the independence of the new attorney general vis-a-vis the Prime Minister. Could we please get a straight answer to a simple question?Will the Minister of Justice challenge Bill 21 or support a legal challenge, yes or no? It seems to me that he does not need notes to answer the question.
Mr. Speaker, as everyone well knows, we spent many weeks working to try and find a positive resolution on this issue. This is something that we understand had very strong opinions on multiple sides and we wanted to work forward and demonstrate that we truly believed that differences of opinion and diversity was a source of strength and resilience for an organization and for our country. That is what we worked very hard on. Unfortunately, we could not get to that place. The will of caucus was clear that those individuals could no longer be in caucus. At the same time, we are going to continue focusing on what matters to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, you should be able to confirm that you received a letter to inform you of the will of caucus on these measures. It is up to the Liberal caucus to decide our own affairs. I would encourage that member to focus on his caucus and its caucus matters. We have caucus discussions, and we know that what happens in caucus stays in caucus, but to satisfy the rules, Mr. Speaker, you were provided with a letter. What is clear is that we have gone through a whole question period, and the Conservatives will continue to focus on us. We will continue to focus on Canadians, and that is why we are so proud to be talking about the budget. We look forward to being able to share how we are going to improve the lives of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, our government has always stood up for Canadians' fundamental rights and will continue to do so. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects the rights of all citizens. We cannot choose which to protect and which to limit. Our position is clear. The state must not dictate what people can or cannot wear regardless of their beliefs.
Mr. Speaker, obviously leaks concern us. I can assure the House that leaks did not come from my ministry and I trust my colleagues when they tell me that leaks did not come from theirs. This is a situation of obvious concern and we are doing our best to make sure it does not happen in the future.
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Coast Guard members are at work every day across the country, and our government will continue to provide them with the tools that they need to keep Canadians and our waters safe and our economy moving. During the 2018 Arctic season, the Coast Guard was faced with more unusually difficult ice conditions than in other years, which led to some delay in resupply and escort missions. Canadians can be proud of the men and women of the Canadian Coast Guard and the important work that they do from coast to coast to coast.
Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to actually talk about climate change and the action our government is taking.We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and having a just transition for workers. We are investing in clean solutions so innovators, entrepreneurs across the country create good jobs. We are of course investing in energy efficiency.The program the member opposite is talking about was a fair and open competition. It was based on the most submissions, the most bang for the buck. It will remove 50,000 cars off the road. The company in question is paying three-quarters of the cost.The real question Canadians want answered is
Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the question of privilege raised this morning by the hon. member for MarkhamStouffville. In her intervention, the member referenced an alleged breach of the Parliament of Canada Act.As the Chair stated in a ruling on April 8, 2019, asking the House to deal with the possible expulsion of a member from caucus is not a proper subject for a question of privilege. The Chair stated that if a member believes that the House needs to put in place certain practices, perhaps by way of additional Standing Orders, this should be done through a substantive motion following proper notice.The Chair also made reference earlier today, as well as in the April 8 ruling, to the Speaker having no role in the interpretation of statute nor in the conduct of changes that were made to the Parliament of Canada Act. As the Chair pointed out, all that is allowed under subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act is that the Speaker be informed of the results of the caucus decision.As the hon. member pointed out, the Speaker confirmed on December 10, 2015, that all actions required by the Speaker as it relates to subsection 49.8(5) had been taken, which she stated is indicative that the chair of the Liberal caucus did indeed inform the Speaker of the decision of the Liberal caucus.Just to be absolutely clear I will state that, pursuant to subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act, the chair of the national Liberal caucus sent a letter to the Speaker over three years ago outlining the decisions of the Liberal caucus as they relate to sections 49.2, 49.3 and 49.4; subsections 49.5(1) to 49.5(4); and section 49.6 of the Parliament of Canada Act and their application to the 42nd Parliament. The Liberal caucus decided that the provisions would not apply for the 42nd Parliament. Given the fact that the Liberal caucus did not adopt these provisions, the points raised by the hon. member on this issue are moot. The hon. member also states that her question of privilege is with respect to which rules apply with regard to the expulsion and readmission of caucus members. I would contend that, given the Liberal caucus decided that the provisions of the Parliament of Canada Act would not apply for the 42nd Parliament and sent the Speaker a letter to confirm this, there is no confusion around which rules apply. Furthermore, as I said earlier, it is not the role of the Speaker to adjudicate these matters.
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to point out that we appointed a minister for rural communities who is responsible for ensuring that the entire country has access to affordable, high-speed Internet services. Along with the private sector, we will continue to make investments across the country to provide all Canadians with this vital access to services that have the quality and speed to meet the demands of the future.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Willowdale for his hard work on behalf of the people of Toronto.We believe that every Canadian should have a safe and affordable home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy, a $40 billion plan. Sorry, it is a $55 billion plan because of budget 2019. That is why we were so pleased last Friday to announce a very historic investment in the city of Toronto, helping to renovate, renew and reconstruct the community homes of 58,000 families in Toronto. That is why we will keep working very hard to give every Canadian a safe and affordable place to call home.
Mr. Speaker, on the same question of privilege, I am quite surprised by the position the government is taking. Apparently, the Liberal caucus reached a decision that the law did not apply to it and because it made the decision, the law does not apply. I would be very interested if the hon. member could provide the legal rationale.As a member of this place who was part of the discussion and debate on the Reform Act to change the rules under the Parliament of Canada Act, I have consistently bemoaned, and I know it may or may not be a matter for the Speaker to look at this, the larger question of how much power leaders of organized parties that are recognized have over the conduct of their individual members. However, the principle of Westminster democracy in this place is that all members are equal and the Prime Minister is merely first among equals. I assumed, when we passed the Parliament of Canada Act and the amendments found in section 49, that the recognized parties would comply with the requirements of section 49 in the Parliament of Canada Act and that surely they applied to every party once the law was passed and in place. It is quite distressing to hear now from this member that the caucus decided for itself to ignore the requirements of the law and feels that it has met all the requirements by sending a letter to the Speaker that details the caucus's decision to ignore the law.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the member for CumberlandColchester and thank him for his 30 years of outstanding service to Canadians. He has been a strong advocate for diversifying the local economy and is very passionate about growing the life sciences sector, particularly in producing life-saving treatments for serious illnesses. That is why, most recently, the Prime Minister made the announcement on BioVectra for $37.5 million, which helped leverage $144.6 million. More importantly, 450 good-quality, middle-class jobs were created.
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to maintaining a well-functioning refugee system, and that is why we have made significant investments in budget 2019 to improve the efficiency of the IRB in holding these hearings and to bring in regulation to encourage people to use the appropriate ways of entry to immigrate to this country. We will continue to invest in that system. We have achieved a significant level of success in significantly reducing the number of people who have presented themselves irregularly at our borders while maintaining a robust and efficient system of refugee determination.
Mr. Speaker, I am always happy to stand up and talk about our ambitious climate change plan. We are eliminating coal. We are investing in renewables. We are ensuring a just transition for communities and workers. We are investing in clean technology to create good jobs here. We are investing in energy efficiency measures.Yes, we launched some competitions to determine who could achieve the greatest emissions reductions. That is why the company that won the competition is going to achieve carbon reductions equal to taking 50,000 cars
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that this question has already been answered.What we want to do in the House is talk about the budget that we put forward for all Canadians. We put forward a budget that is going to help young people have the possibility of getting into their first home. We put in place a budget that is going to help students be able to retire their debt earlier in their post-student life. We put in place a budget that is going to help people get the sort of ability to face up to a changing world with the training that they need.We are proud of what we put forward for Canadians and we look forward to talking about it more.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have a long and proud history of medical developments and discoveries, like insulin and vaccines, which have saved lives at home and abroad.Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please tell us what investments our government is making in cutting-edge research and facilities to pave the way for new medical breakthroughs and to make treatments even more effective?
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in the House, Canadians should have complete confidence in the integrity of our Supreme Court nomination process. It is merit based. It has led to the appointment of two exceptionally high-quality candidates thus far as well as a chief justice.Obviously, these leaks are of great concern to me. As I assured the House yesterday, I am confident that these leaks did not come from my office and the Prime Minister has assured the House that the leaks did not come from his office.
Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague is anxious about HFR. I keep telling him every week that we are working on this important file. When we have news, we will be sure to let my colleague know. In the meantime, we are interested in technologies of the future. We are a government that believes in science and research, and we want to explore all options for transportation in the future.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated yesterday, Canada is based on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is not up to the state to determine what people can or cannot wear no matter their beliefs. We have institutions to protect Canadians' fundamental rights. As Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Justice, I will support and protect these laws.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence. The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses. The witnesses came to testify
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to acknowledge the excellent partnership we have with the Province of Quebec and the City of Montreal. I wish to extend my sincere appreciation for that partnership and for their hard work.Canada has experienced an increase in people coming to this country as a result of situations going on all over the world. People are fleeing war and persecution. It is in partnership with municipalities and the provinces that Canada remains a welcoming country as we work to ensure that these individuals enjoy the full benefit of the rule of law in Canada and that at the same time, the system is operated
Mr. Speaker, we have always been very clear about this issue from the beginning. We are going to do two things at once. We will always stand up for jobs for Canadian workers across the country and we will respect our institutions and the rule of law. That is exactly what we did. We have a great deal of respect for the work that our parliamentary committees do and we also respect the Ethics Commissioner, who is looking into the matter. We will always participate in investigations because we know that we, on the government side of the House, are defending our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.In her response earlier, the hon. government House leader made reference to a piece of correspondence she had given you. I do not believe that the rest of us have seen this letter, but as you know, Mr. Speaker, and as she knows, any letter or any document that is made reference to in the House must be tabled for the benefit of all of us. We would now like to see this letter to determine whether this actually demonstrates that the Liberal Party was in fact in conformity with the Parliament of Canada Act. She was very careful not to make that clear in her comments, so we would like to see it for ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, the Toronto Community Housing Corporation is the largest social housing provider in Canada and the second-largest in North America. Last week, the Prime Minister was in Toronto to make a $1.3 billion housing announcement, the largest federal housing investment in Canadian history. Could the Minister of Families, Children, and Social Development inform the House how this record investment will provide tens of thousands of Toronto families safe and affordable homes?
Most negative speeches
Mr. Speaker, although I find the actions of that side completely wrong and reprehensible, I will apologize for the fact that I did show disrespect for the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, we put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract defamatory online statements he made against the Minister of Innovation.He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, here is what I have to say about the truth: We put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract statements he made online about the Minister of Innovation. He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians. Misleading Canadians, as the opposition leader has done, is never virtuous.
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. He had to retract some statements he made online in December about the Minister of Innovation.We warned the Leader of the Opposition again because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. Once again, on March 31, the Leader of the Opposition deleted some tweets because he knows he did something he should not have.
Mr. Speaker, after the biggest drug money-laundering case in Canadian history, the federal government is still not doing its part. Expert Peter German's report points out that no federal resources are being used. Literally, in the federal money-laundering unit, no one is working on money laundering. No wonder there are so few federal prosecutions. Drug money laundering is fuelling organized crime and putting communities at risk. Why have the Liberals failed to act?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shut down every parliamentary opportunity to examine fully his attempted interference in the SNC-Lavalin corruption trial. By threatening a lawsuit, he suddenly seems to favour litigating details of his scandal under oath in a public courtwell, not really. We know it is just a desperate ruse. However, there is another opportunity this afternoon. Will the Prime Minister encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to support my motion to invite him and 11 other witnesses to speak without constraint about this sorry affair?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has sent a letter to our leader in which he threatens to sue him.In the letter, he states that the Leader of the Opposition accused him of having, and I quote, personally subverted the judicial process to interfere with a criminal prosecution. He seems to understand the situation, and the leader stands by what he said. When will we be going to court?
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time the Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians with false and defamatory statements. As I have said, he has been forced to retract or cease making
Mr. Speaker, as I said, he has been forced to retract or cease making defamatory statements against members of our government repeatedly. The reason we put him on notice is because he is doing so again.Members of the opposition should not have to mislead Canadians in order to make political points. They should stick to the facts. That is what Canadians deserve.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shown little regard for anyone but himself in this ever-deepening scandal. The banal excuses and empty platitudes about his respect for the rule of law and the independence of committees stand in stark contrast to the trail of resignations, removals and character smearing left in his self-serving wake. Again, will the Prime Minister finally order his minions to stand down and encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to freely vote their conscience?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians know what is happening to women under the Liberals. The former attorney general repeatedly said the pressure she was facing was inappropriate, yet the Prime Minister claimed no one had ever raised concerns with him. However, just last week he was forced to admit that was false. Now he is threatening to take our leader to court for pointing out that he has been misleading Canadians.When will the court case begin so the whole truth can come out?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order arising out of question period.I would have risen if I could have at the moment this event occurred, but under our standing rules, there are no points of order during Question Period. Under our standing rules, we are not to interrupt members when they are speaking. We are not to heckle. We are not to create a din. Just as a point of reference for you, Mr. Speaker, at the point that you were trying to bring the House to order, when the Minister of Finance was speaking, with the volume at my desk at full, as high as I could listen to it, as far as our technology would take it, I was unable to hear the minister over the heckling. That is just unacceptable, and I wish that we would find a way. We have the Standing Orders. It is disrespectful to this institution, to democracy itself and to our constituents that we allow this sort of bad behaviour to continue at high volume.
Mr. Speaker, high-speed Internet and cellular services are a necessity, but access is anything but affordable and reliable. A single mother told me that she pays $102 a month for unreliable service. People deserve a government that has the courage to stand up to telecommunications companies.When will the Prime Minister find the courage to stand up for people and cut these costs?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and those Liberals talk about letting members on their side of the House make decisions without direction from the PMO. That certainly was not the case when the Prime Minister unilaterally turfed two female caucus members, in the process breaking the laws of this place. We know what the Prime Minister does to people who do not agree with him. He pressures, intimidates and then threatens them if they do not fall in line, and then he throws them out. Since the leader of the opposition will not be intimidated, and the Prime Minister cannot kick him out of caucus, the Prime Minister has threatened him with a lawsuit. A simple question: When are we going to see you is court?
Mr. Speaker, it is rather ironic that the Liberal Prime Minister is trying to lecture parliamentarians here in the House when he himself violated the Conflict of Interest Act four times. The Prime Minister is claiming that what our leader said is false. He reiterated that yesterday evening.If he wants to demonstrate even a little bit of leadership, will he follow through on his threat so that he can testify under oath in court, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister now says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. I guess he will find out in October.In his letter threatening to sue the Conservative leader, he says that the former attorney general never told him that the political interference in an ongoing criminal proceeding was entirely inappropriate. However, the Prime Minister admitted to the House last week that in fact she told him that directly to his face. He says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. When will the Prime Minister take us to court so he can experience just what those are?
Mr. Speaker, there have been expulsions from caucus, shutting down debate in committees, a lawsuit, a leak of confidential information about a chief justice Supreme Court application and two months of Liberals doing everything they can to change the channel on the PMO scandal. However, leaking confidential information, that is a serious breach. The Minister of Justice does not seem to understand the seriousness of this act. Is the Attorney General comfortable with a leak that was intended to smear the former attorney general? The integrity of our courts is at stake. Will the Attorney General launch an investigation into this serious breach?
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the official opposition was put on notice on March 31. That very same day, he deleted tweets and then edited them because he knew he should be more judicious in his words. His actions are clear. The Conservatives talk a tough game. The same thing happened with the Minister of Innovation . The Conservatives made those statements in the House. When they were asked to take those statements out of the House, they would not. Do you know what happened after they were served notice in December, Mr. Speaker? The leader of the official opposition retracted those comments. He deleted those tweets.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to once again remind Canadians that all information is public. Why is that information public? Because the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. All meetings of the justice committee that were on this issue were in public so Canadians could decide for themselves. They know very well who is misleading Canadians.That member talks a big game, but in February, when it came to comments on this file, it was his leader, the leader of the official opposition, who actually retracted that statement.
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time this Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians by making false and defamatory statements. As I have already said at least twice, he was forced to withdraw or stop making defamatory statements about members of our government.We had to warn him because he did it again. We know the Conservatives have a history of doing this. It is important for the Conservatives to remember that this is not the right approach.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.In her response earlier, the hon. government House leader made reference to a piece of correspondence she had given you. I do not believe that the rest of us have seen this letter, but as you know, Mr. Speaker, and as she knows, any letter or any document that is made reference to in the House must be tabled for the benefit of all of us. We would now like to see this letter to determine whether this actually demonstrates that the Liberal Party was in fact in conformity with the Parliament of Canada Act. She was very careful not to make that clear in her comments, so we would like to see it for ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, on March 29, our leader issued an official statement in a press release in which he said that the Prime Minister engaged in political interference, personally gave orders, denied the truth, and had therefore lost the moral authority to govern. Our leader stands by everything he said and even reiterated it yesterday.If the Prime Minister has the slightest sense of leadership, will he proceed with his lawsuit so we can all find out the truth of this matter?
Mr. Speaker, while Trois-Rivières is still waiting for an announcement on the high-frequency rail project, Transport Canada is funding a feasibility study on the Hyperloop project in Canada. Transport Canada has yet to publish the results of the studies on the HFR. The Hyperloop project is decades away from practical application, while the HFR is closer to reality.Since the minister is currently exploring the future, could he get back in his DeLorean, return to 2019 and tell us whether there is a high-frequency rail project on the horizon?
Mr. Speaker, they stick it to Canadians.Amanda Stevenson, in Lundar, Manitoba, had her dairy fridge quit last week. She has watched these Liberals take money from her in the form of a carbon tax and increase taxes on her small business, and now she had to watch them give money to her competitor for the same thing she cannot afford. That is wrong. We are proud to stand for Amanda, not for SNC-Lavalin and for Loblaws.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is threatening a lawsuit to shut down the opposition from holding him accountable for his attempts to interfere in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. He says that it is libellous to say that the former attorney general told him and his top officials that their actions were political interference and entirely inappropriate. However, the taped phone call, texts and notes show that it is all true. Canadians look forward to the Prime Minister being forced to testify in open court under oath. When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister says that he is going to sue the Leader of the Opposition for saying, [The former attorney general] repeatedly told the Prime Minister and his top officials that their actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. For him to sue, it would have to mean those comments were wrong, but last week the Prime Minister admitted that it was true.How can the Prime Minister sue someone for saying something the Prime Minister has already admitted is true?
Mr. Speaker, after being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition not only refused to do so, but refused to even say the words.I will give him another opportunity to do so today through his deputy leader. Will he denounce white supremacy, the alt-right movement and finally apologize for sharing a platform with it?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been caught misleading Canadians. Having been caught, now the Prime Minister is trying to sue his critics. In his letter, he disputes the fact the Prime Minister had been informed by [the former attorney general] that his actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. Every single Canadian understands that this is in fact exactly what happened.When will the Prime Minister move forward with his threat to call a court case and get to business?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the question of privilege raised this morning by the hon. member for MarkhamStouffville. In her intervention, the member referenced an alleged breach of the Parliament of Canada Act.As the Chair stated in a ruling on April 8, 2019, asking the House to deal with the possible expulsion of a member from caucus is not a proper subject for a question of privilege. The Chair stated that if a member believes that the House needs to put in place certain practices, perhaps by way of additional Standing Orders, this should be done through a substantive motion following proper notice.The Chair also made reference earlier today, as well as in the April 8 ruling, to the Speaker having no role in the interpretation of statute nor in the conduct of changes that were made to the Parliament of Canada Act. As the Chair pointed out, all that is allowed under subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act is that the Speaker be informed of the results of the caucus decision.As the hon. member pointed out, the Speaker confirmed on December 10, 2015, that all actions required by the Speaker as it relates to subsection 49.8(5) had been taken, which she stated is indicative that the chair of the Liberal caucus did indeed inform the Speaker of the decision of the Liberal caucus.Just to be absolutely clear I will state that, pursuant to subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act, the chair of the national Liberal caucus sent a letter to the Speaker over three years ago outlining the decisions of the Liberal caucus as they relate to sections 49.2, 49.3 and 49.4; subsections 49.5(1) to 49.5(4); and section 49.6 of the Parliament of Canada Act and their application to the 42nd Parliament. The Liberal caucus decided that the provisions would not apply for the 42nd Parliament. Given the fact that the Liberal caucus did not adopt these provisions, the points raised by the hon. member on this issue are moot. The hon. member also states that her question of privilege is with respect to which rules apply with regard to the expulsion and readmission of caucus members. I would contend that, given the Liberal caucus decided that the provisions of the Parliament of Canada Act would not apply for the 42nd Parliament and sent the Speaker a letter to confirm this, there is no confusion around which rules apply. Furthermore, as I said earlier, it is not the role of the Speaker to adjudicate these matters.
Mr. Speaker, someone obtained confidential information on the Supreme Court vetting process to smear Chief Justice Joyal and the former attorney general. There are political fingerprints all over this hatchet job, but the new Attorney General of Canada refuses to investigate. Why? He says he trusts the Prime Minister's Office and he trusts it will never happen again. God help the rule of law when we have an Attorney General who thinks his job is damage control. His job is to protect the integrity of the process. When will he launch an independent investigation into finding out who launched that leak and who ordered it?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Willowdale for his hard work on behalf of the people of Toronto.We believe that every Canadian should have a safe and affordable home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy, a $40 billion plan. Sorry, it is a $55 billion plan because of budget 2019. That is why we were so pleased last Friday to announce a very historic investment in the city of Toronto, helping to renovate, renew and reconstruct the community homes of 58,000 families in Toronto. That is why we will keep working very hard to give every Canadian a safe and affordable place to call home.
Mr. Speaker, as everyone well knows, we spent many weeks working to try and find a positive resolution on this issue. This is something that we understand had very strong opinions on multiple sides and we wanted to work forward and demonstrate that we truly believed that differences of opinion and diversity was a source of strength and resilience for an organization and for our country. That is what we worked very hard on. Unfortunately, we could not get to that place. The will of caucus was clear that those individuals could no longer be in caucus. At the same time, we are going to continue focusing on what matters to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, putting the Conservative leader on notice is something we did because the truth was important.Here is the truth. After being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, indeed, let us be clear. The Prime Minister has said that it is libellous for the opposition leader to say that the former attorney general was pressured by him and then fired for resisting. However, on the taped call, the clerk said that the Prime Minister was determined, in a firm frame of mind, that they were on a collision course and that he was going to get it done one way or another.When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat to sue or will he just finally admit that everything the opposition leader said is totally true?
Mr. Speaker, as I stated yesterday, Canada is based on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is not up to the state to determine what people can or cannot wear no matter their beliefs. We have institutions to protect Canadians' fundamental rights. As Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Justice, I will support and protect these laws.
Mr. Speaker, in 2018, Quebec took in roughly 22,000 asylum seekers. The Quebec government housed them, cared for them and looked after them. The budget does not offer Quebec a single cent for refugee settlement. In the budget implementation act, the Liberals do not address the problem of Roxham Road. Instead of making minor adjustments, why did the Minister of Immigration not just announce the suspension of the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the party opposite wants to sticker it to Canadians like Doug Ford, but let us talk about what we are doing. We are putting a price on pollution and giving it all back to Ontarians. What does that mean? It means 90% of the money goes right back to families. A family of four will get $307, which is more than 80% of what families will pay.However, I have a question. The member for Milton was on television the other day and was asked if Conservatives would commit to meeting the Paris Agreement targets. She could not answer. Everyone in this House, except for one Conservative, voted for it. Will
Mr. Speaker, I was so excited when I saw the member stand up because I thought he was going to talk about the Conservatives' climate change plan. It has been 345 days since they announced a climate change plan. What is our plan? We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and providing a just transition for workers. We are investing in public transportation across the country. We are investing in clean-tech companies, and yes, we are investing in energy efficiency. This was an open tender, open to any company or organization across the country, to get bang for the buck, because guess what? Canadians want to reduce their emissions. It is only the party opposite
Mr. Speaker, a new report points out that the Prime Minister's actions against former senior ministers is unprecedented in Canadian history. It has not been seen in a century. Senior former Liberal staffer Penny Collenette points out how this is highly unusual. The women ministers who spoke up about the truth about interference in criminal prosecution were kicked out for speaking up. The Liberals claim that there is nothing to see here. Clearly there is, and Canadians disagree with the government. Why will the government not call a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, we put the Conservative leader on notice because the truth is important. The truth is that, after being asked whether he would condemn white supremacist movements yesterday, the Conservative leader not only refused to do so, he refused to even say the words. We will give the Conservatives another opportunity to condemn white supremacist movements.Will they denounce them and apologize for sharing a platform with those who hold such beliefs?
Mr. Speaker, I will give some free advice to the Prime Minister. Yes, there has been a notice sent over, and the Leader of the Opposition has indicated that he stands by every single word in that press release. That is a problem for the Prime Minister. Therefore, I guess the ball is actually in his court.He can stand up here, wave his arms around and talk about putting us on notice, but why does he not actually show us? Let us get it on.
Mr. Speaker, for two months, the Prime Minister has been avoiding accountability in his involvement in the SNC-Lavalin corruption scandal, which has been engulfing his government now for months.Now he has indicated that he wishes to sue the Leader of the Opposition for the criticisms that the leader made. Let us get the ball rolling. The reason being is, quite frankly, that these allegations can be tested in court, a place the Prime Minister cannot shut down.Would the Prime Minister tell us when he will commence the action?
Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, our government has always stood up for Canadians' fundamental rights and will continue to do so. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects the rights of all citizens. We cannot choose which to protect and which to limit. Our position is clear. The state must not dictate what people can or cannot wear regardless of their beliefs.
Mr. Speaker, every time we ask a question we see the Minister of Justice and Attorney General pick up his notes and repeat the answers written by the Prime Minister's office. That says a lot about the independence of the new attorney general vis-a-vis the Prime Minister. Could we please get a straight answer to a simple question?Will the Minister of Justice challenge Bill 21 or support a legal challenge, yes or no? It seems to me that he does not need notes to answer the question.
Mr. Speaker, when the IPCC report gave us 12 years to take action on global warming, how did the Liberals respond? They purchased a pipeline. When we learned that Canada is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the planet, how did the Liberals respond? They released a budget that keeps giving oil companies billions of dollars. Now we have learned that our glaciers in the far north are disappearing and melting twice as fast as the others around the world. What are the Liberals doing? They are giving Loblaws $12 million for refrigerators.What exactly is it going to take for the Liberals to do something? Does one of their multimillionaire buddies need to move to the far north?
Mr. Speaker, I have a piece of paper too. It is misinformation the Prime Minister gave both during the last election and more recently. Let us start with balanced budgets, or maybe electoral reform or maybe the $10-billion deficit, all things that were promised to Canadians that did not come about.Then we have the most recent crucial issues, for example, the Prime Minister indicating that the former attorney general never went to him about her concerns. We know that to be patently false.Let us test this in court. When will the Prime Minister start this action?
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to point out that we appointed a minister for rural communities who is responsible for ensuring that the entire country has access to affordable, high-speed Internet services. Along with the private sector, we will continue to make investments across the country to provide all Canadians with this vital access to services that have the quality and speed to meet the demands of the future.
Mr. Speaker, the Toronto Community Housing Corporation is the largest social housing provider in Canada and the second-largest in North America. Last week, the Prime Minister was in Toronto to make a $1.3 billion housing announcement, the largest federal housing investment in Canadian history. Could the Minister of Families, Children, and Social Development inform the House how this record investment will provide tens of thousands of Toronto families safe and affordable homes?
Mr. Speaker, yes, we did put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. On March 31, they received a notice and on the same day the Leader of the Opposition deleted his tweets. He knows that he made defamatory remarks, he knows that he must not do this. He was put on notice so that he makes more judicious decisions that are more befitting of his position.
Mr. Speaker, in the letter where the Prime Minister threatens to sue the Conservative leader, he says that it is a lie that the Clerk of the Privy Council pressured the former attorney general and made it clear that her job was on the line. Well, Canadians could hear clearly on an audio recording that the Clerk of the Privy Council said exactly that. Truth is an absolute defence, and every word of the Conservative leader's statement on the Liberal's SNC-Lavalin scandal is true. If the Prime Minister believes otherwise, when will we see him in court?
Mr. Speaker, one cannot be a lawmaker if one is a lawbreaker.We know that the Prime Minister has broken the law, not just the ethics law that he broke by accepting gifts from someone seeking a government grant, but he broke the Parliament of Canada Act to kick two of his members out of caucus as part of the cover-up in the SNC-Lavalin scandal.If the Prime Minister is so confident that anything he said in this matter is true, when will he launch his lawsuit so we can put him on the stand and question him under oath?
Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague is anxious about HFR. I keep telling him every week that we are working on this important file. When we have news, we will be sure to let my colleague know. In the meantime, we are interested in technologies of the future. We are a government that believes in science and research, and we want to explore all options for transportation in the future.
Mr. Speaker, this matter has been addressed numerous times in the House, but I will definitely answer it once again. We believe that Canadians should get to hear the truth. That is exactly why the members of the justice committee themselves set parameters for a discussion: to ensure the truth could be shared with Canadians. That is exactly why the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. This is the first time in the history of the country that this has been done. However, it is important that Canadians get to know. That is exactly why all the facts are now public. The Conservatives are misleading Canadians, and that is what they continue to do. That is why they were served notice and then all of a sudden made some changes.
Mr. Speaker, on World Health Day, we celebrate universal public health care, something that Lester Pearson provided to all Canadians more than 50 years ago. We recognize that in Canada people are proud of their publicly funded health care system, one that is based on need and not on their ability to pay, and this government wants to strengthen that. That is why we are making historic investments in the area of mental health and home care, and we have just laid the foundational piece for a national pharmacare program. This government will continue to fight for a publicly funded health care system.
Mr. Speaker, on the same question of privilege, I am quite surprised by the position the government is taking. Apparently, the Liberal caucus reached a decision that the law did not apply to it and because it made the decision, the law does not apply. I would be very interested if the hon. member could provide the legal rationale.As a member of this place who was part of the discussion and debate on the Reform Act to change the rules under the Parliament of Canada Act, I have consistently bemoaned, and I know it may or may not be a matter for the Speaker to look at this, the larger question of how much power leaders of organized parties that are recognized have over the conduct of their individual members. However, the principle of Westminster democracy in this place is that all members are equal and the Prime Minister is merely first among equals. I assumed, when we passed the Parliament of Canada Act and the amendments found in section 49, that the recognized parties would comply with the requirements of section 49 in the Parliament of Canada Act and that surely they applied to every party once the law was passed and in place. It is quite distressing to hear now from this member that the caucus decided for itself to ignore the requirements of the law and feels that it has met all the requirements by sending a letter to the Speaker that details the caucus's decision to ignore the law.
Mr. Speaker, we found out yesterday that the Canadian Coast Guard is ill-equipped and does not have a concrete plan to deal with an aging fleet. This has resulted in reduced search-and-rescue coverage, ferry-service disruptions, cancelled resupply runs to Arctic and coastal communities and nearly $2 million in lost navigational buoys. The government's lack of funding for the Coast Guard is leaving coastal communities at a real risk. When will the government finally make sure that our Coast Guard is properly equipped, and why has the safety of our coastal communities not been a priority?
Mr. Speaker, last week I asked the government to address urgent food insecurity in our north because of climate change.Did it ever deliver, giving $12 million to Loblaws, a company headed up by the second-richest Canadian. The Liberals also gave $4.5 billion to a rich American oil company. In the eyes of the Liberal government, it is clear that every problem can be solved by giving money to its billionaire friends.Meanwhile, first nations already hurting from climate change get nothing. Instead of favours for the billionaire friends, when will the government stand up for first nations and Canadians already hurting?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member is projecting. That member and his benches are minions of the leader of the official opposition. Rather than point fingers, the member should know very well that when it comes to our members, they make their own decisions. The Conservatives cannot fathom that people do not agree with them. They have not had to endure them often, but we in the Liberal benches have tough conversations. We agree to disagree and we try to find compromise where it is possible. It is with those qualities that we know that Canadians are better off today than they were under 10 years
Mr. Speaker, why does the party opposite not stand for the planet? Why does the party opposite not stand for our children and grandchildren? Why does the party opposite not stand for climate action that is creating good jobs and preparing us for the future?To the woman in Manitoba that the member opposite is misleading, let me tell her that a family of four in Manitoba will receive $339, more than 80% of what families will pay. We can take action on climate change and we can do it in a way that is affordable.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During question period, a falsehood was spoken, and I just wish to draw some attention to that. The Minister for Women and Gender Equality said that women are actually participating in the workforce to a greater extent. I have a document from the Library of Parliament that actually shows that women participated in the labour force to a greater extent when the former government was in place, and that number has declined since this new government came to power.I would ask for unanimous consent to table the document.
Mr. Speaker, climate leaders do not buy pipelines. Feminist prime ministers do not turf female colleagues because they speak truth to power. Humanitarian leaders do not shut their borders to asylum seekers during a refugee crisis. Now the Liberals have snuck in changes to refugee laws in the budget bill. That means people like Seidu Mohammed, an LGBTQ man from Ghana, whose asylum claim was accepted after he crossed irregularly from the U.S., will not even get a chance to apply. Lives are at risk. Will the Prime Minister do what is right and suspend the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, speaking of the truth, the Prime Minister said today that we cannot lie to Canadians. Obviously not, but the Prime Minister's own story has changed since the beginning. He himself admitted that his story was not accurate.If the Prime Minister thinks that Canadians want to know the truth, why is he refusing to launch a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence.The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses, and the witnesses came and testified. All the facts are now public, and Canadians can hear them for themselves.The interesting thing is that after the Leader of the Opposition was served notice last week, he deleted the tweets because he knows he cannot make defamatory statements.
Mr. Speaker, health care is something all Canadians are proud of, and no individual should be left behind when it comes to making sure they get the services they need. Sunday, April 7, was World Health Day, and the focus was on universal health coverage.Can the Minister of Health please advise this House on how she plans to make Canada's health care system even better?
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. To ensure that Canadians could hear the truth, the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. These meetings took place at the justice committee. They took place in public. That is exactly why the member is able to refer to them. It is important that Canadians be able to decide for themselves.Yes, we have put the leader of the official opposition on notice. That is because he is misleading Canadians. This is not the first time we have done so. We have done so previously because he was misleading Canadians when it came to the Minister of Innovation. Once he was put on notice, he deleted and retracted those comments. Once again, on March 31, he did the same thing afterwards
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the consequence of what happens when members opposite do not want to talk about the budget and do not even want to read the budget. They do not notice what is in the budget, including unprecedented measures to move forward on countering money laundering and the impacts of organized crime in the housing sector, particularly in British Columbia.We continue to work with our provincial counterparts and, indeed, with partners right across the country and around the world to crack down on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance and to make sure our system works for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your reminder that members should be judicious in their wording. Outside of the chamber you are not always there to monitor the situation. However, that is exactly why Canadians can have confidence that when the leader of the official opposition is misleading Canadians, we will not stand idly by. That is exactly why the leader of the official opposition was put on notice. After he was put on notice, he deleted tweets. He actually edited his wording to be more judicious, just as you, Mr. Speaker, have reminded all members to do. This is not the first time the Conservatives have done this. They did this in December after the Minister of Innovation had served them notice.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the member for CumberlandColchester and thank him for his 30 years of outstanding service to Canadians. He has been a strong advocate for diversifying the local economy and is very passionate about growing the life sciences sector, particularly in producing life-saving treatments for serious illnesses. That is why, most recently, the Prime Minister made the announcement on BioVectra for $37.5 million, which helped leverage $144.6 million. More importantly, 450 good-quality, middle-class jobs were created.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague brings up the issue of women. I want to point out that I am extremely proud that at Transport Canada 47% of the very large number of nominations that have been done under Transport Canada in the last three and a half years are women.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's saga of corruption and political interference continues. After pulling out all the stops to kill the story and hide the truth from Canadians, the Prime Minister is now resorting to intimidation tactics in a bid to silence the Leader of the Opposition.Will the Prime Minister make good on his threat as soon as possible? Canadians want the truth.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence. The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses. The witnesses came to testify
Mr. Speaker, the member for Mount Royal finally dissociated himself from the shameful statements his friend, the mayor of Hampstead, made comparing secularism to ethnic cleansing. The Minister of Justice was asked to condemn the statements yesterday, but he chose not to.Insulting Quebec is apparently okay with the Minister of Justice.Will the minister condemn the statements made by the mayor of Hampstead and pledge not to challenge the secularism bill in court?
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Coast Guard members are at work every day across the country, and our government will continue to provide them with the tools that they need to keep Canadians and our waters safe and our economy moving. During the 2018 Arctic season, the Coast Guard was faced with more unusually difficult ice conditions than in other years, which led to some delay in resupply and escort missions. Canadians can be proud of the men and women of the Canadian Coast Guard and the important work that they do from coast to coast to coast.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have a long and proud history of medical developments and discoveries, like insulin and vaccines, which have saved lives at home and abroad.Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please tell us what investments our government is making in cutting-edge research and facilities to pave the way for new medical breakthroughs and to make treatments even more effective?
Mr. Speaker, they are twisting the truth. The problem is that the Prime Minister put our leader on notice for the statement he made on March 29.Stop sidestepping. Some facts were raised in the notice and we want to respond. The Leader of the Opposition is prepared to go to court right now.Go ahead, Mr. Prime Minister, we are waiting.
Mr. Speaker, obviously leaks concern us. I can assure the House that leaks did not come from my ministry and I trust my colleagues when they tell me that leaks did not come from theirs. This is a situation of obvious concern and we are doing our best to make sure it does not happen in the future.
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that question has already been answered. What he is not asking about is the budget. Perhaps he does not care about what we are doing for seniors because he already has a million-dollar pension. Those seniors are going to be better off because of their ability to keep more money in their pockets and they are going to be better off in the future because of this budget.For the member for Carleton, we know that the training benefit we are putting in place might help him when he looks for his next job. This is the sort of benefit that will help all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, our Prime Minister is trying to intimidate our leader with threats of legal action. He wants to beef up his credibility because his lack of leadership is causing the government to make mistakes.He hid the truth from Canadians for weeks, if not months, but now we have the perfect opportunity to find out everything. He needs to present his evidence in court, follow through on his threat and testify under oath. When will he do that?
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics is an excellent place to disclose new information on the Prime Minister's political interference, especially when that information will help the Ethics Commissioner in his upcoming investigation.Will the Prime Minister waive any restrictions that might prevent witnesses from appearing and speaking freely before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics? Canadians still want to know the truth.
Mr. Speaker, last year Loblaws made $3 billion in profit, yet yesterday the Minister of Environment gave Loblaws $12 millionto do what? It was to buy fridges. This money came from hard-working Canadians, seniors and low-income families who struggle to make ends meet.You tell mehow many Canadians can walk into the Prime Minister's Office and ask them to pay for a new fridge? How many? Why is it always the wealthy and well-connected who get handouts from these Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, ensuring that Canadians could hear and know the truth is precisely why the Prime Minister waived cabinet confidence and solicitor-client privilege.All the facts have now been made public. Members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights made their own decisions. That is how we operate on this side of the House.We can see that the Conservatives get direction from the Leader of the Opposition, but our MPs can make their own decisions. Members of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics will proceed as they see fit.
Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to actually talk about climate change and the action our government is taking.We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and having a just transition for workers. We are investing in clean solutions so innovators, entrepreneurs across the country create good jobs. We are of course investing in energy efficiency.The program the member opposite is talking about was a fair and open competition. It was based on the most submissions, the most bang for the buck. It will remove 50,000 cars off the road. The company in question is paying three-quarters of the cost.The real question Canadians want answered is
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that this question has already been answered.What we want to do in the House is talk about the budget that we put forward for all Canadians. We put forward a budget that is going to help young people have the possibility of getting into their first home. We put in place a budget that is going to help students be able to retire their debt earlier in their post-student life. We put in place a budget that is going to help people get the sort of ability to face up to a changing world with the training that they need.We are proud of what we put forward for Canadians and we look forward to talking about it more.
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people have jobs. More persons with disabilities are working. More newcomers and young people are working now than ever before. Part of that, my hon. critic will want to know, is because we believe that gender equality is a driver for economic growth.
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to maintaining a well-functioning refugee system, and that is why we have made significant investments in budget 2019 to improve the efficiency of the IRB in holding these hearings and to bring in regulation to encourage people to use the appropriate ways of entry to immigrate to this country. We will continue to invest in that system. We have achieved a significant level of success in significantly reducing the number of people who have presented themselves irregularly at our borders while maintaining a robust and efficient system of refugee determination.
Mr. Speaker, we have always been very clear about this issue from the beginning. We are going to do two things at once. We will always stand up for jobs for Canadian workers across the country and we will respect our institutions and the rule of law. That is exactly what we did. We have a great deal of respect for the work that our parliamentary committees do and we also respect the Ethics Commissioner, who is looking into the matter. We will always participate in investigations because we know that we, on the government side of the House, are defending our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that the minister talked about her plan, a plan that taxes Canadians for committing the sin of heating their homes in the winterwhich will do nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissionsand then gives that money to Loblaws to buy freezers. I am really, really good with that not being our plan. I am proud to say we will not do that.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to acknowledge the excellent partnership we have with the Province of Quebec and the City of Montreal. I wish to extend my sincere appreciation for that partnership and for their hard work.Canada has experienced an increase in people coming to this country as a result of situations going on all over the world. People are fleeing war and persecution. It is in partnership with municipalities and the provinces that Canada remains a welcoming country as we work to ensure that these individuals enjoy the full benefit of the rule of law in Canada and that at the same time, the system is operated
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in the House, Canadians should have complete confidence in the integrity of our Supreme Court nomination process. It is merit based. It has led to the appointment of two exceptionally high-quality candidates thus far as well as a chief justice.Obviously, these leaks are of great concern to me. As I assured the House yesterday, I am confident that these leaks did not come from my office and the Prime Minister has assured the House that the leaks did not come from his office.
Mr. Speaker, you should be able to confirm that you received a letter to inform you of the will of caucus on these measures. It is up to the Liberal caucus to decide our own affairs. I would encourage that member to focus on his caucus and its caucus matters. We have caucus discussions, and we know that what happens in caucus stays in caucus, but to satisfy the rules, Mr. Speaker, you were provided with a letter. What is clear is that we have gone through a whole question period, and the Conservatives will continue to focus on us. We will continue to focus on Canadians, and that is why we are so proud to be talking about the budget. We look forward to being able to share how we are going to improve the lives of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I believe my hon. colleague's question has been answered. I imagine as the critic for the status of women, she is interested in what is happening to women in Canada. I am proud to report that there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people
Mr. Speaker, I am always happy to stand up and talk about our ambitious climate change plan. We are eliminating coal. We are investing in renewables. We are ensuring a just transition for communities and workers. We are investing in clean technology to create good jobs here. We are investing in energy efficiency measures.Yes, we launched some competitions to determine who could achieve the greatest emissions reductions. That is why the company that won the competition is going to achieve carbon reductions equal to taking 50,000 cars
Mr. Speaker, although I find the actions of that side completely wrong and reprehensible, I will apologize for the fact that I did show disrespect for the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, we put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract defamatory online statements he made against the Minister of Innovation.He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, here is what I have to say about the truth: We put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract statements he made online about the Minister of Innovation. He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians. Misleading Canadians, as the opposition leader has done, is never virtuous.
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. He had to retract some statements he made online in December about the Minister of Innovation.We warned the Leader of the Opposition again because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. Once again, on March 31, the Leader of the Opposition deleted some tweets because he knows he did something he should not have.
Mr. Speaker, after the biggest drug money-laundering case in Canadian history, the federal government is still not doing its part. Expert Peter German's report points out that no federal resources are being used. Literally, in the federal money-laundering unit, no one is working on money laundering. No wonder there are so few federal prosecutions. Drug money laundering is fuelling organized crime and putting communities at risk. Why have the Liberals failed to act?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shut down every parliamentary opportunity to examine fully his attempted interference in the SNC-Lavalin corruption trial. By threatening a lawsuit, he suddenly seems to favour litigating details of his scandal under oath in a public courtwell, not really. We know it is just a desperate ruse. However, there is another opportunity this afternoon. Will the Prime Minister encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to support my motion to invite him and 11 other witnesses to speak without constraint about this sorry affair?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has sent a letter to our leader in which he threatens to sue him.In the letter, he states that the Leader of the Opposition accused him of having, and I quote, personally subverted the judicial process to interfere with a criminal prosecution. He seems to understand the situation, and the leader stands by what he said. When will we be going to court?
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time the Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians with false and defamatory statements. As I have said, he has been forced to retract or cease making
Mr. Speaker, as I said, he has been forced to retract or cease making defamatory statements against members of our government repeatedly. The reason we put him on notice is because he is doing so again.Members of the opposition should not have to mislead Canadians in order to make political points. They should stick to the facts. That is what Canadians deserve.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shown little regard for anyone but himself in this ever-deepening scandal. The banal excuses and empty platitudes about his respect for the rule of law and the independence of committees stand in stark contrast to the trail of resignations, removals and character smearing left in his self-serving wake. Again, will the Prime Minister finally order his minions to stand down and encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to freely vote their conscience?
Mr. Speaker, Canadians know what is happening to women under the Liberals. The former attorney general repeatedly said the pressure she was facing was inappropriate, yet the Prime Minister claimed no one had ever raised concerns with him. However, just last week he was forced to admit that was false. Now he is threatening to take our leader to court for pointing out that he has been misleading Canadians.When will the court case begin so the whole truth can come out?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order arising out of question period.I would have risen if I could have at the moment this event occurred, but under our standing rules, there are no points of order during Question Period. Under our standing rules, we are not to interrupt members when they are speaking. We are not to heckle. We are not to create a din. Just as a point of reference for you, Mr. Speaker, at the point that you were trying to bring the House to order, when the Minister of Finance was speaking, with the volume at my desk at full, as high as I could listen to it, as far as our technology would take it, I was unable to hear the minister over the heckling. That is just unacceptable, and I wish that we would find a way. We have the Standing Orders. It is disrespectful to this institution, to democracy itself and to our constituents that we allow this sort of bad behaviour to continue at high volume.
Mr. Speaker, high-speed Internet and cellular services are a necessity, but access is anything but affordable and reliable. A single mother told me that she pays $102 a month for unreliable service. People deserve a government that has the courage to stand up to telecommunications companies.When will the Prime Minister find the courage to stand up for people and cut these costs?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and those Liberals talk about letting members on their side of the House make decisions without direction from the PMO. That certainly was not the case when the Prime Minister unilaterally turfed two female caucus members, in the process breaking the laws of this place. We know what the Prime Minister does to people who do not agree with him. He pressures, intimidates and then threatens them if they do not fall in line, and then he throws them out. Since the leader of the opposition will not be intimidated, and the Prime Minister cannot kick him out of caucus, the Prime Minister has threatened him with a lawsuit. A simple question: When are we going to see you is court?
Mr. Speaker, it is rather ironic that the Liberal Prime Minister is trying to lecture parliamentarians here in the House when he himself violated the Conflict of Interest Act four times. The Prime Minister is claiming that what our leader said is false. He reiterated that yesterday evening.If he wants to demonstrate even a little bit of leadership, will he follow through on his threat so that he can testify under oath in court, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister now says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. I guess he will find out in October.In his letter threatening to sue the Conservative leader, he says that the former attorney general never told him that the political interference in an ongoing criminal proceeding was entirely inappropriate. However, the Prime Minister admitted to the House last week that in fact she told him that directly to his face. He says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. When will the Prime Minister take us to court so he can experience just what those are?
Mr. Speaker, there have been expulsions from caucus, shutting down debate in committees, a lawsuit, a leak of confidential information about a chief justice Supreme Court application and two months of Liberals doing everything they can to change the channel on the PMO scandal. However, leaking confidential information, that is a serious breach. The Minister of Justice does not seem to understand the seriousness of this act. Is the Attorney General comfortable with a leak that was intended to smear the former attorney general? The integrity of our courts is at stake. Will the Attorney General launch an investigation into this serious breach?
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the official opposition was put on notice on March 31. That very same day, he deleted tweets and then edited them because he knew he should be more judicious in his words. His actions are clear. The Conservatives talk a tough game. The same thing happened with the Minister of Innovation . The Conservatives made those statements in the House. When they were asked to take those statements out of the House, they would not. Do you know what happened after they were served notice in December, Mr. Speaker? The leader of the official opposition retracted those comments. He deleted those tweets.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to once again remind Canadians that all information is public. Why is that information public? Because the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. All meetings of the justice committee that were on this issue were in public so Canadians could decide for themselves. They know very well who is misleading Canadians.That member talks a big game, but in February, when it came to comments on this file, it was his leader, the leader of the official opposition, who actually retracted that statement.
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time this Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians by making false and defamatory statements. As I have already said at least twice, he was forced to withdraw or stop making defamatory statements about members of our government.We had to warn him because he did it again. We know the Conservatives have a history of doing this. It is important for the Conservatives to remember that this is not the right approach.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.In her response earlier, the hon. government House leader made reference to a piece of correspondence she had given you. I do not believe that the rest of us have seen this letter, but as you know, Mr. Speaker, and as she knows, any letter or any document that is made reference to in the House must be tabled for the benefit of all of us. We would now like to see this letter to determine whether this actually demonstrates that the Liberal Party was in fact in conformity with the Parliament of Canada Act. She was very careful not to make that clear in her comments, so we would like to see it for ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, on March 29, our leader issued an official statement in a press release in which he said that the Prime Minister engaged in political interference, personally gave orders, denied the truth, and had therefore lost the moral authority to govern. Our leader stands by everything he said and even reiterated it yesterday.If the Prime Minister has the slightest sense of leadership, will he proceed with his lawsuit so we can all find out the truth of this matter?
Mr. Speaker, while Trois-Rivières is still waiting for an announcement on the high-frequency rail project, Transport Canada is funding a feasibility study on the Hyperloop project in Canada. Transport Canada has yet to publish the results of the studies on the HFR. The Hyperloop project is decades away from practical application, while the HFR is closer to reality.Since the minister is currently exploring the future, could he get back in his DeLorean, return to 2019 and tell us whether there is a high-frequency rail project on the horizon?
Mr. Speaker, they stick it to Canadians.Amanda Stevenson, in Lundar, Manitoba, had her dairy fridge quit last week. She has watched these Liberals take money from her in the form of a carbon tax and increase taxes on her small business, and now she had to watch them give money to her competitor for the same thing she cannot afford. That is wrong. We are proud to stand for Amanda, not for SNC-Lavalin and for Loblaws.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is threatening a lawsuit to shut down the opposition from holding him accountable for his attempts to interfere in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. He says that it is libellous to say that the former attorney general told him and his top officials that their actions were political interference and entirely inappropriate. However, the taped phone call, texts and notes show that it is all true. Canadians look forward to the Prime Minister being forced to testify in open court under oath. When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister says that he is going to sue the Leader of the Opposition for saying, [The former attorney general] repeatedly told the Prime Minister and his top officials that their actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. For him to sue, it would have to mean those comments were wrong, but last week the Prime Minister admitted that it was true.How can the Prime Minister sue someone for saying something the Prime Minister has already admitted is true?
Mr. Speaker, after being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition not only refused to do so, but refused to even say the words.I will give him another opportunity to do so today through his deputy leader. Will he denounce white supremacy, the alt-right movement and finally apologize for sharing a platform with it?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been caught misleading Canadians. Having been caught, now the Prime Minister is trying to sue his critics. In his letter, he disputes the fact the Prime Minister had been informed by [the former attorney general] that his actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. Every single Canadian understands that this is in fact exactly what happened.When will the Prime Minister move forward with his threat to call a court case and get to business?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the question of privilege raised this morning by the hon. member for MarkhamStouffville. In her intervention, the member referenced an alleged breach of the Parliament of Canada Act.As the Chair stated in a ruling on April 8, 2019, asking the House to deal with the possible expulsion of a member from caucus is not a proper subject for a question of privilege. The Chair stated that if a member believes that the House needs to put in place certain practices, perhaps by way of additional Standing Orders, this should be done through a substantive motion following proper notice.The Chair also made reference earlier today, as well as in the April 8 ruling, to the Speaker having no role in the interpretation of statute nor in the conduct of changes that were made to the Parliament of Canada Act. As the Chair pointed out, all that is allowed under subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act is that the Speaker be informed of the results of the caucus decision.As the hon. member pointed out, the Speaker confirmed on December 10, 2015, that all actions required by the Speaker as it relates to subsection 49.8(5) had been taken, which she stated is indicative that the chair of the Liberal caucus did indeed inform the Speaker of the decision of the Liberal caucus.Just to be absolutely clear I will state that, pursuant to subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act, the chair of the national Liberal caucus sent a letter to the Speaker over three years ago outlining the decisions of the Liberal caucus as they relate to sections 49.2, 49.3 and 49.4; subsections 49.5(1) to 49.5(4); and section 49.6 of the Parliament of Canada Act and their application to the 42nd Parliament. The Liberal caucus decided that the provisions would not apply for the 42nd Parliament. Given the fact that the Liberal caucus did not adopt these provisions, the points raised by the hon. member on this issue are moot. The hon. member also states that her question of privilege is with respect to which rules apply with regard to the expulsion and readmission of caucus members. I would contend that, given the Liberal caucus decided that the provisions of the Parliament of Canada Act would not apply for the 42nd Parliament and sent the Speaker a letter to confirm this, there is no confusion around which rules apply. Furthermore, as I said earlier, it is not the role of the Speaker to adjudicate these matters.
Mr. Speaker, someone obtained confidential information on the Supreme Court vetting process to smear Chief Justice Joyal and the former attorney general. There are political fingerprints all over this hatchet job, but the new Attorney General of Canada refuses to investigate. Why? He says he trusts the Prime Minister's Office and he trusts it will never happen again. God help the rule of law when we have an Attorney General who thinks his job is damage control. His job is to protect the integrity of the process. When will he launch an independent investigation into finding out who launched that leak and who ordered it?
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Willowdale for his hard work on behalf of the people of Toronto.We believe that every Canadian should have a safe and affordable home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy, a $40 billion plan. Sorry, it is a $55 billion plan because of budget 2019. That is why we were so pleased last Friday to announce a very historic investment in the city of Toronto, helping to renovate, renew and reconstruct the community homes of 58,000 families in Toronto. That is why we will keep working very hard to give every Canadian a safe and affordable place to call home.
Mr. Speaker, as everyone well knows, we spent many weeks working to try and find a positive resolution on this issue. This is something that we understand had very strong opinions on multiple sides and we wanted to work forward and demonstrate that we truly believed that differences of opinion and diversity was a source of strength and resilience for an organization and for our country. That is what we worked very hard on. Unfortunately, we could not get to that place. The will of caucus was clear that those individuals could no longer be in caucus. At the same time, we are going to continue focusing on what matters to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, putting the Conservative leader on notice is something we did because the truth was important.Here is the truth. After being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, indeed, let us be clear. The Prime Minister has said that it is libellous for the opposition leader to say that the former attorney general was pressured by him and then fired for resisting. However, on the taped call, the clerk said that the Prime Minister was determined, in a firm frame of mind, that they were on a collision course and that he was going to get it done one way or another.When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat to sue or will he just finally admit that everything the opposition leader said is totally true?
Mr. Speaker, as I stated yesterday, Canada is based on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is not up to the state to determine what people can or cannot wear no matter their beliefs. We have institutions to protect Canadians' fundamental rights. As Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Justice, I will support and protect these laws.
Mr. Speaker, in 2018, Quebec took in roughly 22,000 asylum seekers. The Quebec government housed them, cared for them and looked after them. The budget does not offer Quebec a single cent for refugee settlement. In the budget implementation act, the Liberals do not address the problem of Roxham Road. Instead of making minor adjustments, why did the Minister of Immigration not just announce the suspension of the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the party opposite wants to sticker it to Canadians like Doug Ford, but let us talk about what we are doing. We are putting a price on pollution and giving it all back to Ontarians. What does that mean? It means 90% of the money goes right back to families. A family of four will get $307, which is more than 80% of what families will pay.However, I have a question. The member for Milton was on television the other day and was asked if Conservatives would commit to meeting the Paris Agreement targets. She could not answer. Everyone in this House, except for one Conservative, voted for it. Will
Mr. Speaker, I was so excited when I saw the member stand up because I thought he was going to talk about the Conservatives' climate change plan. It has been 345 days since they announced a climate change plan. What is our plan? We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and providing a just transition for workers. We are investing in public transportation across the country. We are investing in clean-tech companies, and yes, we are investing in energy efficiency. This was an open tender, open to any company or organization across the country, to get bang for the buck, because guess what? Canadians want to reduce their emissions. It is only the party opposite
Mr. Speaker, a new report points out that the Prime Minister's actions against former senior ministers is unprecedented in Canadian history. It has not been seen in a century. Senior former Liberal staffer Penny Collenette points out how this is highly unusual. The women ministers who spoke up about the truth about interference in criminal prosecution were kicked out for speaking up. The Liberals claim that there is nothing to see here. Clearly there is, and Canadians disagree with the government. Why will the government not call a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, we put the Conservative leader on notice because the truth is important. The truth is that, after being asked whether he would condemn white supremacist movements yesterday, the Conservative leader not only refused to do so, he refused to even say the words. We will give the Conservatives another opportunity to condemn white supremacist movements.Will they denounce them and apologize for sharing a platform with those who hold such beliefs?
Mr. Speaker, I will give some free advice to the Prime Minister. Yes, there has been a notice sent over, and the Leader of the Opposition has indicated that he stands by every single word in that press release. That is a problem for the Prime Minister. Therefore, I guess the ball is actually in his court.He can stand up here, wave his arms around and talk about putting us on notice, but why does he not actually show us? Let us get it on.
Mr. Speaker, for two months, the Prime Minister has been avoiding accountability in his involvement in the SNC-Lavalin corruption scandal, which has been engulfing his government now for months.Now he has indicated that he wishes to sue the Leader of the Opposition for the criticisms that the leader made. Let us get the ball rolling. The reason being is, quite frankly, that these allegations can be tested in court, a place the Prime Minister cannot shut down.Would the Prime Minister tell us when he will commence the action?
Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, our government has always stood up for Canadians' fundamental rights and will continue to do so. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects the rights of all citizens. We cannot choose which to protect and which to limit. Our position is clear. The state must not dictate what people can or cannot wear regardless of their beliefs.
Mr. Speaker, every time we ask a question we see the Minister of Justice and Attorney General pick up his notes and repeat the answers written by the Prime Minister's office. That says a lot about the independence of the new attorney general vis-a-vis the Prime Minister. Could we please get a straight answer to a simple question?Will the Minister of Justice challenge Bill 21 or support a legal challenge, yes or no? It seems to me that he does not need notes to answer the question.
Mr. Speaker, when the IPCC report gave us 12 years to take action on global warming, how did the Liberals respond? They purchased a pipeline. When we learned that Canada is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the planet, how did the Liberals respond? They released a budget that keeps giving oil companies billions of dollars. Now we have learned that our glaciers in the far north are disappearing and melting twice as fast as the others around the world. What are the Liberals doing? They are giving Loblaws $12 million for refrigerators.What exactly is it going to take for the Liberals to do something? Does one of their multimillionaire buddies need to move to the far north?
Mr. Speaker, I have a piece of paper too. It is misinformation the Prime Minister gave both during the last election and more recently. Let us start with balanced budgets, or maybe electoral reform or maybe the $10-billion deficit, all things that were promised to Canadians that did not come about.Then we have the most recent crucial issues, for example, the Prime Minister indicating that the former attorney general never went to him about her concerns. We know that to be patently false.Let us test this in court. When will the Prime Minister start this action?
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to point out that we appointed a minister for rural communities who is responsible for ensuring that the entire country has access to affordable, high-speed Internet services. Along with the private sector, we will continue to make investments across the country to provide all Canadians with this vital access to services that have the quality and speed to meet the demands of the future.
Mr. Speaker, the Toronto Community Housing Corporation is the largest social housing provider in Canada and the second-largest in North America. Last week, the Prime Minister was in Toronto to make a $1.3 billion housing announcement, the largest federal housing investment in Canadian history. Could the Minister of Families, Children, and Social Development inform the House how this record investment will provide tens of thousands of Toronto families safe and affordable homes?
Mr. Speaker, yes, we did put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. On March 31, they received a notice and on the same day the Leader of the Opposition deleted his tweets. He knows that he made defamatory remarks, he knows that he must not do this. He was put on notice so that he makes more judicious decisions that are more befitting of his position.
Mr. Speaker, in the letter where the Prime Minister threatens to sue the Conservative leader, he says that it is a lie that the Clerk of the Privy Council pressured the former attorney general and made it clear that her job was on the line. Well, Canadians could hear clearly on an audio recording that the Clerk of the Privy Council said exactly that. Truth is an absolute defence, and every word of the Conservative leader's statement on the Liberal's SNC-Lavalin scandal is true. If the Prime Minister believes otherwise, when will we see him in court?
Mr. Speaker, one cannot be a lawmaker if one is a lawbreaker.We know that the Prime Minister has broken the law, not just the ethics law that he broke by accepting gifts from someone seeking a government grant, but he broke the Parliament of Canada Act to kick two of his members out of caucus as part of the cover-up in the SNC-Lavalin scandal.If the Prime Minister is so confident that anything he said in this matter is true, when will he launch his lawsuit so we can put him on the stand and question him under oath?
Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague is anxious about HFR. I keep telling him every week that we are working on this important file. When we have news, we will be sure to let my colleague know. In the meantime, we are interested in technologies of the future. We are a government that believes in science and research, and we want to explore all options for transportation in the future.
Mr. Speaker, this matter has been addressed numerous times in the House, but I will definitely answer it once again. We believe that Canadians should get to hear the truth. That is exactly why the members of the justice committee themselves set parameters for a discussion: to ensure the truth could be shared with Canadians. That is exactly why the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. This is the first time in the history of the country that this has been done. However, it is important that Canadians get to know. That is exactly why all the facts are now public. The Conservatives are misleading Canadians, and that is what they continue to do. That is why they were served notice and then all of a sudden made some changes.
Mr. Speaker, on World Health Day, we celebrate universal public health care, something that Lester Pearson provided to all Canadians more than 50 years ago. We recognize that in Canada people are proud of their publicly funded health care system, one that is based on need and not on their ability to pay, and this government wants to strengthen that. That is why we are making historic investments in the area of mental health and home care, and we have just laid the foundational piece for a national pharmacare program. This government will continue to fight for a publicly funded health care system.
Mr. Speaker, on the same question of privilege, I am quite surprised by the position the government is taking. Apparently, the Liberal caucus reached a decision that the law did not apply to it and because it made the decision, the law does not apply. I would be very interested if the hon. member could provide the legal rationale.As a member of this place who was part of the discussion and debate on the Reform Act to change the rules under the Parliament of Canada Act, I have consistently bemoaned, and I know it may or may not be a matter for the Speaker to look at this, the larger question of how much power leaders of organized parties that are recognized have over the conduct of their individual members. However, the principle of Westminster democracy in this place is that all members are equal and the Prime Minister is merely first among equals. I assumed, when we passed the Parliament of Canada Act and the amendments found in section 49, that the recognized parties would comply with the requirements of section 49 in the Parliament of Canada Act and that surely they applied to every party once the law was passed and in place. It is quite distressing to hear now from this member that the caucus decided for itself to ignore the requirements of the law and feels that it has met all the requirements by sending a letter to the Speaker that details the caucus's decision to ignore the law.
Mr. Speaker, we found out yesterday that the Canadian Coast Guard is ill-equipped and does not have a concrete plan to deal with an aging fleet. This has resulted in reduced search-and-rescue coverage, ferry-service disruptions, cancelled resupply runs to Arctic and coastal communities and nearly $2 million in lost navigational buoys. The government's lack of funding for the Coast Guard is leaving coastal communities at a real risk. When will the government finally make sure that our Coast Guard is properly equipped, and why has the safety of our coastal communities not been a priority?
Mr. Speaker, last week I asked the government to address urgent food insecurity in our north because of climate change.Did it ever deliver, giving $12 million to Loblaws, a company headed up by the second-richest Canadian. The Liberals also gave $4.5 billion to a rich American oil company. In the eyes of the Liberal government, it is clear that every problem can be solved by giving money to its billionaire friends.Meanwhile, first nations already hurting from climate change get nothing. Instead of favours for the billionaire friends, when will the government stand up for first nations and Canadians already hurting?
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member is projecting. That member and his benches are minions of the leader of the official opposition. Rather than point fingers, the member should know very well that when it comes to our members, they make their own decisions. The Conservatives cannot fathom that people do not agree with them. They have not had to endure them often, but we in the Liberal benches have tough conversations. We agree to disagree and we try to find compromise where it is possible. It is with those qualities that we know that Canadians are better off today than they were under 10 years
Mr. Speaker, why does the party opposite not stand for the planet? Why does the party opposite not stand for our children and grandchildren? Why does the party opposite not stand for climate action that is creating good jobs and preparing us for the future?To the woman in Manitoba that the member opposite is misleading, let me tell her that a family of four in Manitoba will receive $339, more than 80% of what families will pay. We can take action on climate change and we can do it in a way that is affordable.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During question period, a falsehood was spoken, and I just wish to draw some attention to that. The Minister for Women and Gender Equality said that women are actually participating in the workforce to a greater extent. I have a document from the Library of Parliament that actually shows that women participated in the labour force to a greater extent when the former government was in place, and that number has declined since this new government came to power.I would ask for unanimous consent to table the document.
Mr. Speaker, climate leaders do not buy pipelines. Feminist prime ministers do not turf female colleagues because they speak truth to power. Humanitarian leaders do not shut their borders to asylum seekers during a refugee crisis. Now the Liberals have snuck in changes to refugee laws in the budget bill. That means people like Seidu Mohammed, an LGBTQ man from Ghana, whose asylum claim was accepted after he crossed irregularly from the U.S., will not even get a chance to apply. Lives are at risk. Will the Prime Minister do what is right and suspend the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, speaking of the truth, the Prime Minister said today that we cannot lie to Canadians. Obviously not, but the Prime Minister's own story has changed since the beginning. He himself admitted that his story was not accurate.If the Prime Minister thinks that Canadians want to know the truth, why is he refusing to launch a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence.The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses, and the witnesses came and testified. All the facts are now public, and Canadians can hear them for themselves.The interesting thing is that after the Leader of the Opposition was served notice last week, he deleted the tweets because he knows he cannot make defamatory statements.
Mr. Speaker, health care is something all Canadians are proud of, and no individual should be left behind when it comes to making sure they get the services they need. Sunday, April 7, was World Health Day, and the focus was on universal health coverage.Can the Minister of Health please advise this House on how she plans to make Canada's health care system even better?
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. To ensure that Canadians could hear the truth, the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. These meetings took place at the justice committee. They took place in public. That is exactly why the member is able to refer to them. It is important that Canadians be able to decide for themselves.Yes, we have put the leader of the official opposition on notice. That is because he is misleading Canadians. This is not the first time we have done so. We have done so previously because he was misleading Canadians when it came to the Minister of Innovation. Once he was put on notice, he deleted and retracted those comments. Once again, on March 31, he did the same thing afterwards
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the consequence of what happens when members opposite do not want to talk about the budget and do not even want to read the budget. They do not notice what is in the budget, including unprecedented measures to move forward on countering money laundering and the impacts of organized crime in the housing sector, particularly in British Columbia.We continue to work with our provincial counterparts and, indeed, with partners right across the country and around the world to crack down on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance and to make sure our system works for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your reminder that members should be judicious in their wording. Outside of the chamber you are not always there to monitor the situation. However, that is exactly why Canadians can have confidence that when the leader of the official opposition is misleading Canadians, we will not stand idly by. That is exactly why the leader of the official opposition was put on notice. After he was put on notice, he deleted tweets. He actually edited his wording to be more judicious, just as you, Mr. Speaker, have reminded all members to do. This is not the first time the Conservatives have done this. They did this in December after the Minister of Innovation had served them notice.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the member for CumberlandColchester and thank him for his 30 years of outstanding service to Canadians. He has been a strong advocate for diversifying the local economy and is very passionate about growing the life sciences sector, particularly in producing life-saving treatments for serious illnesses. That is why, most recently, the Prime Minister made the announcement on BioVectra for $37.5 million, which helped leverage $144.6 million. More importantly, 450 good-quality, middle-class jobs were created.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague brings up the issue of women. I want to point out that I am extremely proud that at Transport Canada 47% of the very large number of nominations that have been done under Transport Canada in the last three and a half years are women.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's saga of corruption and political interference continues. After pulling out all the stops to kill the story and hide the truth from Canadians, the Prime Minister is now resorting to intimidation tactics in a bid to silence the Leader of the Opposition.Will the Prime Minister make good on his threat as soon as possible? Canadians want the truth.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence. The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses. The witnesses came to testify
Mr. Speaker, the member for Mount Royal finally dissociated himself from the shameful statements his friend, the mayor of Hampstead, made comparing secularism to ethnic cleansing. The Minister of Justice was asked to condemn the statements yesterday, but he chose not to.Insulting Quebec is apparently okay with the Minister of Justice.Will the minister condemn the statements made by the mayor of Hampstead and pledge not to challenge the secularism bill in court?
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Coast Guard members are at work every day across the country, and our government will continue to provide them with the tools that they need to keep Canadians and our waters safe and our economy moving. During the 2018 Arctic season, the Coast Guard was faced with more unusually difficult ice conditions than in other years, which led to some delay in resupply and escort missions. Canadians can be proud of the men and women of the Canadian Coast Guard and the important work that they do from coast to coast to coast.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have a long and proud history of medical developments and discoveries, like insulin and vaccines, which have saved lives at home and abroad.Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please tell us what investments our government is making in cutting-edge research and facilities to pave the way for new medical breakthroughs and to make treatments even more effective?
Mr. Speaker, they are twisting the truth. The problem is that the Prime Minister put our leader on notice for the statement he made on March 29.Stop sidestepping. Some facts were raised in the notice and we want to respond. The Leader of the Opposition is prepared to go to court right now.Go ahead, Mr. Prime Minister, we are waiting.
Mr. Speaker, obviously leaks concern us. I can assure the House that leaks did not come from my ministry and I trust my colleagues when they tell me that leaks did not come from theirs. This is a situation of obvious concern and we are doing our best to make sure it does not happen in the future.
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that question has already been answered. What he is not asking about is the budget. Perhaps he does not care about what we are doing for seniors because he already has a million-dollar pension. Those seniors are going to be better off because of their ability to keep more money in their pockets and they are going to be better off in the future because of this budget.For the member for Carleton, we know that the training benefit we are putting in place might help him when he looks for his next job. This is the sort of benefit that will help all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, our Prime Minister is trying to intimidate our leader with threats of legal action. He wants to beef up his credibility because his lack of leadership is causing the government to make mistakes.He hid the truth from Canadians for weeks, if not months, but now we have the perfect opportunity to find out everything. He needs to present his evidence in court, follow through on his threat and testify under oath. When will he do that?
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics is an excellent place to disclose new information on the Prime Minister's political interference, especially when that information will help the Ethics Commissioner in his upcoming investigation.Will the Prime Minister waive any restrictions that might prevent witnesses from appearing and speaking freely before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics? Canadians still want to know the truth.
Mr. Speaker, last year Loblaws made $3 billion in profit, yet yesterday the Minister of Environment gave Loblaws $12 millionto do what? It was to buy fridges. This money came from hard-working Canadians, seniors and low-income families who struggle to make ends meet.You tell mehow many Canadians can walk into the Prime Minister's Office and ask them to pay for a new fridge? How many? Why is it always the wealthy and well-connected who get handouts from these Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, ensuring that Canadians could hear and know the truth is precisely why the Prime Minister waived cabinet confidence and solicitor-client privilege.All the facts have now been made public. Members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights made their own decisions. That is how we operate on this side of the House.We can see that the Conservatives get direction from the Leader of the Opposition, but our MPs can make their own decisions. Members of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics will proceed as they see fit.
Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to actually talk about climate change and the action our government is taking.We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and having a just transition for workers. We are investing in clean solutions so innovators, entrepreneurs across the country create good jobs. We are of course investing in energy efficiency.The program the member opposite is talking about was a fair and open competition. It was based on the most submissions, the most bang for the buck. It will remove 50,000 cars off the road. The company in question is paying three-quarters of the cost.The real question Canadians want answered is
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that this question has already been answered.What we want to do in the House is talk about the budget that we put forward for all Canadians. We put forward a budget that is going to help young people have the possibility of getting into their first home. We put in place a budget that is going to help students be able to retire their debt earlier in their post-student life. We put in place a budget that is going to help people get the sort of ability to face up to a changing world with the training that they need.We are proud of what we put forward for Canadians and we look forward to talking about it more.
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people have jobs. More persons with disabilities are working. More newcomers and young people are working now than ever before. Part of that, my hon. critic will want to know, is because we believe that gender equality is a driver for economic growth.
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to maintaining a well-functioning refugee system, and that is why we have made significant investments in budget 2019 to improve the efficiency of the IRB in holding these hearings and to bring in regulation to encourage people to use the appropriate ways of entry to immigrate to this country. We will continue to invest in that system. We have achieved a significant level of success in significantly reducing the number of people who have presented themselves irregularly at our borders while maintaining a robust and efficient system of refugee determination.
Mr. Speaker, we have always been very clear about this issue from the beginning. We are going to do two things at once. We will always stand up for jobs for Canadian workers across the country and we will respect our institutions and the rule of law. That is exactly what we did. We have a great deal of respect for the work that our parliamentary committees do and we also respect the Ethics Commissioner, who is looking into the matter. We will always participate in investigations because we know that we, on the government side of the House, are defending our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that the minister talked about her plan, a plan that taxes Canadians for committing the sin of heating their homes in the winterwhich will do nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissionsand then gives that money to Loblaws to buy freezers. I am really, really good with that not being our plan. I am proud to say we will not do that.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to acknowledge the excellent partnership we have with the Province of Quebec and the City of Montreal. I wish to extend my sincere appreciation for that partnership and for their hard work.Canada has experienced an increase in people coming to this country as a result of situations going on all over the world. People are fleeing war and persecution. It is in partnership with municipalities and the provinces that Canada remains a welcoming country as we work to ensure that these individuals enjoy the full benefit of the rule of law in Canada and that at the same time, the system is operated
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in the House, Canadians should have complete confidence in the integrity of our Supreme Court nomination process. It is merit based. It has led to the appointment of two exceptionally high-quality candidates thus far as well as a chief justice.Obviously, these leaks are of great concern to me. As I assured the House yesterday, I am confident that these leaks did not come from my office and the Prime Minister has assured the House that the leaks did not come from his office.
Mr. Speaker, you should be able to confirm that you received a letter to inform you of the will of caucus on these measures. It is up to the Liberal caucus to decide our own affairs. I would encourage that member to focus on his caucus and its caucus matters. We have caucus discussions, and we know that what happens in caucus stays in caucus, but to satisfy the rules, Mr. Speaker, you were provided with a letter. What is clear is that we have gone through a whole question period, and the Conservatives will continue to focus on us. We will continue to focus on Canadians, and that is why we are so proud to be talking about the budget. We look forward to being able to share how we are going to improve the lives of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I believe my hon. colleague's question has been answered. I imagine as the critic for the status of women, she is interested in what is happening to women in Canada. I am proud to report that there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people
Mr. Speaker, I am always happy to stand up and talk about our ambitious climate change plan. We are eliminating coal. We are investing in renewables. We are ensuring a just transition for communities and workers. We are investing in clean technology to create good jobs here. We are investing in energy efficiency measures.Yes, we launched some competitions to determine who could achieve the greatest emissions reductions. That is why the company that won the competition is going to achieve carbon reductions equal to taking 50,000 cars
Most positive speeches
Mr. Speaker, I am always happy to stand up and talk about our ambitious climate change plan. We are eliminating coal. We are investing in renewables. We are ensuring a just transition for communities and workers. We are investing in clean technology to create good jobs here. We are investing in energy efficiency measures.Yes, we launched some competitions to determine who could achieve the greatest emissions reductions. That is why the company that won the competition is going to achieve carbon reductions equal to taking 50,000 cars
Mr. Speaker, I believe my hon. colleague's question has been answered. I imagine as the critic for the status of women, she is interested in what is happening to women in Canada. I am proud to report that there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people
Mr. Speaker, you should be able to confirm that you received a letter to inform you of the will of caucus on these measures. It is up to the Liberal caucus to decide our own affairs. I would encourage that member to focus on his caucus and its caucus matters. We have caucus discussions, and we know that what happens in caucus stays in caucus, but to satisfy the rules, Mr. Speaker, you were provided with a letter. What is clear is that we have gone through a whole question period, and the Conservatives will continue to focus on us. We will continue to focus on Canadians, and that is why we are so proud to be talking about the budget. We look forward to being able to share how we are going to improve the lives of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in the House, Canadians should have complete confidence in the integrity of our Supreme Court nomination process. It is merit based. It has led to the appointment of two exceptionally high-quality candidates thus far as well as a chief justice.Obviously, these leaks are of great concern to me. As I assured the House yesterday, I am confident that these leaks did not come from my office and the Prime Minister has assured the House that the leaks did not come from his office.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to acknowledge the excellent partnership we have with the Province of Quebec and the City of Montreal. I wish to extend my sincere appreciation for that partnership and for their hard work.Canada has experienced an increase in people coming to this country as a result of situations going on all over the world. People are fleeing war and persecution. It is in partnership with municipalities and the provinces that Canada remains a welcoming country as we work to ensure that these individuals enjoy the full benefit of the rule of law in Canada and that at the same time, the system is operated
Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that the minister talked about her plan, a plan that taxes Canadians for committing the sin of heating their homes in the winterwhich will do nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissionsand then gives that money to Loblaws to buy freezers. I am really, really good with that not being our plan. I am proud to say we will not do that.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, we have always been very clear about this issue from the beginning. We are going to do two things at once. We will always stand up for jobs for Canadian workers across the country and we will respect our institutions and the rule of law. That is exactly what we did. We have a great deal of respect for the work that our parliamentary committees do and we also respect the Ethics Commissioner, who is looking into the matter. We will always participate in investigations because we know that we, on the government side of the House, are defending our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to maintaining a well-functioning refugee system, and that is why we have made significant investments in budget 2019 to improve the efficiency of the IRB in holding these hearings and to bring in regulation to encourage people to use the appropriate ways of entry to immigrate to this country. We will continue to invest in that system. We have achieved a significant level of success in significantly reducing the number of people who have presented themselves irregularly at our borders while maintaining a robust and efficient system of refugee determination.
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people have jobs. More persons with disabilities are working. More newcomers and young people are working now than ever before. Part of that, my hon. critic will want to know, is because we believe that gender equality is a driver for economic growth.
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that this question has already been answered.What we want to do in the House is talk about the budget that we put forward for all Canadians. We put forward a budget that is going to help young people have the possibility of getting into their first home. We put in place a budget that is going to help students be able to retire their debt earlier in their post-student life. We put in place a budget that is going to help people get the sort of ability to face up to a changing world with the training that they need.We are proud of what we put forward for Canadians and we look forward to talking about it more.
Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to actually talk about climate change and the action our government is taking.We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and having a just transition for workers. We are investing in clean solutions so innovators, entrepreneurs across the country create good jobs. We are of course investing in energy efficiency.The program the member opposite is talking about was a fair and open competition. It was based on the most submissions, the most bang for the buck. It will remove 50,000 cars off the road. The company in question is paying three-quarters of the cost.The real question Canadians want answered is
Mr. Speaker, ensuring that Canadians could hear and know the truth is precisely why the Prime Minister waived cabinet confidence and solicitor-client privilege.All the facts have now been made public. Members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights made their own decisions. That is how we operate on this side of the House.We can see that the Conservatives get direction from the Leader of the Opposition, but our MPs can make their own decisions. Members of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics will proceed as they see fit.
Mr. Speaker, last year Loblaws made $3 billion in profit, yet yesterday the Minister of Environment gave Loblaws $12 millionto do what? It was to buy fridges. This money came from hard-working Canadians, seniors and low-income families who struggle to make ends meet.You tell mehow many Canadians can walk into the Prime Minister's Office and ask them to pay for a new fridge? How many? Why is it always the wealthy and well-connected who get handouts from these Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics is an excellent place to disclose new information on the Prime Minister's political interference, especially when that information will help the Ethics Commissioner in his upcoming investigation.Will the Prime Minister waive any restrictions that might prevent witnesses from appearing and speaking freely before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics? Canadians still want to know the truth.
Mr. Speaker, obviously leaks concern us. I can assure the House that leaks did not come from my ministry and I trust my colleagues when they tell me that leaks did not come from theirs. This is a situation of obvious concern and we are doing our best to make sure it does not happen in the future.
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that question has already been answered. What he is not asking about is the budget. Perhaps he does not care about what we are doing for seniors because he already has a million-dollar pension. Those seniors are going to be better off because of their ability to keep more money in their pockets and they are going to be better off in the future because of this budget.For the member for Carleton, we know that the training benefit we are putting in place might help him when he looks for his next job. This is the sort of benefit that will help all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, our Prime Minister is trying to intimidate our leader with threats of legal action. He wants to beef up his credibility because his lack of leadership is causing the government to make mistakes.He hid the truth from Canadians for weeks, if not months, but now we have the perfect opportunity to find out everything. He needs to present his evidence in court, follow through on his threat and testify under oath. When will he do that?
Mr. Speaker, they are twisting the truth. The problem is that the Prime Minister put our leader on notice for the statement he made on March 29.Stop sidestepping. Some facts were raised in the notice and we want to respond. The Leader of the Opposition is prepared to go to court right now.Go ahead, Mr. Prime Minister, we are waiting.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have a long and proud history of medical developments and discoveries, like insulin and vaccines, which have saved lives at home and abroad.Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please tell us what investments our government is making in cutting-edge research and facilities to pave the way for new medical breakthroughs and to make treatments even more effective?
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Coast Guard members are at work every day across the country, and our government will continue to provide them with the tools that they need to keep Canadians and our waters safe and our economy moving. During the 2018 Arctic season, the Coast Guard was faced with more unusually difficult ice conditions than in other years, which led to some delay in resupply and escort missions. Canadians can be proud of the men and women of the Canadian Coast Guard and the important work that they do from coast to coast to coast.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence. The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses. The witnesses came to testify
Mr. Speaker, the member for Mount Royal finally dissociated himself from the shameful statements his friend, the mayor of Hampstead, made comparing secularism to ethnic cleansing. The Minister of Justice was asked to condemn the statements yesterday, but he chose not to.Insulting Quebec is apparently okay with the Minister of Justice.Will the minister condemn the statements made by the mayor of Hampstead and pledge not to challenge the secularism bill in court?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's saga of corruption and political interference continues. After pulling out all the stops to kill the story and hide the truth from Canadians, the Prime Minister is now resorting to intimidation tactics in a bid to silence the Leader of the Opposition.Will the Prime Minister make good on his threat as soon as possible? Canadians want the truth.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague brings up the issue of women. I want to point out that I am extremely proud that at Transport Canada 47% of the very large number of nominations that have been done under Transport Canada in the last three and a half years are women.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the member for CumberlandColchester and thank him for his 30 years of outstanding service to Canadians. He has been a strong advocate for diversifying the local economy and is very passionate about growing the life sciences sector, particularly in producing life-saving treatments for serious illnesses. That is why, most recently, the Prime Minister made the announcement on BioVectra for $37.5 million, which helped leverage $144.6 million. More importantly, 450 good-quality, middle-class jobs were created.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your reminder that members should be judicious in their wording. Outside of the chamber you are not always there to monitor the situation. However, that is exactly why Canadians can have confidence that when the leader of the official opposition is misleading Canadians, we will not stand idly by. That is exactly why the leader of the official opposition was put on notice. After he was put on notice, he deleted tweets. He actually edited his wording to be more judicious, just as you, Mr. Speaker, have reminded all members to do. This is not the first time the Conservatives have done this. They did this in December after the Minister of Innovation had served them notice.
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the consequence of what happens when members opposite do not want to talk about the budget and do not even want to read the budget. They do not notice what is in the budget, including unprecedented measures to move forward on countering money laundering and the impacts of organized crime in the housing sector, particularly in British Columbia.We continue to work with our provincial counterparts and, indeed, with partners right across the country and around the world to crack down on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance and to make sure our system works for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. To ensure that Canadians could hear the truth, the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. These meetings took place at the justice committee. They took place in public. That is exactly why the member is able to refer to them. It is important that Canadians be able to decide for themselves.Yes, we have put the leader of the official opposition on notice. That is because he is misleading Canadians. This is not the first time we have done so. We have done so previously because he was misleading Canadians when it came to the Minister of Innovation. Once he was put on notice, he deleted and retracted those comments. Once again, on March 31, he did the same thing afterwards
Mr. Speaker, speaking of the truth, the Prime Minister said today that we cannot lie to Canadians. Obviously not, but the Prime Minister's own story has changed since the beginning. He himself admitted that his story was not accurate.If the Prime Minister thinks that Canadians want to know the truth, why is he refusing to launch a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence.The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses, and the witnesses came and testified. All the facts are now public, and Canadians can hear them for themselves.The interesting thing is that after the Leader of the Opposition was served notice last week, he deleted the tweets because he knows he cannot make defamatory statements.
Mr. Speaker, health care is something all Canadians are proud of, and no individual should be left behind when it comes to making sure they get the services they need. Sunday, April 7, was World Health Day, and the focus was on universal health coverage.Can the Minister of Health please advise this House on how she plans to make Canada's health care system even better?
Mr. Speaker, climate leaders do not buy pipelines. Feminist prime ministers do not turf female colleagues because they speak truth to power. Humanitarian leaders do not shut their borders to asylum seekers during a refugee crisis. Now the Liberals have snuck in changes to refugee laws in the budget bill. That means people like Seidu Mohammed, an LGBTQ man from Ghana, whose asylum claim was accepted after he crossed irregularly from the U.S., will not even get a chance to apply. Lives are at risk. Will the Prime Minister do what is right and suspend the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During question period, a falsehood was spoken, and I just wish to draw some attention to that. The Minister for Women and Gender Equality said that women are actually participating in the workforce to a greater extent. I have a document from the Library of Parliament that actually shows that women participated in the labour force to a greater extent when the former government was in place, and that number has declined since this new government came to power.I would ask for unanimous consent to table the document.
Mr. Speaker, why does the party opposite not stand for the planet? Why does the party opposite not stand for our children and grandchildren? Why does the party opposite not stand for climate action that is creating good jobs and preparing us for the future?To the woman in Manitoba that the member opposite is misleading, let me tell her that a family of four in Manitoba will receive $339, more than 80% of what families will pay. We can take action on climate change and we can do it in a way that is affordable.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member is projecting. That member and his benches are minions of the leader of the official opposition. Rather than point fingers, the member should know very well that when it comes to our members, they make their own decisions. The Conservatives cannot fathom that people do not agree with them. They have not had to endure them often, but we in the Liberal benches have tough conversations. We agree to disagree and we try to find compromise where it is possible. It is with those qualities that we know that Canadians are better off today than they were under 10 years
Mr. Speaker, last week I asked the government to address urgent food insecurity in our north because of climate change.Did it ever deliver, giving $12 million to Loblaws, a company headed up by the second-richest Canadian. The Liberals also gave $4.5 billion to a rich American oil company. In the eyes of the Liberal government, it is clear that every problem can be solved by giving money to its billionaire friends.Meanwhile, first nations already hurting from climate change get nothing. Instead of favours for the billionaire friends, when will the government stand up for first nations and Canadians already hurting?
Mr. Speaker, we found out yesterday that the Canadian Coast Guard is ill-equipped and does not have a concrete plan to deal with an aging fleet. This has resulted in reduced search-and-rescue coverage, ferry-service disruptions, cancelled resupply runs to Arctic and coastal communities and nearly $2 million in lost navigational buoys. The government's lack of funding for the Coast Guard is leaving coastal communities at a real risk. When will the government finally make sure that our Coast Guard is properly equipped, and why has the safety of our coastal communities not been a priority?
Mr. Speaker, on the same question of privilege, I am quite surprised by the position the government is taking. Apparently, the Liberal caucus reached a decision that the law did not apply to it and because it made the decision, the law does not apply. I would be very interested if the hon. member could provide the legal rationale.As a member of this place who was part of the discussion and debate on the Reform Act to change the rules under the Parliament of Canada Act, I have consistently bemoaned, and I know it may or may not be a matter for the Speaker to look at this, the larger question of how much power leaders of organized parties that are recognized have over the conduct of their individual members. However, the principle of Westminster democracy in this place is that all members are equal and the Prime Minister is merely first among equals. I assumed, when we passed the Parliament of Canada Act and the amendments found in section 49, that the recognized parties would comply with the requirements of section 49 in the Parliament of Canada Act and that surely they applied to every party once the law was passed and in place. It is quite distressing to hear now from this member that the caucus decided for itself to ignore the requirements of the law and feels that it has met all the requirements by sending a letter to the Speaker that details the caucus's decision to ignore the law.
Mr. Speaker, this matter has been addressed numerous times in the House, but I will definitely answer it once again. We believe that Canadians should get to hear the truth. That is exactly why the members of the justice committee themselves set parameters for a discussion: to ensure the truth could be shared with Canadians. That is exactly why the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. This is the first time in the history of the country that this has been done. However, it is important that Canadians get to know. That is exactly why all the facts are now public. The Conservatives are misleading Canadians, and that is what they continue to do. That is why they were served notice and then all of a sudden made some changes.
Mr. Speaker, on World Health Day, we celebrate universal public health care, something that Lester Pearson provided to all Canadians more than 50 years ago. We recognize that in Canada people are proud of their publicly funded health care system, one that is based on need and not on their ability to pay, and this government wants to strengthen that. That is why we are making historic investments in the area of mental health and home care, and we have just laid the foundational piece for a national pharmacare program. This government will continue to fight for a publicly funded health care system.
Mr. Speaker, yes, we did put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. On March 31, they received a notice and on the same day the Leader of the Opposition deleted his tweets. He knows that he made defamatory remarks, he knows that he must not do this. He was put on notice so that he makes more judicious decisions that are more befitting of his position.
Mr. Speaker, in the letter where the Prime Minister threatens to sue the Conservative leader, he says that it is a lie that the Clerk of the Privy Council pressured the former attorney general and made it clear that her job was on the line. Well, Canadians could hear clearly on an audio recording that the Clerk of the Privy Council said exactly that. Truth is an absolute defence, and every word of the Conservative leader's statement on the Liberal's SNC-Lavalin scandal is true. If the Prime Minister believes otherwise, when will we see him in court?
Mr. Speaker, one cannot be a lawmaker if one is a lawbreaker.We know that the Prime Minister has broken the law, not just the ethics law that he broke by accepting gifts from someone seeking a government grant, but he broke the Parliament of Canada Act to kick two of his members out of caucus as part of the cover-up in the SNC-Lavalin scandal.If the Prime Minister is so confident that anything he said in this matter is true, when will he launch his lawsuit so we can put him on the stand and question him under oath?
Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague is anxious about HFR. I keep telling him every week that we are working on this important file. When we have news, we will be sure to let my colleague know. In the meantime, we are interested in technologies of the future. We are a government that believes in science and research, and we want to explore all options for transportation in the future.
Mr. Speaker, the Toronto Community Housing Corporation is the largest social housing provider in Canada and the second-largest in North America. Last week, the Prime Minister was in Toronto to make a $1.3 billion housing announcement, the largest federal housing investment in Canadian history. Could the Minister of Families, Children, and Social Development inform the House how this record investment will provide tens of thousands of Toronto families safe and affordable homes?
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to point out that we appointed a minister for rural communities who is responsible for ensuring that the entire country has access to affordable, high-speed Internet services. Along with the private sector, we will continue to make investments across the country to provide all Canadians with this vital access to services that have the quality and speed to meet the demands of the future.
Mr. Speaker, I have a piece of paper too. It is misinformation the Prime Minister gave both during the last election and more recently. Let us start with balanced budgets, or maybe electoral reform or maybe the $10-billion deficit, all things that were promised to Canadians that did not come about.Then we have the most recent crucial issues, for example, the Prime Minister indicating that the former attorney general never went to him about her concerns. We know that to be patently false.Let us test this in court. When will the Prime Minister start this action?
Mr. Speaker, when the IPCC report gave us 12 years to take action on global warming, how did the Liberals respond? They purchased a pipeline. When we learned that Canada is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the planet, how did the Liberals respond? They released a budget that keeps giving oil companies billions of dollars. Now we have learned that our glaciers in the far north are disappearing and melting twice as fast as the others around the world. What are the Liberals doing? They are giving Loblaws $12 million for refrigerators.What exactly is it going to take for the Liberals to do something? Does one of their multimillionaire buddies need to move to the far north?
Mr. Speaker, every time we ask a question we see the Minister of Justice and Attorney General pick up his notes and repeat the answers written by the Prime Minister's office. That says a lot about the independence of the new attorney general vis-a-vis the Prime Minister. Could we please get a straight answer to a simple question?Will the Minister of Justice challenge Bill 21 or support a legal challenge, yes or no? It seems to me that he does not need notes to answer the question.
Mr. Speaker, for two months, the Prime Minister has been avoiding accountability in his involvement in the SNC-Lavalin corruption scandal, which has been engulfing his government now for months.Now he has indicated that he wishes to sue the Leader of the Opposition for the criticisms that the leader made. Let us get the ball rolling. The reason being is, quite frankly, that these allegations can be tested in court, a place the Prime Minister cannot shut down.Would the Prime Minister tell us when he will commence the action?
Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, our government has always stood up for Canadians' fundamental rights and will continue to do so. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects the rights of all citizens. We cannot choose which to protect and which to limit. Our position is clear. The state must not dictate what people can or cannot wear regardless of their beliefs.
Mr. Speaker, I will give some free advice to the Prime Minister. Yes, there has been a notice sent over, and the Leader of the Opposition has indicated that he stands by every single word in that press release. That is a problem for the Prime Minister. Therefore, I guess the ball is actually in his court.He can stand up here, wave his arms around and talk about putting us on notice, but why does he not actually show us? Let us get it on.
Mr. Speaker, we put the Conservative leader on notice because the truth is important. The truth is that, after being asked whether he would condemn white supremacist movements yesterday, the Conservative leader not only refused to do so, he refused to even say the words. We will give the Conservatives another opportunity to condemn white supremacist movements.Will they denounce them and apologize for sharing a platform with those who hold such beliefs?
Mr. Speaker, a new report points out that the Prime Minister's actions against former senior ministers is unprecedented in Canadian history. It has not been seen in a century. Senior former Liberal staffer Penny Collenette points out how this is highly unusual. The women ministers who spoke up about the truth about interference in criminal prosecution were kicked out for speaking up. The Liberals claim that there is nothing to see here. Clearly there is, and Canadians disagree with the government. Why will the government not call a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, I was so excited when I saw the member stand up because I thought he was going to talk about the Conservatives' climate change plan. It has been 345 days since they announced a climate change plan. What is our plan? We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and providing a just transition for workers. We are investing in public transportation across the country. We are investing in clean-tech companies, and yes, we are investing in energy efficiency. This was an open tender, open to any company or organization across the country, to get bang for the buck, because guess what? Canadians want to reduce their emissions. It is only the party opposite
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the party opposite wants to sticker it to Canadians like Doug Ford, but let us talk about what we are doing. We are putting a price on pollution and giving it all back to Ontarians. What does that mean? It means 90% of the money goes right back to families. A family of four will get $307, which is more than 80% of what families will pay.However, I have a question. The member for Milton was on television the other day and was asked if Conservatives would commit to meeting the Paris Agreement targets. She could not answer. Everyone in this House, except for one Conservative, voted for it. Will
Mr. Speaker, in 2018, Quebec took in roughly 22,000 asylum seekers. The Quebec government housed them, cared for them and looked after them. The budget does not offer Quebec a single cent for refugee settlement. In the budget implementation act, the Liberals do not address the problem of Roxham Road. Instead of making minor adjustments, why did the Minister of Immigration not just announce the suspension of the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, putting the Conservative leader on notice is something we did because the truth was important.Here is the truth. After being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, indeed, let us be clear. The Prime Minister has said that it is libellous for the opposition leader to say that the former attorney general was pressured by him and then fired for resisting. However, on the taped call, the clerk said that the Prime Minister was determined, in a firm frame of mind, that they were on a collision course and that he was going to get it done one way or another.When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat to sue or will he just finally admit that everything the opposition leader said is totally true?
Mr. Speaker, as I stated yesterday, Canada is based on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is not up to the state to determine what people can or cannot wear no matter their beliefs. We have institutions to protect Canadians' fundamental rights. As Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Justice, I will support and protect these laws.
Mr. Speaker, as everyone well knows, we spent many weeks working to try and find a positive resolution on this issue. This is something that we understand had very strong opinions on multiple sides and we wanted to work forward and demonstrate that we truly believed that differences of opinion and diversity was a source of strength and resilience for an organization and for our country. That is what we worked very hard on. Unfortunately, we could not get to that place. The will of caucus was clear that those individuals could no longer be in caucus. At the same time, we are going to continue focusing on what matters to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Willowdale for his hard work on behalf of the people of Toronto.We believe that every Canadian should have a safe and affordable home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy, a $40 billion plan. Sorry, it is a $55 billion plan because of budget 2019. That is why we were so pleased last Friday to announce a very historic investment in the city of Toronto, helping to renovate, renew and reconstruct the community homes of 58,000 families in Toronto. That is why we will keep working very hard to give every Canadian a safe and affordable place to call home.
Mr. Speaker, someone obtained confidential information on the Supreme Court vetting process to smear Chief Justice Joyal and the former attorney general. There are political fingerprints all over this hatchet job, but the new Attorney General of Canada refuses to investigate. Why? He says he trusts the Prime Minister's Office and he trusts it will never happen again. God help the rule of law when we have an Attorney General who thinks his job is damage control. His job is to protect the integrity of the process. When will he launch an independent investigation into finding out who launched that leak and who ordered it?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the question of privilege raised this morning by the hon. member for MarkhamStouffville. In her intervention, the member referenced an alleged breach of the Parliament of Canada Act.As the Chair stated in a ruling on April 8, 2019, asking the House to deal with the possible expulsion of a member from caucus is not a proper subject for a question of privilege. The Chair stated that if a member believes that the House needs to put in place certain practices, perhaps by way of additional Standing Orders, this should be done through a substantive motion following proper notice.The Chair also made reference earlier today, as well as in the April 8 ruling, to the Speaker having no role in the interpretation of statute nor in the conduct of changes that were made to the Parliament of Canada Act. As the Chair pointed out, all that is allowed under subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act is that the Speaker be informed of the results of the caucus decision.As the hon. member pointed out, the Speaker confirmed on December 10, 2015, that all actions required by the Speaker as it relates to subsection 49.8(5) had been taken, which she stated is indicative that the chair of the Liberal caucus did indeed inform the Speaker of the decision of the Liberal caucus.Just to be absolutely clear I will state that, pursuant to subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act, the chair of the national Liberal caucus sent a letter to the Speaker over three years ago outlining the decisions of the Liberal caucus as they relate to sections 49.2, 49.3 and 49.4; subsections 49.5(1) to 49.5(4); and section 49.6 of the Parliament of Canada Act and their application to the 42nd Parliament. The Liberal caucus decided that the provisions would not apply for the 42nd Parliament. Given the fact that the Liberal caucus did not adopt these provisions, the points raised by the hon. member on this issue are moot. The hon. member also states that her question of privilege is with respect to which rules apply with regard to the expulsion and readmission of caucus members. I would contend that, given the Liberal caucus decided that the provisions of the Parliament of Canada Act would not apply for the 42nd Parliament and sent the Speaker a letter to confirm this, there is no confusion around which rules apply. Furthermore, as I said earlier, it is not the role of the Speaker to adjudicate these matters.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been caught misleading Canadians. Having been caught, now the Prime Minister is trying to sue his critics. In his letter, he disputes the fact the Prime Minister had been informed by [the former attorney general] that his actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. Every single Canadian understands that this is in fact exactly what happened.When will the Prime Minister move forward with his threat to call a court case and get to business?
Mr. Speaker, after being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition not only refused to do so, but refused to even say the words.I will give him another opportunity to do so today through his deputy leader. Will he denounce white supremacy, the alt-right movement and finally apologize for sharing a platform with it?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister says that he is going to sue the Leader of the Opposition for saying, [The former attorney general] repeatedly told the Prime Minister and his top officials that their actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. For him to sue, it would have to mean those comments were wrong, but last week the Prime Minister admitted that it was true.How can the Prime Minister sue someone for saying something the Prime Minister has already admitted is true?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is threatening a lawsuit to shut down the opposition from holding him accountable for his attempts to interfere in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. He says that it is libellous to say that the former attorney general told him and his top officials that their actions were political interference and entirely inappropriate. However, the taped phone call, texts and notes show that it is all true. Canadians look forward to the Prime Minister being forced to testify in open court under oath. When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat?
Mr. Speaker, they stick it to Canadians.Amanda Stevenson, in Lundar, Manitoba, had her dairy fridge quit last week. She has watched these Liberals take money from her in the form of a carbon tax and increase taxes on her small business, and now she had to watch them give money to her competitor for the same thing she cannot afford. That is wrong. We are proud to stand for Amanda, not for SNC-Lavalin and for Loblaws.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, on March 29, our leader issued an official statement in a press release in which he said that the Prime Minister engaged in political interference, personally gave orders, denied the truth, and had therefore lost the moral authority to govern. Our leader stands by everything he said and even reiterated it yesterday.If the Prime Minister has the slightest sense of leadership, will he proceed with his lawsuit so we can all find out the truth of this matter?
Mr. Speaker, while Trois-Rivières is still waiting for an announcement on the high-frequency rail project, Transport Canada is funding a feasibility study on the Hyperloop project in Canada. Transport Canada has yet to publish the results of the studies on the HFR. The Hyperloop project is decades away from practical application, while the HFR is closer to reality.Since the minister is currently exploring the future, could he get back in his DeLorean, return to 2019 and tell us whether there is a high-frequency rail project on the horizon?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.In her response earlier, the hon. government House leader made reference to a piece of correspondence she had given you. I do not believe that the rest of us have seen this letter, but as you know, Mr. Speaker, and as she knows, any letter or any document that is made reference to in the House must be tabled for the benefit of all of us. We would now like to see this letter to determine whether this actually demonstrates that the Liberal Party was in fact in conformity with the Parliament of Canada Act. She was very careful not to make that clear in her comments, so we would like to see it for ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time this Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians by making false and defamatory statements. As I have already said at least twice, he was forced to withdraw or stop making defamatory statements about members of our government.We had to warn him because he did it again. We know the Conservatives have a history of doing this. It is important for the Conservatives to remember that this is not the right approach.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to once again remind Canadians that all information is public. Why is that information public? Because the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. All meetings of the justice committee that were on this issue were in public so Canadians could decide for themselves. They know very well who is misleading Canadians.That member talks a big game, but in February, when it came to comments on this file, it was his leader, the leader of the official opposition, who actually retracted that statement.
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the official opposition was put on notice on March 31. That very same day, he deleted tweets and then edited them because he knew he should be more judicious in his words. His actions are clear. The Conservatives talk a tough game. The same thing happened with the Minister of Innovation . The Conservatives made those statements in the House. When they were asked to take those statements out of the House, they would not. Do you know what happened after they were served notice in December, Mr. Speaker? The leader of the official opposition retracted those comments. He deleted those tweets.
Mr. Speaker, there have been expulsions from caucus, shutting down debate in committees, a lawsuit, a leak of confidential information about a chief justice Supreme Court application and two months of Liberals doing everything they can to change the channel on the PMO scandal. However, leaking confidential information, that is a serious breach. The Minister of Justice does not seem to understand the seriousness of this act. Is the Attorney General comfortable with a leak that was intended to smear the former attorney general? The integrity of our courts is at stake. Will the Attorney General launch an investigation into this serious breach?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister now says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. I guess he will find out in October.In his letter threatening to sue the Conservative leader, he says that the former attorney general never told him that the political interference in an ongoing criminal proceeding was entirely inappropriate. However, the Prime Minister admitted to the House last week that in fact she told him that directly to his face. He says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. When will the Prime Minister take us to court so he can experience just what those are?
Mr. Speaker, it is rather ironic that the Liberal Prime Minister is trying to lecture parliamentarians here in the House when he himself violated the Conflict of Interest Act four times. The Prime Minister is claiming that what our leader said is false. He reiterated that yesterday evening.If he wants to demonstrate even a little bit of leadership, will he follow through on his threat so that he can testify under oath in court, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, high-speed Internet and cellular services are a necessity, but access is anything but affordable and reliable. A single mother told me that she pays $102 a month for unreliable service. People deserve a government that has the courage to stand up to telecommunications companies.When will the Prime Minister find the courage to stand up for people and cut these costs?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and those Liberals talk about letting members on their side of the House make decisions without direction from the PMO. That certainly was not the case when the Prime Minister unilaterally turfed two female caucus members, in the process breaking the laws of this place. We know what the Prime Minister does to people who do not agree with him. He pressures, intimidates and then threatens them if they do not fall in line, and then he throws them out. Since the leader of the opposition will not be intimidated, and the Prime Minister cannot kick him out of caucus, the Prime Minister has threatened him with a lawsuit. A simple question: When are we going to see you is court?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order arising out of question period.I would have risen if I could have at the moment this event occurred, but under our standing rules, there are no points of order during Question Period. Under our standing rules, we are not to interrupt members when they are speaking. We are not to heckle. We are not to create a din. Just as a point of reference for you, Mr. Speaker, at the point that you were trying to bring the House to order, when the Minister of Finance was speaking, with the volume at my desk at full, as high as I could listen to it, as far as our technology would take it, I was unable to hear the minister over the heckling. That is just unacceptable, and I wish that we would find a way. We have the Standing Orders. It is disrespectful to this institution, to democracy itself and to our constituents that we allow this sort of bad behaviour to continue at high volume.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians know what is happening to women under the Liberals. The former attorney general repeatedly said the pressure she was facing was inappropriate, yet the Prime Minister claimed no one had ever raised concerns with him. However, just last week he was forced to admit that was false. Now he is threatening to take our leader to court for pointing out that he has been misleading Canadians.When will the court case begin so the whole truth can come out?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shown little regard for anyone but himself in this ever-deepening scandal. The banal excuses and empty platitudes about his respect for the rule of law and the independence of committees stand in stark contrast to the trail of resignations, removals and character smearing left in his self-serving wake. Again, will the Prime Minister finally order his minions to stand down and encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to freely vote their conscience?
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time the Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians with false and defamatory statements. As I have said, he has been forced to retract or cease making
Mr. Speaker, as I said, he has been forced to retract or cease making defamatory statements against members of our government repeatedly. The reason we put him on notice is because he is doing so again.Members of the opposition should not have to mislead Canadians in order to make political points. They should stick to the facts. That is what Canadians deserve.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has sent a letter to our leader in which he threatens to sue him.In the letter, he states that the Leader of the Opposition accused him of having, and I quote, personally subverted the judicial process to interfere with a criminal prosecution. He seems to understand the situation, and the leader stands by what he said. When will we be going to court?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shut down every parliamentary opportunity to examine fully his attempted interference in the SNC-Lavalin corruption trial. By threatening a lawsuit, he suddenly seems to favour litigating details of his scandal under oath in a public courtwell, not really. We know it is just a desperate ruse. However, there is another opportunity this afternoon. Will the Prime Minister encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to support my motion to invite him and 11 other witnesses to speak without constraint about this sorry affair?
Mr. Speaker, after the biggest drug money-laundering case in Canadian history, the federal government is still not doing its part. Expert Peter German's report points out that no federal resources are being used. Literally, in the federal money-laundering unit, no one is working on money laundering. No wonder there are so few federal prosecutions. Drug money laundering is fuelling organized crime and putting communities at risk. Why have the Liberals failed to act?
Mr. Speaker, we put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract defamatory online statements he made against the Minister of Innovation.He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, here is what I have to say about the truth: We put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract statements he made online about the Minister of Innovation. He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians. Misleading Canadians, as the opposition leader has done, is never virtuous.
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. He had to retract some statements he made online in December about the Minister of Innovation.We warned the Leader of the Opposition again because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. Once again, on March 31, the Leader of the Opposition deleted some tweets because he knows he did something he should not have.
Mr. Speaker, although I find the actions of that side completely wrong and reprehensible, I will apologize for the fact that I did show disrespect for the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, I am always happy to stand up and talk about our ambitious climate change plan. We are eliminating coal. We are investing in renewables. We are ensuring a just transition for communities and workers. We are investing in clean technology to create good jobs here. We are investing in energy efficiency measures.Yes, we launched some competitions to determine who could achieve the greatest emissions reductions. That is why the company that won the competition is going to achieve carbon reductions equal to taking 50,000 cars
Mr. Speaker, I believe my hon. colleague's question has been answered. I imagine as the critic for the status of women, she is interested in what is happening to women in Canada. I am proud to report that there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people
Mr. Speaker, you should be able to confirm that you received a letter to inform you of the will of caucus on these measures. It is up to the Liberal caucus to decide our own affairs. I would encourage that member to focus on his caucus and its caucus matters. We have caucus discussions, and we know that what happens in caucus stays in caucus, but to satisfy the rules, Mr. Speaker, you were provided with a letter. What is clear is that we have gone through a whole question period, and the Conservatives will continue to focus on us. We will continue to focus on Canadians, and that is why we are so proud to be talking about the budget. We look forward to being able to share how we are going to improve the lives of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in the House, Canadians should have complete confidence in the integrity of our Supreme Court nomination process. It is merit based. It has led to the appointment of two exceptionally high-quality candidates thus far as well as a chief justice.Obviously, these leaks are of great concern to me. As I assured the House yesterday, I am confident that these leaks did not come from my office and the Prime Minister has assured the House that the leaks did not come from his office.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to acknowledge the excellent partnership we have with the Province of Quebec and the City of Montreal. I wish to extend my sincere appreciation for that partnership and for their hard work.Canada has experienced an increase in people coming to this country as a result of situations going on all over the world. People are fleeing war and persecution. It is in partnership with municipalities and the provinces that Canada remains a welcoming country as we work to ensure that these individuals enjoy the full benefit of the rule of law in Canada and that at the same time, the system is operated
Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that the minister talked about her plan, a plan that taxes Canadians for committing the sin of heating their homes in the winterwhich will do nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissionsand then gives that money to Loblaws to buy freezers. I am really, really good with that not being our plan. I am proud to say we will not do that.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, we have always been very clear about this issue from the beginning. We are going to do two things at once. We will always stand up for jobs for Canadian workers across the country and we will respect our institutions and the rule of law. That is exactly what we did. We have a great deal of respect for the work that our parliamentary committees do and we also respect the Ethics Commissioner, who is looking into the matter. We will always participate in investigations because we know that we, on the government side of the House, are defending our institutions.
Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to maintaining a well-functioning refugee system, and that is why we have made significant investments in budget 2019 to improve the efficiency of the IRB in holding these hearings and to bring in regulation to encourage people to use the appropriate ways of entry to immigrate to this country. We will continue to invest in that system. We have achieved a significant level of success in significantly reducing the number of people who have presented themselves irregularly at our borders while maintaining a robust and efficient system of refugee determination.
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, there are more women working in Canada now than ever before. More indigenous people have jobs. More persons with disabilities are working. More newcomers and young people are working now than ever before. Part of that, my hon. critic will want to know, is because we believe that gender equality is a driver for economic growth.
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that this question has already been answered.What we want to do in the House is talk about the budget that we put forward for all Canadians. We put forward a budget that is going to help young people have the possibility of getting into their first home. We put in place a budget that is going to help students be able to retire their debt earlier in their post-student life. We put in place a budget that is going to help people get the sort of ability to face up to a changing world with the training that they need.We are proud of what we put forward for Canadians and we look forward to talking about it more.
Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to actually talk about climate change and the action our government is taking.We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and having a just transition for workers. We are investing in clean solutions so innovators, entrepreneurs across the country create good jobs. We are of course investing in energy efficiency.The program the member opposite is talking about was a fair and open competition. It was based on the most submissions, the most bang for the buck. It will remove 50,000 cars off the road. The company in question is paying three-quarters of the cost.The real question Canadians want answered is
Mr. Speaker, ensuring that Canadians could hear and know the truth is precisely why the Prime Minister waived cabinet confidence and solicitor-client privilege.All the facts have now been made public. Members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights made their own decisions. That is how we operate on this side of the House.We can see that the Conservatives get direction from the Leader of the Opposition, but our MPs can make their own decisions. Members of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics will proceed as they see fit.
Mr. Speaker, last year Loblaws made $3 billion in profit, yet yesterday the Minister of Environment gave Loblaws $12 millionto do what? It was to buy fridges. This money came from hard-working Canadians, seniors and low-income families who struggle to make ends meet.You tell mehow many Canadians can walk into the Prime Minister's Office and ask them to pay for a new fridge? How many? Why is it always the wealthy and well-connected who get handouts from these Liberals?
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics is an excellent place to disclose new information on the Prime Minister's political interference, especially when that information will help the Ethics Commissioner in his upcoming investigation.Will the Prime Minister waive any restrictions that might prevent witnesses from appearing and speaking freely before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics? Canadians still want to know the truth.
Mr. Speaker, obviously leaks concern us. I can assure the House that leaks did not come from my ministry and I trust my colleagues when they tell me that leaks did not come from theirs. This is a situation of obvious concern and we are doing our best to make sure it does not happen in the future.
Mr. Speaker, the critic from Carleton knows that question has already been answered. What he is not asking about is the budget. Perhaps he does not care about what we are doing for seniors because he already has a million-dollar pension. Those seniors are going to be better off because of their ability to keep more money in their pockets and they are going to be better off in the future because of this budget.For the member for Carleton, we know that the training benefit we are putting in place might help him when he looks for his next job. This is the sort of benefit that will help all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, our Prime Minister is trying to intimidate our leader with threats of legal action. He wants to beef up his credibility because his lack of leadership is causing the government to make mistakes.He hid the truth from Canadians for weeks, if not months, but now we have the perfect opportunity to find out everything. He needs to present his evidence in court, follow through on his threat and testify under oath. When will he do that?
Mr. Speaker, they are twisting the truth. The problem is that the Prime Minister put our leader on notice for the statement he made on March 29.Stop sidestepping. Some facts were raised in the notice and we want to respond. The Leader of the Opposition is prepared to go to court right now.Go ahead, Mr. Prime Minister, we are waiting.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians have a long and proud history of medical developments and discoveries, like insulin and vaccines, which have saved lives at home and abroad.Can the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development please tell us what investments our government is making in cutting-edge research and facilities to pave the way for new medical breakthroughs and to make treatments even more effective?
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Coast Guard members are at work every day across the country, and our government will continue to provide them with the tools that they need to keep Canadians and our waters safe and our economy moving. During the 2018 Arctic season, the Coast Guard was faced with more unusually difficult ice conditions than in other years, which led to some delay in resupply and escort missions. Canadians can be proud of the men and women of the Canadian Coast Guard and the important work that they do from coast to coast to coast.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence. The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses. The witnesses came to testify
Mr. Speaker, the member for Mount Royal finally dissociated himself from the shameful statements his friend, the mayor of Hampstead, made comparing secularism to ethnic cleansing. The Minister of Justice was asked to condemn the statements yesterday, but he chose not to.Insulting Quebec is apparently okay with the Minister of Justice.Will the minister condemn the statements made by the mayor of Hampstead and pledge not to challenge the secularism bill in court?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's saga of corruption and political interference continues. After pulling out all the stops to kill the story and hide the truth from Canadians, the Prime Minister is now resorting to intimidation tactics in a bid to silence the Leader of the Opposition.Will the Prime Minister make good on his threat as soon as possible? Canadians want the truth.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague brings up the issue of women. I want to point out that I am extremely proud that at Transport Canada 47% of the very large number of nominations that have been done under Transport Canada in the last three and a half years are women.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the member for CumberlandColchester and thank him for his 30 years of outstanding service to Canadians. He has been a strong advocate for diversifying the local economy and is very passionate about growing the life sciences sector, particularly in producing life-saving treatments for serious illnesses. That is why, most recently, the Prime Minister made the announcement on BioVectra for $37.5 million, which helped leverage $144.6 million. More importantly, 450 good-quality, middle-class jobs were created.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your reminder that members should be judicious in their wording. Outside of the chamber you are not always there to monitor the situation. However, that is exactly why Canadians can have confidence that when the leader of the official opposition is misleading Canadians, we will not stand idly by. That is exactly why the leader of the official opposition was put on notice. After he was put on notice, he deleted tweets. He actually edited his wording to be more judicious, just as you, Mr. Speaker, have reminded all members to do. This is not the first time the Conservatives have done this. They did this in December after the Minister of Innovation had served them notice.
Mr. Speaker, we have seen the consequence of what happens when members opposite do not want to talk about the budget and do not even want to read the budget. They do not notice what is in the budget, including unprecedented measures to move forward on countering money laundering and the impacts of organized crime in the housing sector, particularly in British Columbia.We continue to work with our provincial counterparts and, indeed, with partners right across the country and around the world to crack down on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance and to make sure our system works for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. To ensure that Canadians could hear the truth, the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. These meetings took place at the justice committee. They took place in public. That is exactly why the member is able to refer to them. It is important that Canadians be able to decide for themselves.Yes, we have put the leader of the official opposition on notice. That is because he is misleading Canadians. This is not the first time we have done so. We have done so previously because he was misleading Canadians when it came to the Minister of Innovation. Once he was put on notice, he deleted and retracted those comments. Once again, on March 31, he did the same thing afterwards
Mr. Speaker, speaking of the truth, the Prime Minister said today that we cannot lie to Canadians. Obviously not, but the Prime Minister's own story has changed since the beginning. He himself admitted that his story was not accurate.If the Prime Minister thinks that Canadians want to know the truth, why is he refusing to launch a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wanted to make sure Canadians heard the truth. That is why he waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence.The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights called witnesses, and the witnesses came and testified. All the facts are now public, and Canadians can hear them for themselves.The interesting thing is that after the Leader of the Opposition was served notice last week, he deleted the tweets because he knows he cannot make defamatory statements.
Mr. Speaker, health care is something all Canadians are proud of, and no individual should be left behind when it comes to making sure they get the services they need. Sunday, April 7, was World Health Day, and the focus was on universal health coverage.Can the Minister of Health please advise this House on how she plans to make Canada's health care system even better?
Mr. Speaker, climate leaders do not buy pipelines. Feminist prime ministers do not turf female colleagues because they speak truth to power. Humanitarian leaders do not shut their borders to asylum seekers during a refugee crisis. Now the Liberals have snuck in changes to refugee laws in the budget bill. That means people like Seidu Mohammed, an LGBTQ man from Ghana, whose asylum claim was accepted after he crossed irregularly from the U.S., will not even get a chance to apply. Lives are at risk. Will the Prime Minister do what is right and suspend the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During question period, a falsehood was spoken, and I just wish to draw some attention to that. The Minister for Women and Gender Equality said that women are actually participating in the workforce to a greater extent. I have a document from the Library of Parliament that actually shows that women participated in the labour force to a greater extent when the former government was in place, and that number has declined since this new government came to power.I would ask for unanimous consent to table the document.
Mr. Speaker, why does the party opposite not stand for the planet? Why does the party opposite not stand for our children and grandchildren? Why does the party opposite not stand for climate action that is creating good jobs and preparing us for the future?To the woman in Manitoba that the member opposite is misleading, let me tell her that a family of four in Manitoba will receive $339, more than 80% of what families will pay. We can take action on climate change and we can do it in a way that is affordable.
Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the member is projecting. That member and his benches are minions of the leader of the official opposition. Rather than point fingers, the member should know very well that when it comes to our members, they make their own decisions. The Conservatives cannot fathom that people do not agree with them. They have not had to endure them often, but we in the Liberal benches have tough conversations. We agree to disagree and we try to find compromise where it is possible. It is with those qualities that we know that Canadians are better off today than they were under 10 years
Mr. Speaker, last week I asked the government to address urgent food insecurity in our north because of climate change.Did it ever deliver, giving $12 million to Loblaws, a company headed up by the second-richest Canadian. The Liberals also gave $4.5 billion to a rich American oil company. In the eyes of the Liberal government, it is clear that every problem can be solved by giving money to its billionaire friends.Meanwhile, first nations already hurting from climate change get nothing. Instead of favours for the billionaire friends, when will the government stand up for first nations and Canadians already hurting?
Mr. Speaker, we found out yesterday that the Canadian Coast Guard is ill-equipped and does not have a concrete plan to deal with an aging fleet. This has resulted in reduced search-and-rescue coverage, ferry-service disruptions, cancelled resupply runs to Arctic and coastal communities and nearly $2 million in lost navigational buoys. The government's lack of funding for the Coast Guard is leaving coastal communities at a real risk. When will the government finally make sure that our Coast Guard is properly equipped, and why has the safety of our coastal communities not been a priority?
Mr. Speaker, on the same question of privilege, I am quite surprised by the position the government is taking. Apparently, the Liberal caucus reached a decision that the law did not apply to it and because it made the decision, the law does not apply. I would be very interested if the hon. member could provide the legal rationale.As a member of this place who was part of the discussion and debate on the Reform Act to change the rules under the Parliament of Canada Act, I have consistently bemoaned, and I know it may or may not be a matter for the Speaker to look at this, the larger question of how much power leaders of organized parties that are recognized have over the conduct of their individual members. However, the principle of Westminster democracy in this place is that all members are equal and the Prime Minister is merely first among equals. I assumed, when we passed the Parliament of Canada Act and the amendments found in section 49, that the recognized parties would comply with the requirements of section 49 in the Parliament of Canada Act and that surely they applied to every party once the law was passed and in place. It is quite distressing to hear now from this member that the caucus decided for itself to ignore the requirements of the law and feels that it has met all the requirements by sending a letter to the Speaker that details the caucus's decision to ignore the law.
Mr. Speaker, this matter has been addressed numerous times in the House, but I will definitely answer it once again. We believe that Canadians should get to hear the truth. That is exactly why the members of the justice committee themselves set parameters for a discussion: to ensure the truth could be shared with Canadians. That is exactly why the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. This is the first time in the history of the country that this has been done. However, it is important that Canadians get to know. That is exactly why all the facts are now public. The Conservatives are misleading Canadians, and that is what they continue to do. That is why they were served notice and then all of a sudden made some changes.
Mr. Speaker, on World Health Day, we celebrate universal public health care, something that Lester Pearson provided to all Canadians more than 50 years ago. We recognize that in Canada people are proud of their publicly funded health care system, one that is based on need and not on their ability to pay, and this government wants to strengthen that. That is why we are making historic investments in the area of mental health and home care, and we have just laid the foundational piece for a national pharmacare program. This government will continue to fight for a publicly funded health care system.
Mr. Speaker, yes, we did put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. On March 31, they received a notice and on the same day the Leader of the Opposition deleted his tweets. He knows that he made defamatory remarks, he knows that he must not do this. He was put on notice so that he makes more judicious decisions that are more befitting of his position.
Mr. Speaker, in the letter where the Prime Minister threatens to sue the Conservative leader, he says that it is a lie that the Clerk of the Privy Council pressured the former attorney general and made it clear that her job was on the line. Well, Canadians could hear clearly on an audio recording that the Clerk of the Privy Council said exactly that. Truth is an absolute defence, and every word of the Conservative leader's statement on the Liberal's SNC-Lavalin scandal is true. If the Prime Minister believes otherwise, when will we see him in court?
Mr. Speaker, one cannot be a lawmaker if one is a lawbreaker.We know that the Prime Minister has broken the law, not just the ethics law that he broke by accepting gifts from someone seeking a government grant, but he broke the Parliament of Canada Act to kick two of his members out of caucus as part of the cover-up in the SNC-Lavalin scandal.If the Prime Minister is so confident that anything he said in this matter is true, when will he launch his lawsuit so we can put him on the stand and question him under oath?
Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague is anxious about HFR. I keep telling him every week that we are working on this important file. When we have news, we will be sure to let my colleague know. In the meantime, we are interested in technologies of the future. We are a government that believes in science and research, and we want to explore all options for transportation in the future.
Mr. Speaker, the Toronto Community Housing Corporation is the largest social housing provider in Canada and the second-largest in North America. Last week, the Prime Minister was in Toronto to make a $1.3 billion housing announcement, the largest federal housing investment in Canadian history. Could the Minister of Families, Children, and Social Development inform the House how this record investment will provide tens of thousands of Toronto families safe and affordable homes?
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to point out that we appointed a minister for rural communities who is responsible for ensuring that the entire country has access to affordable, high-speed Internet services. Along with the private sector, we will continue to make investments across the country to provide all Canadians with this vital access to services that have the quality and speed to meet the demands of the future.
Mr. Speaker, I have a piece of paper too. It is misinformation the Prime Minister gave both during the last election and more recently. Let us start with balanced budgets, or maybe electoral reform or maybe the $10-billion deficit, all things that were promised to Canadians that did not come about.Then we have the most recent crucial issues, for example, the Prime Minister indicating that the former attorney general never went to him about her concerns. We know that to be patently false.Let us test this in court. When will the Prime Minister start this action?
Mr. Speaker, when the IPCC report gave us 12 years to take action on global warming, how did the Liberals respond? They purchased a pipeline. When we learned that Canada is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the planet, how did the Liberals respond? They released a budget that keeps giving oil companies billions of dollars. Now we have learned that our glaciers in the far north are disappearing and melting twice as fast as the others around the world. What are the Liberals doing? They are giving Loblaws $12 million for refrigerators.What exactly is it going to take for the Liberals to do something? Does one of their multimillionaire buddies need to move to the far north?
Mr. Speaker, every time we ask a question we see the Minister of Justice and Attorney General pick up his notes and repeat the answers written by the Prime Minister's office. That says a lot about the independence of the new attorney general vis-a-vis the Prime Minister. Could we please get a straight answer to a simple question?Will the Minister of Justice challenge Bill 21 or support a legal challenge, yes or no? It seems to me that he does not need notes to answer the question.
Mr. Speaker, for two months, the Prime Minister has been avoiding accountability in his involvement in the SNC-Lavalin corruption scandal, which has been engulfing his government now for months.Now he has indicated that he wishes to sue the Leader of the Opposition for the criticisms that the leader made. Let us get the ball rolling. The reason being is, quite frankly, that these allegations can be tested in court, a place the Prime Minister cannot shut down.Would the Prime Minister tell us when he will commence the action?
Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, our government has always stood up for Canadians' fundamental rights and will continue to do so. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects the rights of all citizens. We cannot choose which to protect and which to limit. Our position is clear. The state must not dictate what people can or cannot wear regardless of their beliefs.
Mr. Speaker, I will give some free advice to the Prime Minister. Yes, there has been a notice sent over, and the Leader of the Opposition has indicated that he stands by every single word in that press release. That is a problem for the Prime Minister. Therefore, I guess the ball is actually in his court.He can stand up here, wave his arms around and talk about putting us on notice, but why does he not actually show us? Let us get it on.
Mr. Speaker, we put the Conservative leader on notice because the truth is important. The truth is that, after being asked whether he would condemn white supremacist movements yesterday, the Conservative leader not only refused to do so, he refused to even say the words. We will give the Conservatives another opportunity to condemn white supremacist movements.Will they denounce them and apologize for sharing a platform with those who hold such beliefs?
Mr. Speaker, a new report points out that the Prime Minister's actions against former senior ministers is unprecedented in Canadian history. It has not been seen in a century. Senior former Liberal staffer Penny Collenette points out how this is highly unusual. The women ministers who spoke up about the truth about interference in criminal prosecution were kicked out for speaking up. The Liberals claim that there is nothing to see here. Clearly there is, and Canadians disagree with the government. Why will the government not call a public inquiry?
Mr. Speaker, I was so excited when I saw the member stand up because I thought he was going to talk about the Conservatives' climate change plan. It has been 345 days since they announced a climate change plan. What is our plan? We are phasing out coal, investing in renewables and providing a just transition for workers. We are investing in public transportation across the country. We are investing in clean-tech companies, and yes, we are investing in energy efficiency. This was an open tender, open to any company or organization across the country, to get bang for the buck, because guess what? Canadians want to reduce their emissions. It is only the party opposite
Mr. Speaker, it seems like the party opposite wants to sticker it to Canadians like Doug Ford, but let us talk about what we are doing. We are putting a price on pollution and giving it all back to Ontarians. What does that mean? It means 90% of the money goes right back to families. A family of four will get $307, which is more than 80% of what families will pay.However, I have a question. The member for Milton was on television the other day and was asked if Conservatives would commit to meeting the Paris Agreement targets. She could not answer. Everyone in this House, except for one Conservative, voted for it. Will
Mr. Speaker, in 2018, Quebec took in roughly 22,000 asylum seekers. The Quebec government housed them, cared for them and looked after them. The budget does not offer Quebec a single cent for refugee settlement. In the budget implementation act, the Liberals do not address the problem of Roxham Road. Instead of making minor adjustments, why did the Minister of Immigration not just announce the suspension of the safe third country agreement?
Mr. Speaker, putting the Conservative leader on notice is something we did because the truth was important.Here is the truth. After being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, indeed, let us be clear. The Prime Minister has said that it is libellous for the opposition leader to say that the former attorney general was pressured by him and then fired for resisting. However, on the taped call, the clerk said that the Prime Minister was determined, in a firm frame of mind, that they were on a collision course and that he was going to get it done one way or another.When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat to sue or will he just finally admit that everything the opposition leader said is totally true?
Mr. Speaker, as I stated yesterday, Canada is based on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is not up to the state to determine what people can or cannot wear no matter their beliefs. We have institutions to protect Canadians' fundamental rights. As Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Justice, I will support and protect these laws.
Mr. Speaker, as everyone well knows, we spent many weeks working to try and find a positive resolution on this issue. This is something that we understand had very strong opinions on multiple sides and we wanted to work forward and demonstrate that we truly believed that differences of opinion and diversity was a source of strength and resilience for an organization and for our country. That is what we worked very hard on. Unfortunately, we could not get to that place. The will of caucus was clear that those individuals could no longer be in caucus. At the same time, we are going to continue focusing on what matters to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Willowdale for his hard work on behalf of the people of Toronto.We believe that every Canadian should have a safe and affordable home. That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy, a $40 billion plan. Sorry, it is a $55 billion plan because of budget 2019. That is why we were so pleased last Friday to announce a very historic investment in the city of Toronto, helping to renovate, renew and reconstruct the community homes of 58,000 families in Toronto. That is why we will keep working very hard to give every Canadian a safe and affordable place to call home.
Mr. Speaker, someone obtained confidential information on the Supreme Court vetting process to smear Chief Justice Joyal and the former attorney general. There are political fingerprints all over this hatchet job, but the new Attorney General of Canada refuses to investigate. Why? He says he trusts the Prime Minister's Office and he trusts it will never happen again. God help the rule of law when we have an Attorney General who thinks his job is damage control. His job is to protect the integrity of the process. When will he launch an independent investigation into finding out who launched that leak and who ordered it?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the question of privilege raised this morning by the hon. member for MarkhamStouffville. In her intervention, the member referenced an alleged breach of the Parliament of Canada Act.As the Chair stated in a ruling on April 8, 2019, asking the House to deal with the possible expulsion of a member from caucus is not a proper subject for a question of privilege. The Chair stated that if a member believes that the House needs to put in place certain practices, perhaps by way of additional Standing Orders, this should be done through a substantive motion following proper notice.The Chair also made reference earlier today, as well as in the April 8 ruling, to the Speaker having no role in the interpretation of statute nor in the conduct of changes that were made to the Parliament of Canada Act. As the Chair pointed out, all that is allowed under subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act is that the Speaker be informed of the results of the caucus decision.As the hon. member pointed out, the Speaker confirmed on December 10, 2015, that all actions required by the Speaker as it relates to subsection 49.8(5) had been taken, which she stated is indicative that the chair of the Liberal caucus did indeed inform the Speaker of the decision of the Liberal caucus.Just to be absolutely clear I will state that, pursuant to subsection 49.8(5) of the Parliament of Canada Act, the chair of the national Liberal caucus sent a letter to the Speaker over three years ago outlining the decisions of the Liberal caucus as they relate to sections 49.2, 49.3 and 49.4; subsections 49.5(1) to 49.5(4); and section 49.6 of the Parliament of Canada Act and their application to the 42nd Parliament. The Liberal caucus decided that the provisions would not apply for the 42nd Parliament. Given the fact that the Liberal caucus did not adopt these provisions, the points raised by the hon. member on this issue are moot. The hon. member also states that her question of privilege is with respect to which rules apply with regard to the expulsion and readmission of caucus members. I would contend that, given the Liberal caucus decided that the provisions of the Parliament of Canada Act would not apply for the 42nd Parliament and sent the Speaker a letter to confirm this, there is no confusion around which rules apply. Furthermore, as I said earlier, it is not the role of the Speaker to adjudicate these matters.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been caught misleading Canadians. Having been caught, now the Prime Minister is trying to sue his critics. In his letter, he disputes the fact the Prime Minister had been informed by [the former attorney general] that his actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. Every single Canadian understands that this is in fact exactly what happened.When will the Prime Minister move forward with his threat to call a court case and get to business?
Mr. Speaker, after being asked directly to condemn white supremacists yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition not only refused to do so, but refused to even say the words.I will give him another opportunity to do so today through his deputy leader. Will he denounce white supremacy, the alt-right movement and finally apologize for sharing a platform with it?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister says that he is going to sue the Leader of the Opposition for saying, [The former attorney general] repeatedly told the Prime Minister and his top officials that their actions were entirely inappropriate and amounted to political interference. For him to sue, it would have to mean those comments were wrong, but last week the Prime Minister admitted that it was true.How can the Prime Minister sue someone for saying something the Prime Minister has already admitted is true?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is threatening a lawsuit to shut down the opposition from holding him accountable for his attempts to interfere in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. He says that it is libellous to say that the former attorney general told him and his top officials that their actions were political interference and entirely inappropriate. However, the taped phone call, texts and notes show that it is all true. Canadians look forward to the Prime Minister being forced to testify in open court under oath. When will the Prime Minister follow through on his threat?
Mr. Speaker, they stick it to Canadians.Amanda Stevenson, in Lundar, Manitoba, had her dairy fridge quit last week. She has watched these Liberals take money from her in the form of a carbon tax and increase taxes on her small business, and now she had to watch them give money to her competitor for the same thing she cannot afford. That is wrong. We are proud to stand for Amanda, not for SNC-Lavalin and for Loblaws.Why is the government so hell-bent on taking from the poor to give to the rich?
Mr. Speaker, on March 29, our leader issued an official statement in a press release in which he said that the Prime Minister engaged in political interference, personally gave orders, denied the truth, and had therefore lost the moral authority to govern. Our leader stands by everything he said and even reiterated it yesterday.If the Prime Minister has the slightest sense of leadership, will he proceed with his lawsuit so we can all find out the truth of this matter?
Mr. Speaker, while Trois-Rivières is still waiting for an announcement on the high-frequency rail project, Transport Canada is funding a feasibility study on the Hyperloop project in Canada. Transport Canada has yet to publish the results of the studies on the HFR. The Hyperloop project is decades away from practical application, while the HFR is closer to reality.Since the minister is currently exploring the future, could he get back in his DeLorean, return to 2019 and tell us whether there is a high-frequency rail project on the horizon?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.In her response earlier, the hon. government House leader made reference to a piece of correspondence she had given you. I do not believe that the rest of us have seen this letter, but as you know, Mr. Speaker, and as she knows, any letter or any document that is made reference to in the House must be tabled for the benefit of all of us. We would now like to see this letter to determine whether this actually demonstrates that the Liberal Party was in fact in conformity with the Parliament of Canada Act. She was very careful not to make that clear in her comments, so we would like to see it for ourselves.
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time this Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians by making false and defamatory statements. As I have already said at least twice, he was forced to withdraw or stop making defamatory statements about members of our government.We had to warn him because he did it again. We know the Conservatives have a history of doing this. It is important for the Conservatives to remember that this is not the right approach.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to once again remind Canadians that all information is public. Why is that information public? Because the Prime Minister waived solicitor-client privilege as well as cabinet confidence. All meetings of the justice committee that were on this issue were in public so Canadians could decide for themselves. They know very well who is misleading Canadians.That member talks a big game, but in February, when it came to comments on this file, it was his leader, the leader of the official opposition, who actually retracted that statement.
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the official opposition was put on notice on March 31. That very same day, he deleted tweets and then edited them because he knew he should be more judicious in his words. His actions are clear. The Conservatives talk a tough game. The same thing happened with the Minister of Innovation . The Conservatives made those statements in the House. When they were asked to take those statements out of the House, they would not. Do you know what happened after they were served notice in December, Mr. Speaker? The leader of the official opposition retracted those comments. He deleted those tweets.
Mr. Speaker, there have been expulsions from caucus, shutting down debate in committees, a lawsuit, a leak of confidential information about a chief justice Supreme Court application and two months of Liberals doing everything they can to change the channel on the PMO scandal. However, leaking confidential information, that is a serious breach. The Minister of Justice does not seem to understand the seriousness of this act. Is the Attorney General comfortable with a leak that was intended to smear the former attorney general? The integrity of our courts is at stake. Will the Attorney General launch an investigation into this serious breach?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister now says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. I guess he will find out in October.In his letter threatening to sue the Conservative leader, he says that the former attorney general never told him that the political interference in an ongoing criminal proceeding was entirely inappropriate. However, the Prime Minister admitted to the House last week that in fact she told him that directly to his face. He says that there should be consequences for lying to Canadians. When will the Prime Minister take us to court so he can experience just what those are?
Mr. Speaker, it is rather ironic that the Liberal Prime Minister is trying to lecture parliamentarians here in the House when he himself violated the Conflict of Interest Act four times. The Prime Minister is claiming that what our leader said is false. He reiterated that yesterday evening.If he wants to demonstrate even a little bit of leadership, will he follow through on his threat so that he can testify under oath in court, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, high-speed Internet and cellular services are a necessity, but access is anything but affordable and reliable. A single mother told me that she pays $102 a month for unreliable service. People deserve a government that has the courage to stand up to telecommunications companies.When will the Prime Minister find the courage to stand up for people and cut these costs?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and those Liberals talk about letting members on their side of the House make decisions without direction from the PMO. That certainly was not the case when the Prime Minister unilaterally turfed two female caucus members, in the process breaking the laws of this place. We know what the Prime Minister does to people who do not agree with him. He pressures, intimidates and then threatens them if they do not fall in line, and then he throws them out. Since the leader of the opposition will not be intimidated, and the Prime Minister cannot kick him out of caucus, the Prime Minister has threatened him with a lawsuit. A simple question: When are we going to see you is court?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order arising out of question period.I would have risen if I could have at the moment this event occurred, but under our standing rules, there are no points of order during Question Period. Under our standing rules, we are not to interrupt members when they are speaking. We are not to heckle. We are not to create a din. Just as a point of reference for you, Mr. Speaker, at the point that you were trying to bring the House to order, when the Minister of Finance was speaking, with the volume at my desk at full, as high as I could listen to it, as far as our technology would take it, I was unable to hear the minister over the heckling. That is just unacceptable, and I wish that we would find a way. We have the Standing Orders. It is disrespectful to this institution, to democracy itself and to our constituents that we allow this sort of bad behaviour to continue at high volume.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians know what is happening to women under the Liberals. The former attorney general repeatedly said the pressure she was facing was inappropriate, yet the Prime Minister claimed no one had ever raised concerns with him. However, just last week he was forced to admit that was false. Now he is threatening to take our leader to court for pointing out that he has been misleading Canadians.When will the court case begin so the whole truth can come out?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shown little regard for anyone but himself in this ever-deepening scandal. The banal excuses and empty platitudes about his respect for the rule of law and the independence of committees stand in stark contrast to the trail of resignations, removals and character smearing left in his self-serving wake. Again, will the Prime Minister finally order his minions to stand down and encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to freely vote their conscience?
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time the Conservative leader and his party have misled Canadians with false and defamatory statements. As I have said, he has been forced to retract or cease making
Mr. Speaker, as I said, he has been forced to retract or cease making defamatory statements against members of our government repeatedly. The reason we put him on notice is because he is doing so again.Members of the opposition should not have to mislead Canadians in order to make political points. They should stick to the facts. That is what Canadians deserve.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has sent a letter to our leader in which he threatens to sue him.In the letter, he states that the Leader of the Opposition accused him of having, and I quote, personally subverted the judicial process to interfere with a criminal prosecution. He seems to understand the situation, and the leader stands by what he said. When will we be going to court?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has shut down every parliamentary opportunity to examine fully his attempted interference in the SNC-Lavalin corruption trial. By threatening a lawsuit, he suddenly seems to favour litigating details of his scandal under oath in a public courtwell, not really. We know it is just a desperate ruse. However, there is another opportunity this afternoon. Will the Prime Minister encourage the Liberal members of the ethics committee to support my motion to invite him and 11 other witnesses to speak without constraint about this sorry affair?
Mr. Speaker, after the biggest drug money-laundering case in Canadian history, the federal government is still not doing its part. Expert Peter German's report points out that no federal resources are being used. Literally, in the federal money-laundering unit, no one is working on money laundering. No wonder there are so few federal prosecutions. Drug money laundering is fuelling organized crime and putting communities at risk. Why have the Liberals failed to act?
Mr. Speaker, we put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract defamatory online statements he made against the Minister of Innovation.He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, here is what I have to say about the truth: We put the Leader of the Opposition on notice because he was making false statements and misleading Canadians.The opposition leader and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. In December, he had to retract statements he made online about the Minister of Innovation. He has done this repeatedly and now pretends that it is somehow virtuous for him to mislead Canadians. Misleading Canadians, as the opposition leader has done, is never virtuous.
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition and his party have a history of making false and defamatory statements. He had to retract some statements he made online in December about the Minister of Innovation.We warned the Leader of the Opposition again because he was making false and misleading statements to Canadians. Once again, on March 31, the Leader of the Opposition deleted some tweets because he knows he did something he should not have.
Mr. Speaker, although I find the actions of that side completely wrong and reprehensible, I will apologize for the fact that I did show disrespect for the Chair.