Most toxic speeches
Mr. Speaker, if policies are neglected, they are worthless. The government has to have zero tolerance for sexual abuse in Canadian sports. Right now, the onus is on sporting organizations to be responsible for policing these complaints. That is not fair to these organizations. Canada needs an independent body to handle cases of sexual abuse in Canadian sport. Under the recent Safe Sport Act in the United States, independent bodies investigate these cases. It is time for Canada to do the same. When is the government going to step up?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' budget has in fact turned out to be built on borrowing and tax cuts on those very same middle-class Canadians they pretend to want to help.
Mr. Speaker, during question period I asked the Prime Minister a question about the upcoming food labelling policy. I asked him whether he believed that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice were health hazards. Based on the Prime Minister's answer, it seems clear that he had the wrong paper.I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to table the brief from Les Producteurs de lait du Québec, which confirms that the policy to put warning labels on the front of packaging could stigmatize a number of dairy products. I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to inform the Prime Minister of the impact that the food labelling policy will have on milk producers.
Mr. Speaker, this week we all heard the many traumatizing stories of sexual abuse from Canadian athletes. This is unacceptable, and the government must do something to protect our athletes. National sports bodies in Canada are responsible for policing themselves in matters of sexual abuse. What is wrong with this picture? It creates conflicts of interest and endangers the safety of our athletes.When will the government do something to keep these young athletes safe?
Mr. Speaker, Canada is generally a very safe country, but there have been recent trends of an increase in guns and gangs violence. The responsibility for keeping communities safe starts at home, and working with communities to prevent crime will help them stay safe and resilient. Can the Prime Minister tell us what our government is doing to keep Canadian kids away from gangs, which will allow them to live full and productive lives?
Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister prepares to play host to the G7, Canadians and many around the world are asking themselves, What happened to this guy? We all remember that great defender of the planet who promised to end fossil fuels subsidies. However, a new report shows that when it comes to the G7 and those same subsidies, Canada ranks seventh out of seven. That would be last. That would be after Donald Trump's America. Therefore, rather than eliminate the subsidies, the Prime Minister went out and bought a 65-year-old pipeline. When will he end this circle of hypocrisy and finally come clean with Canadians and keep his promise to them and to the world?
Mr. Speaker, harassment of any kind is unacceptable.The safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination and harassment. That is why all federally-funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy.We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote healthy, harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, this government and all Canadians have been very clear. Harassment of any kind is completely unacceptable, and the safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination, harassment, and harmful behaviour. That is why all federally funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy in place to be eligible for sport support program funding, which Sport Canada reviews to ensure compliance. We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, on June 6, 1944, 14,000 Canadian soldiers landed on the beaches of Normandy. On June 6, 2018, our soldiers are being asked to hand in their rucksacks and sleeping bags to the quartermaster. This is outrageous. What is the Prime Minister doing in the meantime? He is spending $10 million on Omar Khadr, $7 billion on a pipeline that a company could have taken care of itself, and $7 million on a temporary skating rink right here in front of Parliament.Mr. Prime Minister, do you think that we are going to send our soldiers to Mali under those conditions?
Mr. Speaker, an event like the G7 summit naturally has an impact on local residents. Everyone knows that. Not only are honest workers currently prevented from getting to their place of work, but local shops, businesses, and homes will be exposed to vandalism.Under such circumstances, we would expect the government to look after victims of vandalism and provide compensation.Will the Prime Minister formally promise to compensate every victim of vandalism during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, well, we only wish that were true.Canada is a country rich in natural resources, home to innovative businesses, and populated by hard-working Canadians. Our country should be attracting investment, but instead we are repelling it. In fact, we are so opposed to private sector investment in the energy sector that we have killed three pipeline projects worth over $100 billion. Now, we have taken $4.5 billion and given it to Kinder Morgan to take its projects elsewhere.When will the Prime Minister stop attacking Canada's energy sector and start putting the interests of Canadians first?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces were ordered to return their sleeping bags and rucksacks because of an equipment shortage. The Prime Minister is failing our Canadian Armed Forces. Already he broke the Liberal promise and cut another $2.3 billion from defence spending. This is unacceptable. How can Canadians trust the Prime Minister to buy navy ships and fighter jets when he cannot even get buying sleeping bags right? How can we trust him to provide the right equipment to our troops who are about to deploy to Mali?
Mr. Speaker, every day the Liberal government demonstrates how completely out of touch it is with the farming community. The Liberals called our farmers tax cheats and are imposing a carbon tax that farmers do not want. They are changing Canada's food guide and imposing labels that make no sense on agricultural products. All their actions are having so-called unintended consequences on farmers.My question for the Prime Minister is quite simple. Does he also believe that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice are a health hazard?
Mr. Speaker, one almost has to feel sorry for the Conservatives. For 10 years, they tried to get this done, and were unable to do it. Then, for two and a half years, while we were in government, they have been screaming at us to get this pipeline built, and now, when we are finally getting this pipeline built, they do not know what to do with themselves. So they fall back on their silly attacks, on playing politics, on their rigid ideology that somehow, suddenly, they do not think that public investment has any place in the development of our natural resources, which, of course, the great Peter Lougheed disagreed with them about. We know that we are doing the right thing, the right way.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to help the Prime Minister out. Conservatives and Liberals voted for Bill C-23, which gave unprecedented powers to American border officers on Canadian soil. Luckily, the NDP was here raising exactly these concerns, because now what we are seeing in the Senate report is that with the legalization of marijuana, any person on Canadian soil, not crossing the border and subject to another country's laws, but here in Canada, could potentially be fined or imprisoned under that very legislation.My question for the Prime Minister is simple. Is that the case, yes or no? When will he finally take that issue up with his American counterparts?
Mr. Speaker, $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money is going directly to Houston, Texas. That is eight times more than Kinder Morgan spent on the pipeline. That is $2 billion more than Kinder Morgan itself estimated the pipeline to be worth.When Kinder Morgan executives made that deal, they called Houston.They did not say, Houston, we have a problem. No, instead, they said, Houston, it's party time with $4.5 billion of Canadian taxpayers' money, thanks to the Liberal Party of Canada.Why is the Liberal government sending $4.5 billion to Texas?
Mr. Speaker, a Senate report has just concluded that Canadians who use cannabis after it is legalized and try to cross the border to the United States could be denied entry, but worse, those who do not answer certain questions in pre-clearance could face up to two years in prison under Bill C-23, which calls it resisting or wilfully obstructing an American officer, even on Canadian soil.Can the Prime Minister confirm whether or not Canadians who simply refuse to answer American officers in Canada about their cannabis use could face fines or imprisonment?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister uses the word stringent. There is no doubt that it will have a stringent effect on household budgets. There is also no doubt the Prime Minister supports high gas prices. He said so when he was in Vancouver, celebrating $1.60 a litre gas prices. There is also no doubt that his carbon tax will raise the price of consumer goods upon which middle-class Canadians rely.It is his bill, so how much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite pointed out that he thinks about tax cuts. The issue is that Conservatives think about tax cuts for the wealthiest Canadians.The first thing we did was bring in a tax cut for the middle class, and we raised taxes on the wealthiest 1%. For 10 years, Conservatives tried to put forward an agenda for growth that was focused on giving benefits and boutique tax cuts to the wealthiest Canadians, hoping that somehow it would trickle down to everyone else.It did not, which is why the Conservatives had terrible growth for 10 years. We are investing in the middle class and those working hard to join it, and giving them more money
Mr. Speaker, I hate to have to correct the member opposite. In fact, it was during his government that many provinces moved forward on pricing carbon pollution. We have a situation in which British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Ontario have all moved forward with pricing of carbon pollution, and we know that it has to be done right across the country. That is exactly what we are ensuring, but we are working with the provinces to ensure they can put forward a model that works for them, as long as it is fairly stringent and impactful right across the country.
Mr. Speaker, as we have said from the very beginning, with this particular American administration, we have to be ready for everything, and we are.That is why, as soon as the U.S. put forward punitive, unacceptable tariffs on steel and aluminum in Canada, we were, right away, ready with a list of retaliatory measures that target American companies and American producers for which there are alternatives available to Canadian citizens. We know that tariffs end up hurting the citizens of the country that brings them in. We want to avoid hurting Canadians. That is why we are consulting with Canadians on those retaliatory measures.
Mr. Speaker, after two years, one month, and 14 days of incessant consultation, the Minister of Canadian Heritage finally made an announcement yesterday. I could hardly believe it. Did she have new measures or reforms to announce? Of course not. She announced a new panel of experts, the second in two years, which will issue its recommendations in 2020, after the next election. That is cynicism. Two years ago, the minister was bragging about her political courage and promised legislative changes in 2017.By doing nothing for four years, is this government not jeopardizing our culture for no other reason than to get re-elected at the expense of our culture?
[Member spoke in Inuktitut][English]Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Two communities in my riding have recently declared that they are in crisis. These declarations stem from the fact that there are too few mental health supports and an increased number of suicide attempts. Of the recent $118 million announced for first nations and Inuit mental health, Nunavut receives only $500,000 annually, despite the fact that the suicide rate is 10 times the national average. The current government has sent additional support to first nations communities in crisis. Will the government do the same for Inuit communities?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite well knows that the government will be there for workers and industries affected by these punitive American measures. That is what I told steel and aluminum workers over the past months as I travelled across the country to engage with them.It is interesting that the member opposite speaks about deficits. In the last election, Canadians had a very clear choice. The Conservatives, their choice, their option, was actually austerity and cuts. Our proposal to Canadians was investing in the middle class and the people working hard to join it, investing in our communities, and growing the economy the way the Conservatives were not able to for 10 years.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals voted against the NDP motion to implement the rights of indigenous peoples in their pipeline project, but just a few days ago voted to put those same rights into Canadian law. The Prime Minister cannot pretend that indigenous voices are all the same and ignore the clear opposition to his pipeline. The Liberals are denying the rights of first nations, Métis, and Inuit people. Does the government really not see that or does it just not care?
Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear about one thing. The reason we are moving forward on the legalization of marijuana is because the current system does not work. It does not protect our kids from the harmful impact of marijuana, and it delivers billions of dollars every year to criminal organizations that make profits off of that. We are also highlighting that cannabis is not somehow a positive health food supplement that we encourage everyone to use. It is a controlled substance. We are trying to make it more difficult for kids to access, and people need to be honest when they cross the border if they choose to enter a different country.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians really are watching what is going on because they are quite concerned. They see an economy that is going to be put at risk and they are looking for answers from the Prime Minister. Unfortunately, today we have not received any answers from the Prime Minister. He was asked four times about how much a carbon tax would cost a Canadian family. He did not tell us the answer. He was asked how much more deficit was going to be accumulated because of the trade war we are in. He did not give us an answer. These are things that Canadians care about. He did give us one answer. He told us that he is going to introduce legislation to affirm the CPTPP, the free-trade deal that we negotiated. Will he guarantee that it is going to pass?
Mr. Speaker, this is yet another example of a government that talks a lot, but is always missing in action when it comes to making important decisions that affect entire indigenous communities.Last week it voted to support the rights of indigenous peoples. This week, it is voting against our motion, which is a concrete way to support these rights.Can the Liberals do more than just talk, and talk, and talk about the rights of indigenous people?
Mr. Speaker, it is a real shame to see the trapped ideology of the Conservatives who are playing politics with this issue. I can tell them that I was just in Alberta yesterday talking to oil sands workers, talking to pipeline workers, who are deeply grateful that we are able to move forward on building this pipeline project after years of the Conservatives being unable to do so. Why were the Conservatives unable to do so? It is because they did not understand that the only way to build a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. This government is doing both, and that is why we are getting it done.
Mr. Speaker, here we go again. The Conservatives pretend that they are friends to our troops, but for 10 years they underinvested, they politicized, they played games with procurement, and they nickel-and-dimed our veterans, yet they are easy to stand up with inflated rhetoric any time there is a challenge. We are going to continue to work with the men and women of our Canadian Forces to ensure that they have the equipment and the support they need to do their jobs as they stand up for Canada with their lives and livelihoods on the line. We continue to support our troops, not just with words, like them, but with dollars and cents that go the distance.
Mr. Speaker, Conservatives are always thinking about tax cuts. I will correct the blues after this to make sure they reflect tax hikes.On the subject of tariffs, we know that tariffs collected by the government will raise revenue for the Government of Canada. Will the Prime Minister assure the House and Canadians that any new revenue for the government will be used to lower taxes for affected workers and the businesses that employ them?
Mr. Speaker, farmers are struggling to survive and the Liberal imposed taxes are not helping. Now the agriculture minister is claiming that farmers support the Liberal carbon tax. The chair of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers said, I'm not sure who has been briefing [the] Minister... but he is dead wrong if he thinks that most farmers support a carbon tax.Does the Prime Minister agree with the minister that farmers like his carbon tax or will he listen to farmers and recognize that the carbon tax is crippling our farm families?
Mr. Speaker, before selling the Trans Mountain pipeline to the Prime Minister for $4.5 billion, Kinder Morgan valued its Canadian assets at $2.5 billion. That is quite a deal if one is Kinder Morgan. Kinder Morgan did not ask for any Canadian tax dollars. All it wanted to do was to build a pipeline.Why did the Prime Minister pay Kinder Morgan $2 billion more than the pipeline was worth and allow Kinder Morgan to invest and create jobs outside of this country?
Mr. Speaker, three years ago, a young Cree girl was suffering chronic pain and was taking daily medication for a jaw misalignment. She simply needed $6,000 in dental work. Instead of showing compassion and common sense, the government decided to take Josey and her family to court, for over $110,000 in costs, to fight. Seven months ago, we suggested that it was time to quit the fight and show some compassion and change the policy.Can the Prime Minister tell us how this represents using taxpayer dollars for reconciliation?
Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Conservatives are feeling a bit lost. For years, they have been demanding that we do what they could not, and that is to build a pipeline to give Canada access to new markets other than the United States. The Conservatives were unable to do that, but we did so, at their request. Now that we have delivered on their main demand, they have to try to find a way to attack us and play petty politics. Fortunately, workers across Canada understand that we did the right thing for them.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to have the opportunity to reinforce that we have indeed committed, and are on track, to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies by the year 2025. To do this, we announced in our very first budget the expiration of the tax writeoffs on capital investments in LNG facilities. In budget 2017, we announced the elimination of certain tax credits for exploration expenses in the oil and gas sector. We are developing our resources while protecting our environment, including safeguarding our oceans and combatting climate change. Our government understands that a clean environment and a strong economy go hand in hand.
Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to stand today in the House and express my concern in regard to comments made by our hon. Prime Minister during answering questions in regard to the carbon tax. He indicated to the House that he had worked with all the provinces and that the provinces were working toward this with him. Clearly, we all know the Province of Saskatchewan is not in agreement.
Mr. Speaker, we recognize that the mental health challenges facing indigenous people are deep-rooted, and the need for support is immense. In Nunavut, we are working with our partners and have invested $189 million over 10 years in the community-led Nunavut wellness agreement as well as $8.4 million, this year alone, for mental health support for Inuit. We are supporting ITK's national Inuit suicide-prevention strategy and will continue to work with partners to respond to the mental health needs in the territory.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent to table some documents. The documents speak to the issue of Kinder Morgan and the fact that it valued its assets at $2.5 billion, yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion.I would like to table these documents, the SEC filings of Kinder Morgan Canada, to show that the assets are in fact valued at $2.5 billion in spite of the Prime Minister's assertion.
Mr. Speaker, if the provinces were already doing it, the Prime Minister would not have to introduce a budget bill forcing them to do it. Clearly this is a federally imposed tax. Clearly he would have read the briefing notes that his departments have given him about the cost of that tax. He knows the cost.Again, how much will this Liberal carbon tax imposed by the Prime Minister cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised Canadians he would be a climate change leader, and he committed to eliminate public subsidies for oil and gas companies. However, climate change leaders do not buy pipelines with public money. Climate change leaders do not allow $3 million bonuses to be given to top oil executives. Climate change leaders do use public money to build long-term job creation in renewable energies. Could the government explain why it makes sense for a climate change leader to buy a pipeline?
Mr. Speaker, we have no doubt that the Prime Minister will work with any politician as part of his plan to raise taxes on Canadians. It is his form of trickle-down economics. He scoops up money from working class consumers, gives it to the federal government, trickles it down to provincial politicians, and then expects us to believe that a few drops will go back to the people who originally paid for it in the first place. If that is true, then why can he not tell us this. How much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the laundry list the member put forward. However, we can list the concrete results we have delivered for Canadians over the past two and a half years. Whether it be signing the CPTPP, which the Conservatives were not moving forward on; whether it was concretizing a CETA that was in dire straits when we came into office; whether it is delivering an energy infrastructure that will get our oil resources to new markets, which they failed to do for 10 years; whether it is actually investing in infrastructure in our communities, lowering taxes for the middle class, and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, these are the things that
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the Prime Minister was a superstar, a breath of fresh air, and a new champion of the environment. Three years later, everyone is shaking their heads. What happened to Canada? What happened to Mr. Selfie, to Paris Match's new pet?After adopting Stephen Harper's targets, the Prime Minister bought a pipeline. Today, we learned that Canada ranks lowest among the G7 countries when it comes to eliminating oil subsidies. We came in seventh out seven.Will the Prime Minister finally keep his promise, do the right thing, and eliminate all oil subsidies?
Mr. Speaker, in Kinder Morgan's 2017 annual report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, it valued the Trans Mountain pipeline at $2.5 billion, and yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion to purchase the pipeline. We now know that a lot of the extra padding went to executive bonuses.If Kinder Morgan says its pipeline is worth $2.5 billion, why did the Prime Minister pay it $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money to leave Canada?
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the choice was clear for Canadians.The NDP was proposing to make Canadians choose between what is good for the environment and what is good for the economy. The Liberal Party told Canadians that we understood how important it was to create a strong economy while protecting the environment. The two go hand in hand.That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting a national price on carbon pollution, implementing a historic oceans protection plan, and securing new markets for our resources.That is what Canadians expect.
Mr. Speaker, at the moment I will not seek to table documents. I have a point of order on a totally unrelated standing order that I think is very well grounded.
Mr. Speaker, this is not a novel point of order. It relates to Standing Order 16 and 18, but in particular to Standing Order 16, related to interrupting members when they speak, in this case, the Prime Minister. I can assure other members that I feel like screaming a good deal of the time when I listen to the Prime Minister, but I do not. It violates the rules of this place when I cannot hear the Prime Minister deliver a response. I do not recall, from this seat, having trouble hearing Stephen Harper. I do not think he spoke louder than the current Prime Minister. The noise from this quarter of Conservatives is unacceptable. It violates our rules.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has a budget bill before the House of Commons right now that Finance Canada admits will raise the price of gas, home heating, and most other consumer goods that Canadians buy.How much will the Prime Minister's carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister announced that the G7 would be held in La Malbaie, his government also said that workers in the region would be put to use. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Workers everywhere are currently in a situation of forced unemployment.Can the Prime Minister tell the people of La Malbaie whether compensation is provided for and what he is going to do for the hotel managers, innkeepers, and restaurant owners who are unable to put their employees to work before and during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, in a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent. There has been a considerable amount of misinformation on that side of the House in regard to the minister's decision to award the lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and those with close family ties to the Liberal Party of Canada.The minister, along with the Prime Minister, have repeatedly said this was about reconciliation, and they have misrepresented the previous government's commitment to the indigenous participation with this fishery.Yesterday at committee the minister's most senior staff acknowledged the commitment of the previous government to aboriginal participation in this fishery. In order to clear up the government's inaccurate misrepresentation once and for all, I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Government of Canada 2015 news release, which states: With this increase in TAC, the Integrated Fisheries Management Plan provision for new entrants has been triggered and, as such, Fisheries and Oceans Canada is commencing a process to introduce a new entrant or new entrants to the fishery. This process includes consultation with the current licence holder, industry and First Nations and will conclude in the coming weeks.
Mr. Speaker, I would say that it is the NDP that talks, and talks, and talks, while we deliver results for first nations and indigenous peoples. We have eliminated many boil water advisories, we have built schools, and we are moving forward with partnerships on governance and on treaties. We are working hand in hand with indigenous communities across the country to keep our promise of nation-to-nation reconciliation.We will continue to respectfully work with first nations without claiming to speak for them like the NDP does.
Mr. Speaker, we are, of course, in ongoing discussions with our American counterparts on a broad range of border issues, and we will continue to be, but at the same time, I hope the NDP is not suggesting that somehow a sovereign country cannot make determinations about how it handles people entering its own borders. Of course, we would never expect or allow any other country to dictate to us who or how we can or cannot let someone into our country. We will ensure that we are also respecting other countries' sovereignty in doing that at the same time as we stand up for Canadians, and of course, for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years Stephen Harper and his Conservatives did nothing on protecting the environment. However, over those years, a number of provinces stepped up and put forward a price on carbon pollution. Actually, we presently have a situation in which 80% of our citizens live in jurisdictions where there is a carbon price in effect. We are continuing to move forward to demonstrate that a national price on carbon will be fair for those provinces that already have it and grow the economy for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions, and I hope you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: that the House hope for the success of the G7 meeting in La Malbaie and defend the right to protest, but denounce possible acts of violence and vandalism, thank the police forces who will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe, and call on the government to formally pledge to compensate residents and business owners in the unfortunate event of unrest and damage in the Charlevoix region and in the city of Quebec.
Members who are asking me to sit down should listen, especially the members of PROC, who know the rules.My good colleague from Red DeerLacombe gave an important point of order, and in response to it the government House leader said something like As a member who was here until midnight last night. It is an important convention in this House not to refer to the presence or absence of members during debate. I do not know if she was referring to herself or to my good friend from Red DeerLacombe, but especially during late sittings, it is a grievous violation of the rules of procedure for members to make insinuations about who was or was not here late into the night. I think the government House leader should be called to order.
Mr. Speaker, last week, I had the opportunity to visit La Malbaie in the Charlevoix region to meet with locals. They told me that they were proud to welcome the world, to show them the beauty of Charlevoix and to encourage people to come visit and discover this magnificent region.Obviously, they know that there will be some inconveniences and challenges that come with hosting our visitors and dealing with security. We are continuously working with the public and with their elected representatives to ensure that everything goes smoothly.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table some important documents I believe the House needs to see so everybody can then have a fulsome discussion. We asked the Prime Minister four times today, although we have actually been asking for weeks, about the price and the cost of the carbon tax. We have documents here that my hon. colleague, the member for Carleton, has worked very hard to get, which would reveal the cost of the carbon tax to Canadians. Unfortunately they have been redacted, but it would be important I table those documents today. This is something that has been in dispute. We are getting ready to rise very soon for the summer, and Canadians need to know how much the carbon tax is going to cost.
Mr. Speaker, today we are launching a new call for proposals under the youth gang prevention program and the crime prevention action fund. These programs address the impact of gangs and violence on youth, especially in indigenous and high-needs communities. This is on top of unprecedented annual funding we announced last year of up to $100 million. We will keep working to enhance public safety by focusing on prevention, effective law enforcement, and strong community partnerships.
Mr. Speaker, on the member's first comment, it is true that we just appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change.On the issue of pipelines, for 10 years the Conservatives tried to move forward on getting our oil resources to new markets, and they failed. They failed because they refused to understand that the only way to grow a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are demonstrating with a national price on carbon pollution, with a world-class oceans protection plan, with $8 billion worth of investment in clean energy projects and renewable technologies. We know the way
Mr. Speaker, we will continue to protect and to promote our culture.The Broadcasting Act has not been reviewed since 1991. It predates smart phones and the ubiquitous use of the Internet. We are reviewing the act to ensure that it reflects today's realities and that the system in place is fair for everyone. The guiding principle for the review is clear: anyone who profits must contribute. No one gets a free pass.We are also going to protect and strengthen CBC's mandate to make sure that Harper-style budget cuts can never happen again.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will once again be seeking unanimous support. Unfortunately, it seems the government continues to suppress the facts in the surf clam case. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Federal Court documents pertaining to the current case against the government in regard to the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard awarding a lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and his wife's cousin. These documents
Mr. Speaker, unlike the years of the Harper Conservatives, we work with provinces as we move forward on pan-Canadian issues and projects. That is why we are working with provinces like Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and others to establish how they want to move forward on putting a price on pollution. We know we need a price on pollution across the country. It needs to be equivalent and effective right across the country. However, every jurisdiction will get to determine how that money comes in and how it returns that money to the people who need it.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's own officials have confirmed that the deficit for this year will be over $18 billion.Can the Prime Minister tell us if he has any idea how much higher the deficit will be as a result of any support that may be necessary for the industries and workers affected by the trade disruption between the United States and Canada?
Mr. Speaker, our decision to introduce indigenous participation is consistent with our commitment to developing a renewed relationship between Canada and indigenous peoples. Enhancing access to the Arctic surf clam fishery broadens the distribution of benefits from this public resource, and it is a powerful step toward reconciliation. When the Conservatives went through a similar process to increase access to this fishery, they chose to exclude indigenous peoples. Of course, the member will continue to work with the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and follow his advice.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Saint-LéonardSaint-Michel for his question.Public transit is a priority for our government because it enables Canadians to spend less time on the road and more time with their loved ones. I am proud of this week's announcement that we will be giving the Société de transport de Montréal over $450 million to help it purchase buses, build a new garage, and renovate Montreal metro system equipment.That is what it means to invest in our communities.
Mr. Speaker, I want to pause to thank Canadians. Over the past months, and indeed over a year now, Canadians have been united in our approach to dealing with the U.S. administration. Across political lines, across provincial capitals, across industries, Canadians have been speaking with a clear and united voice that we stand together and that we stand against punitive measures by the United States, that we will support our neighbours, that we will support our workers, and that we will remain united and proud Canadians. I want to thank all members of this House and all Canadians for the solidarity they continue to show on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians that said we understood we needed to grow the economy and protect the environment together. Those on the other side of the House would have Canadians believe that there is still a choice to be made between what is good for the economy and what is good for the environment. We on this side of the House know they must go together. That is why we are moving forward with a world-class oceans protection plan, a national price on carbon pollution, and getting our resources to new markets, other than the United States, for our oil. That is what we know we need to do. That is what we are going to keep doing, despite the false choice proposed by the members opposite.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Today, during question, I referred to the defence spending shortfall by the government. This information comes from the document, Strong, Secure, Engaged So Far by David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. I am going to ask for consent to table this. The document states: ...the capital allocations to date are falling well short of the projections contained in SSE. The DND's capital allocation for 2017/2018 as of Supplementary Estimates C for 2017/2018 was $4 billion (the green dot in Figure 6). This final year-end allocation represents the maximum DND can spend on capital in 2017/2018. This is well short of the $6.3 billion in capital spending projected for 2017/2018 in SSE... I ask for unanimous consent to table this report so Canadians can get all the information they need, as well as inform the government of all its own shortfalls.
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives like to talk a good game on farmers, but the reality is different. While the previous government cut nearly $700 million from agriculture and agrifood, we have invested in hard-working Canadian farmers.Our government signed CETA, which will boost our agricultural exports by one and a half billion dollars a year, and the CPTPP, which will boost our agricultural exports by over a billion dollars a year. We have secured our $2-billion canola trade with China. We have invested $100 million in agricultural science and innovation. We have invested $350 million to help dairy farmers and processors modernize. We will always
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member opposite's expertise in trickle-down economics. That is what the Conservatives specialized in for 10 years. They gave boutique tax credits to wealthy Canadians, delivered child benefit cheques to millionaire families, and then when we moved forward with lowering taxes for the middle class and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, they voted against it. Then we moved forward on a Canada child benefit to give more money to nine out of 10 Canadian families and did not send child benefit cheques to millionaires, while lifting hundreds of thousands of kids out of poverty. The Conservatives voted against it. Their positions are clear.
Mr. Speaker, in March, the President of the United States announced that he would be introducing tariffs on steel and aluminum. After that, he announced there would be an exemption for Canada and Mexico until May 1. He then announced a further extension of that exemption until June 1. Most recently, he indicated that, of course, the exemption was going to be lifted. All through that time, the Prime Minister had an opportunity to consult on the tariffs that he is now proposing to counter the steel and aluminum tariffs. My question is simple. Why did he wait so long and put us in a position where we cannot react right away?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw to the attention of the House a matter concerning the notice of time allocation regarding Bill C-59. Bill C-59 was referred to committee before second reading and is now before the House at report stage. If you read Standing Order 78(3), Mr. Speaker, it allows a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading of a bill provided that the bill is consistent with Standing Order 76.1(10).Standing Order 76.1(10) refers to a bill that was sent to committee after second reading, not before second reading. Standing Order 76.1(10) is the Standing Order that deals with the report stage of a bill that was referred to committee before second reading and Standing Order 78(3) does not refer to it.Therefore, there is no provision in our Standing Orders that would allow a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading stages of a bill that was sent to committee prior to second reading.I concede time allocation motions have covered both the report and third reading stages of some bills that were referred to committee before second reading, however, no member had ever objected to this practice nor pointed out to the Speaker that it was simply out of order. The fact that the former opposition turned a blind eye to this breach does not make it right.Since Bill C-59 is the first in this Parliament that has been referred to committee before second reading and notice having been given to time allocate, now is the time, Mr. Speaker, for you to take a look at this matter and ensure the government begins following the House rules.Finally, I would add one point to my submission. Standing Order 76.1(10) deems the report stage of Bill C-59 to be an integral part of second reading. We are actually talking about two stages plus third reading, another situation not anticipated by Standing Order 78(3).
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be hosting world leaders in the beautiful region of Charlevoix. When I was there, I learned that a company from La Baie, a borough of Saguenay, won the contract to supply food to all the security and military personnel who will be present. This community will be reaping substantial profits.I can assure my colleague that the compensation policies for affected local businesses are exactly the same as they were when the Conservatives hosted their summit in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, we have known for a long time that under this U.S. administration, our trade relationship has been volatile and under grave risk.Given this, can the Prime Minister tell us how much money was set aside in his budget and where we might find any mention of a contingency plan to deal with the trade disruption between Canada and the United States?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister spoke about the review of the CRTC Act. The last time the Official Languages Act was comprehensively reviewed was when the Conservatives were in power in 1988. In light of the new challenges and issues they are dealing with, francophones, Acadians, and anglophones from Quebec are all asking that the act be reviewed. The Federal Court agrees and is asking Parliament to review the act. The Liberals are the only ones not on board.What exactly is the Prime Minister waiting for to modernize the Official Languages Act?
Mr. Speaker, now more than ever Canada needs to open up new markets and diversify our trading relationships. The trans-Pacific partnership would achieve just that. Despite the Prime Minister's delaying and jeopardizing that deal, it is essential that the bill implementing the deal be passed quickly. When will the Prime Minister commit to introducing the legislation for this trade agreement and can he commit that it will be passed before the House rises?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I had the privilege of sitting down with representatives of indigenous communities that will be affected by this new pipeline. We talked about the impact on their communities. We have set up a committee to consult and listen to communities. We will ensure that the pipeline has a positive impact, and we will minimize any negative repercussions. I am proud of the reconciliation work we are doing. We will keep working with all indigenous peoples. We will listen to them. We will respect all points of view.
Sorry, tax hikes.
Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House are very proud of the support we provide to our farmers. The Conservatives cut nearly $700 million from agriculture budgets, whereas we are investing in hard-working Canadian farmers. We reached a trade agreement with Europe that will increase our agricultural exports by over $1.5 billion per year, and the comprehensive progressive agreement on the trans-Pacific partnership will boost them by over $1 billion a year. We invested $350 million to help dairy producers and processors modernize their operations, and we will always support Canadian farmers.
Mr. Speaker, our party created supply management. Our party has always unequivocally defended supply management. We will continue to do so. Dairy producers in Quebec and across Canada know just how much we support for them.We will always defend the supply management system. However, if the Conservatives want to talk about supply management, I would ask the Leader of the Opposition why he appointed someone who opposes supply management as the critic for innovation and economic development.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is looking to politicize the fact that today is the 74th anniversary of the D-Day invasion, but we on this side of the House are thinking about what unfolded on the shores of Normandy and paying tribute to our fallen soldiers. The monumental achievements of those young men transformed this great country. Their determination to fight for freedom, democracy, peace, and security was passed down to future generations. As an expression of our gratitude to their bravery and perseverance, we thank and salute the men and women who played a pivotal role all those years ago. Lest we forget.
Mr. Speaker, strong action is needed to tackle climate change, all the while generating the long-term economic development that will grow the middle class and support a clean economy.Yesterday, on World Environment Day, we appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change. Working together on climate change, oceans, and clean energy is one of the key themes of our G7 presidency. We are working to ensure that we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids.
Mr. Speaker, responding to questions about the fisheries minister's surf clam decision, the minister's most senior official confirmed that the Liberal-connected Five Nations had the lowest participation of first nations out of all the applicants. She also confirmed that she had no knowledge of the minister's family connection to the unincorporated entity. She confirmed multiple times that this was the minister's sole, personal decision.When did the minister become aware of the minister's family connections, and when did he know that Five Nations had the least amount of indigenous participation?
Mr. Speaker, the real impact of climate change cannot be understated. The challenge governments face is striking the right balance between an evolving economy and protection of the environment now and for future generations.The Minister of Environment and Climate Change repeatedly says that We're all in this together as a global community and that international collaboration is essential to make sure we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids. Can the Prime Minister describe Canada's global plan to meet these global challenges?
Mr. Speaker, we are proud of the work we have done in diversifying Canada's trade. Under this government, we signed the CETA deal with Europe and we actually moved forward on a CPTPP, which highlights that a progressive trade deal can work for our workers and for the growing economies of Asia. We are pleased with our record on trade and growth. We are happy to announce that we will be introducing into the House the bill for the ratification of the new CPTPP before the House rises for the summer.
Mr. Speaker, Montreal's public transit system is the most heavily used in the country. Many Montrealers make the eco-friendly choice to get around the city by metro, bus, and bike share. I am very pleased with our government's recent decision to help with planning the blue line extension to Anjou.I would like to ask the Prime Minister how the government plans to help maintain the existing network and ensure quality service going forward.
Mr. Speaker, the Official Languages Act is important to our party and also to our country. Protecting Canada's linguistic minorities is at the core of who we are as a country. We will continue to stand up for linguistic minorities and strive to improve the Official Languages Act.I can confirm that we are preparing to modernize the Official Languages Act. We will work with all Canadians to ensure we get it right.
Mr. Speaker, I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to move the following motion: That the House: 1) send good wishes for the G7 summit in Charlevoix; 2) protect the right to protest, but condemn potential acts of violence; 3) thank and congratulate the police forces that will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe; and 4) support the enforcement of the same guidelines for compensating residents and business owners in the Charlevoix area and in Quebec City as those enforced by the Harper government in Huntsville in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague from BeauportCôte-de-BeaupréÎle d'OrléansCharlevoix, I would like to move a motion in the House, but first I would like to give some background. The G7, a major event, is starting soon. This kind of event sometimes attracts mass protests that sadly lead to unrest. Over the past few months, serious concerns about this event have been raised in the media or through public consultations by many residents from the ridings of Québec, represented by the Minister of Families, Louis-Hébert, represented by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, Louis-Saint-Laurent, CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles, and BeauportLimoilou, where protests will
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, Canadians asked our government to step up on reconciliation and build a new relationship, nation to nation, with indigenous peoples, and that is exactly what we are doing. In partnership with them, in respect with them, we are working with indigenous communities across this country to respond to their needs, to deliver on the services they need, to build the housing, invest in the schools, and create the infrastructure necessary for them to determine their own future and for them to thrive in this country.We are doing this hand in hand, in partnership, in respect, and that is what we will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the member opposite's voice, but I do need to highlight that there are a range of voices in indigenous communities and we need to listen to all of them. There are people in indigenous communities who were opposed to this pipeline and other economic development projects. There are some who are in favour of it. We are working with all of them, including through entities like the Indigenous Advisory and Monitoring Committee, a committee that we put together exactly for the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We are going to continue to work in the spirit of reconciliation on a nation-to-nation relationship that respects UNDRIP.
Mr. Speaker, we hear the government just spent $4.5 billion in renewable energies, but it spent it on a pipeline.Last week, the majority of MPs had the good sense to vote in favour of the bill introduced by my colleague from AbitibiBaie-JamesNunavikEeyou to enshrine the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People in Canadian law. The Prime Minister himself voted in favour of it.How can he say he respects indigenous rights while forcing a pipeline through despite opposition from a number of first nations?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am pleased to inform the House that proper notice was in fact given last night. There was a point of clarification. If the member checks Hansard and reads just a bit further on, as a member who was here until midnight, I can assure him clarification was indeed given.
Mr. Speaker, during question period, I did not refer to a historic event that occurred in 1971, the well-known Apollo 13, On the contrary, I was referring to a very specific document, issued in the United States, regarding Kinder Morgan's financial statements.As all Canadians know, Kinder Morgan just received $4.5 billion in Canadian taxpayers' money for the Trans Mountain pipeline. In the first table on page 134 of that document, it states in black and white that the pipeline was assessed at $2.5 billion.I ask for the unanimous consent of the House to table this document so that Canadians are fully informed of the facts.
Mr. Speaker, during his interview on U.S. television last weekend, the Prime Minister spoke about NAFTA negotiations on supply management.The Prime Minister said, We were moving towards flexibility in those areas that I thought was very, very promising.What concessions has the Prime Minister made on supply management?
Mr. Speaker, if policies are neglected, they are worthless. The government has to have zero tolerance for sexual abuse in Canadian sports. Right now, the onus is on sporting organizations to be responsible for policing these complaints. That is not fair to these organizations. Canada needs an independent body to handle cases of sexual abuse in Canadian sport. Under the recent Safe Sport Act in the United States, independent bodies investigate these cases. It is time for Canada to do the same. When is the government going to step up?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' budget has in fact turned out to be built on borrowing and tax cuts on those very same middle-class Canadians they pretend to want to help.
Mr. Speaker, during question period I asked the Prime Minister a question about the upcoming food labelling policy. I asked him whether he believed that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice were health hazards. Based on the Prime Minister's answer, it seems clear that he had the wrong paper.I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to table the brief from Les Producteurs de lait du Québec, which confirms that the policy to put warning labels on the front of packaging could stigmatize a number of dairy products. I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to inform the Prime Minister of the impact that the food labelling policy will have on milk producers.
Mr. Speaker, this week we all heard the many traumatizing stories of sexual abuse from Canadian athletes. This is unacceptable, and the government must do something to protect our athletes. National sports bodies in Canada are responsible for policing themselves in matters of sexual abuse. What is wrong with this picture? It creates conflicts of interest and endangers the safety of our athletes.When will the government do something to keep these young athletes safe?
Mr. Speaker, Canada is generally a very safe country, but there have been recent trends of an increase in guns and gangs violence. The responsibility for keeping communities safe starts at home, and working with communities to prevent crime will help them stay safe and resilient. Can the Prime Minister tell us what our government is doing to keep Canadian kids away from gangs, which will allow them to live full and productive lives?
Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister prepares to play host to the G7, Canadians and many around the world are asking themselves, What happened to this guy? We all remember that great defender of the planet who promised to end fossil fuels subsidies. However, a new report shows that when it comes to the G7 and those same subsidies, Canada ranks seventh out of seven. That would be last. That would be after Donald Trump's America. Therefore, rather than eliminate the subsidies, the Prime Minister went out and bought a 65-year-old pipeline. When will he end this circle of hypocrisy and finally come clean with Canadians and keep his promise to them and to the world?
Mr. Speaker, harassment of any kind is unacceptable.The safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination and harassment. That is why all federally-funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy.We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote healthy, harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, this government and all Canadians have been very clear. Harassment of any kind is completely unacceptable, and the safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination, harassment, and harmful behaviour. That is why all federally funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy in place to be eligible for sport support program funding, which Sport Canada reviews to ensure compliance. We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, on June 6, 1944, 14,000 Canadian soldiers landed on the beaches of Normandy. On June 6, 2018, our soldiers are being asked to hand in their rucksacks and sleeping bags to the quartermaster. This is outrageous. What is the Prime Minister doing in the meantime? He is spending $10 million on Omar Khadr, $7 billion on a pipeline that a company could have taken care of itself, and $7 million on a temporary skating rink right here in front of Parliament.Mr. Prime Minister, do you think that we are going to send our soldiers to Mali under those conditions?
Mr. Speaker, an event like the G7 summit naturally has an impact on local residents. Everyone knows that. Not only are honest workers currently prevented from getting to their place of work, but local shops, businesses, and homes will be exposed to vandalism.Under such circumstances, we would expect the government to look after victims of vandalism and provide compensation.Will the Prime Minister formally promise to compensate every victim of vandalism during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, well, we only wish that were true.Canada is a country rich in natural resources, home to innovative businesses, and populated by hard-working Canadians. Our country should be attracting investment, but instead we are repelling it. In fact, we are so opposed to private sector investment in the energy sector that we have killed three pipeline projects worth over $100 billion. Now, we have taken $4.5 billion and given it to Kinder Morgan to take its projects elsewhere.When will the Prime Minister stop attacking Canada's energy sector and start putting the interests of Canadians first?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces were ordered to return their sleeping bags and rucksacks because of an equipment shortage. The Prime Minister is failing our Canadian Armed Forces. Already he broke the Liberal promise and cut another $2.3 billion from defence spending. This is unacceptable. How can Canadians trust the Prime Minister to buy navy ships and fighter jets when he cannot even get buying sleeping bags right? How can we trust him to provide the right equipment to our troops who are about to deploy to Mali?
Mr. Speaker, every day the Liberal government demonstrates how completely out of touch it is with the farming community. The Liberals called our farmers tax cheats and are imposing a carbon tax that farmers do not want. They are changing Canada's food guide and imposing labels that make no sense on agricultural products. All their actions are having so-called unintended consequences on farmers.My question for the Prime Minister is quite simple. Does he also believe that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice are a health hazard?
Mr. Speaker, one almost has to feel sorry for the Conservatives. For 10 years, they tried to get this done, and were unable to do it. Then, for two and a half years, while we were in government, they have been screaming at us to get this pipeline built, and now, when we are finally getting this pipeline built, they do not know what to do with themselves. So they fall back on their silly attacks, on playing politics, on their rigid ideology that somehow, suddenly, they do not think that public investment has any place in the development of our natural resources, which, of course, the great Peter Lougheed disagreed with them about. We know that we are doing the right thing, the right way.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to help the Prime Minister out. Conservatives and Liberals voted for Bill C-23, which gave unprecedented powers to American border officers on Canadian soil. Luckily, the NDP was here raising exactly these concerns, because now what we are seeing in the Senate report is that with the legalization of marijuana, any person on Canadian soil, not crossing the border and subject to another country's laws, but here in Canada, could potentially be fined or imprisoned under that very legislation.My question for the Prime Minister is simple. Is that the case, yes or no? When will he finally take that issue up with his American counterparts?
Mr. Speaker, $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money is going directly to Houston, Texas. That is eight times more than Kinder Morgan spent on the pipeline. That is $2 billion more than Kinder Morgan itself estimated the pipeline to be worth.When Kinder Morgan executives made that deal, they called Houston.They did not say, Houston, we have a problem. No, instead, they said, Houston, it's party time with $4.5 billion of Canadian taxpayers' money, thanks to the Liberal Party of Canada.Why is the Liberal government sending $4.5 billion to Texas?
Mr. Speaker, a Senate report has just concluded that Canadians who use cannabis after it is legalized and try to cross the border to the United States could be denied entry, but worse, those who do not answer certain questions in pre-clearance could face up to two years in prison under Bill C-23, which calls it resisting or wilfully obstructing an American officer, even on Canadian soil.Can the Prime Minister confirm whether or not Canadians who simply refuse to answer American officers in Canada about their cannabis use could face fines or imprisonment?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister uses the word stringent. There is no doubt that it will have a stringent effect on household budgets. There is also no doubt the Prime Minister supports high gas prices. He said so when he was in Vancouver, celebrating $1.60 a litre gas prices. There is also no doubt that his carbon tax will raise the price of consumer goods upon which middle-class Canadians rely.It is his bill, so how much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite pointed out that he thinks about tax cuts. The issue is that Conservatives think about tax cuts for the wealthiest Canadians.The first thing we did was bring in a tax cut for the middle class, and we raised taxes on the wealthiest 1%. For 10 years, Conservatives tried to put forward an agenda for growth that was focused on giving benefits and boutique tax cuts to the wealthiest Canadians, hoping that somehow it would trickle down to everyone else.It did not, which is why the Conservatives had terrible growth for 10 years. We are investing in the middle class and those working hard to join it, and giving them more money
Mr. Speaker, I hate to have to correct the member opposite. In fact, it was during his government that many provinces moved forward on pricing carbon pollution. We have a situation in which British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Ontario have all moved forward with pricing of carbon pollution, and we know that it has to be done right across the country. That is exactly what we are ensuring, but we are working with the provinces to ensure they can put forward a model that works for them, as long as it is fairly stringent and impactful right across the country.
Mr. Speaker, as we have said from the very beginning, with this particular American administration, we have to be ready for everything, and we are.That is why, as soon as the U.S. put forward punitive, unacceptable tariffs on steel and aluminum in Canada, we were, right away, ready with a list of retaliatory measures that target American companies and American producers for which there are alternatives available to Canadian citizens. We know that tariffs end up hurting the citizens of the country that brings them in. We want to avoid hurting Canadians. That is why we are consulting with Canadians on those retaliatory measures.
Mr. Speaker, after two years, one month, and 14 days of incessant consultation, the Minister of Canadian Heritage finally made an announcement yesterday. I could hardly believe it. Did she have new measures or reforms to announce? Of course not. She announced a new panel of experts, the second in two years, which will issue its recommendations in 2020, after the next election. That is cynicism. Two years ago, the minister was bragging about her political courage and promised legislative changes in 2017.By doing nothing for four years, is this government not jeopardizing our culture for no other reason than to get re-elected at the expense of our culture?
[Member spoke in Inuktitut][English]Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Two communities in my riding have recently declared that they are in crisis. These declarations stem from the fact that there are too few mental health supports and an increased number of suicide attempts. Of the recent $118 million announced for first nations and Inuit mental health, Nunavut receives only $500,000 annually, despite the fact that the suicide rate is 10 times the national average. The current government has sent additional support to first nations communities in crisis. Will the government do the same for Inuit communities?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite well knows that the government will be there for workers and industries affected by these punitive American measures. That is what I told steel and aluminum workers over the past months as I travelled across the country to engage with them.It is interesting that the member opposite speaks about deficits. In the last election, Canadians had a very clear choice. The Conservatives, their choice, their option, was actually austerity and cuts. Our proposal to Canadians was investing in the middle class and the people working hard to join it, investing in our communities, and growing the economy the way the Conservatives were not able to for 10 years.
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals voted against the NDP motion to implement the rights of indigenous peoples in their pipeline project, but just a few days ago voted to put those same rights into Canadian law. The Prime Minister cannot pretend that indigenous voices are all the same and ignore the clear opposition to his pipeline. The Liberals are denying the rights of first nations, Métis, and Inuit people. Does the government really not see that or does it just not care?
Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear about one thing. The reason we are moving forward on the legalization of marijuana is because the current system does not work. It does not protect our kids from the harmful impact of marijuana, and it delivers billions of dollars every year to criminal organizations that make profits off of that. We are also highlighting that cannabis is not somehow a positive health food supplement that we encourage everyone to use. It is a controlled substance. We are trying to make it more difficult for kids to access, and people need to be honest when they cross the border if they choose to enter a different country.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians really are watching what is going on because they are quite concerned. They see an economy that is going to be put at risk and they are looking for answers from the Prime Minister. Unfortunately, today we have not received any answers from the Prime Minister. He was asked four times about how much a carbon tax would cost a Canadian family. He did not tell us the answer. He was asked how much more deficit was going to be accumulated because of the trade war we are in. He did not give us an answer. These are things that Canadians care about. He did give us one answer. He told us that he is going to introduce legislation to affirm the CPTPP, the free-trade deal that we negotiated. Will he guarantee that it is going to pass?
Mr. Speaker, this is yet another example of a government that talks a lot, but is always missing in action when it comes to making important decisions that affect entire indigenous communities.Last week it voted to support the rights of indigenous peoples. This week, it is voting against our motion, which is a concrete way to support these rights.Can the Liberals do more than just talk, and talk, and talk about the rights of indigenous people?
Mr. Speaker, it is a real shame to see the trapped ideology of the Conservatives who are playing politics with this issue. I can tell them that I was just in Alberta yesterday talking to oil sands workers, talking to pipeline workers, who are deeply grateful that we are able to move forward on building this pipeline project after years of the Conservatives being unable to do so. Why were the Conservatives unable to do so? It is because they did not understand that the only way to build a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. This government is doing both, and that is why we are getting it done.
Mr. Speaker, here we go again. The Conservatives pretend that they are friends to our troops, but for 10 years they underinvested, they politicized, they played games with procurement, and they nickel-and-dimed our veterans, yet they are easy to stand up with inflated rhetoric any time there is a challenge. We are going to continue to work with the men and women of our Canadian Forces to ensure that they have the equipment and the support they need to do their jobs as they stand up for Canada with their lives and livelihoods on the line. We continue to support our troops, not just with words, like them, but with dollars and cents that go the distance.
Mr. Speaker, Conservatives are always thinking about tax cuts. I will correct the blues after this to make sure they reflect tax hikes.On the subject of tariffs, we know that tariffs collected by the government will raise revenue for the Government of Canada. Will the Prime Minister assure the House and Canadians that any new revenue for the government will be used to lower taxes for affected workers and the businesses that employ them?
Mr. Speaker, farmers are struggling to survive and the Liberal imposed taxes are not helping. Now the agriculture minister is claiming that farmers support the Liberal carbon tax. The chair of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers said, I'm not sure who has been briefing [the] Minister... but he is dead wrong if he thinks that most farmers support a carbon tax.Does the Prime Minister agree with the minister that farmers like his carbon tax or will he listen to farmers and recognize that the carbon tax is crippling our farm families?
Mr. Speaker, before selling the Trans Mountain pipeline to the Prime Minister for $4.5 billion, Kinder Morgan valued its Canadian assets at $2.5 billion. That is quite a deal if one is Kinder Morgan. Kinder Morgan did not ask for any Canadian tax dollars. All it wanted to do was to build a pipeline.Why did the Prime Minister pay Kinder Morgan $2 billion more than the pipeline was worth and allow Kinder Morgan to invest and create jobs outside of this country?
Mr. Speaker, three years ago, a young Cree girl was suffering chronic pain and was taking daily medication for a jaw misalignment. She simply needed $6,000 in dental work. Instead of showing compassion and common sense, the government decided to take Josey and her family to court, for over $110,000 in costs, to fight. Seven months ago, we suggested that it was time to quit the fight and show some compassion and change the policy.Can the Prime Minister tell us how this represents using taxpayer dollars for reconciliation?
Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Conservatives are feeling a bit lost. For years, they have been demanding that we do what they could not, and that is to build a pipeline to give Canada access to new markets other than the United States. The Conservatives were unable to do that, but we did so, at their request. Now that we have delivered on their main demand, they have to try to find a way to attack us and play petty politics. Fortunately, workers across Canada understand that we did the right thing for them.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to have the opportunity to reinforce that we have indeed committed, and are on track, to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies by the year 2025. To do this, we announced in our very first budget the expiration of the tax writeoffs on capital investments in LNG facilities. In budget 2017, we announced the elimination of certain tax credits for exploration expenses in the oil and gas sector. We are developing our resources while protecting our environment, including safeguarding our oceans and combatting climate change. Our government understands that a clean environment and a strong economy go hand in hand.
Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to stand today in the House and express my concern in regard to comments made by our hon. Prime Minister during answering questions in regard to the carbon tax. He indicated to the House that he had worked with all the provinces and that the provinces were working toward this with him. Clearly, we all know the Province of Saskatchewan is not in agreement.
Mr. Speaker, we recognize that the mental health challenges facing indigenous people are deep-rooted, and the need for support is immense. In Nunavut, we are working with our partners and have invested $189 million over 10 years in the community-led Nunavut wellness agreement as well as $8.4 million, this year alone, for mental health support for Inuit. We are supporting ITK's national Inuit suicide-prevention strategy and will continue to work with partners to respond to the mental health needs in the territory.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent to table some documents. The documents speak to the issue of Kinder Morgan and the fact that it valued its assets at $2.5 billion, yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion.I would like to table these documents, the SEC filings of Kinder Morgan Canada, to show that the assets are in fact valued at $2.5 billion in spite of the Prime Minister's assertion.
Mr. Speaker, if the provinces were already doing it, the Prime Minister would not have to introduce a budget bill forcing them to do it. Clearly this is a federally imposed tax. Clearly he would have read the briefing notes that his departments have given him about the cost of that tax. He knows the cost.Again, how much will this Liberal carbon tax imposed by the Prime Minister cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised Canadians he would be a climate change leader, and he committed to eliminate public subsidies for oil and gas companies. However, climate change leaders do not buy pipelines with public money. Climate change leaders do not allow $3 million bonuses to be given to top oil executives. Climate change leaders do use public money to build long-term job creation in renewable energies. Could the government explain why it makes sense for a climate change leader to buy a pipeline?
Mr. Speaker, we have no doubt that the Prime Minister will work with any politician as part of his plan to raise taxes on Canadians. It is his form of trickle-down economics. He scoops up money from working class consumers, gives it to the federal government, trickles it down to provincial politicians, and then expects us to believe that a few drops will go back to the people who originally paid for it in the first place. If that is true, then why can he not tell us this. How much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the laundry list the member put forward. However, we can list the concrete results we have delivered for Canadians over the past two and a half years. Whether it be signing the CPTPP, which the Conservatives were not moving forward on; whether it was concretizing a CETA that was in dire straits when we came into office; whether it is delivering an energy infrastructure that will get our oil resources to new markets, which they failed to do for 10 years; whether it is actually investing in infrastructure in our communities, lowering taxes for the middle class, and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, these are the things that
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the Prime Minister was a superstar, a breath of fresh air, and a new champion of the environment. Three years later, everyone is shaking their heads. What happened to Canada? What happened to Mr. Selfie, to Paris Match's new pet?After adopting Stephen Harper's targets, the Prime Minister bought a pipeline. Today, we learned that Canada ranks lowest among the G7 countries when it comes to eliminating oil subsidies. We came in seventh out seven.Will the Prime Minister finally keep his promise, do the right thing, and eliminate all oil subsidies?
Mr. Speaker, in Kinder Morgan's 2017 annual report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, it valued the Trans Mountain pipeline at $2.5 billion, and yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion to purchase the pipeline. We now know that a lot of the extra padding went to executive bonuses.If Kinder Morgan says its pipeline is worth $2.5 billion, why did the Prime Minister pay it $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money to leave Canada?
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the choice was clear for Canadians.The NDP was proposing to make Canadians choose between what is good for the environment and what is good for the economy. The Liberal Party told Canadians that we understood how important it was to create a strong economy while protecting the environment. The two go hand in hand.That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting a national price on carbon pollution, implementing a historic oceans protection plan, and securing new markets for our resources.That is what Canadians expect.
Mr. Speaker, at the moment I will not seek to table documents. I have a point of order on a totally unrelated standing order that I think is very well grounded.
Mr. Speaker, this is not a novel point of order. It relates to Standing Order 16 and 18, but in particular to Standing Order 16, related to interrupting members when they speak, in this case, the Prime Minister. I can assure other members that I feel like screaming a good deal of the time when I listen to the Prime Minister, but I do not. It violates the rules of this place when I cannot hear the Prime Minister deliver a response. I do not recall, from this seat, having trouble hearing Stephen Harper. I do not think he spoke louder than the current Prime Minister. The noise from this quarter of Conservatives is unacceptable. It violates our rules.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has a budget bill before the House of Commons right now that Finance Canada admits will raise the price of gas, home heating, and most other consumer goods that Canadians buy.How much will the Prime Minister's carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister announced that the G7 would be held in La Malbaie, his government also said that workers in the region would be put to use. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Workers everywhere are currently in a situation of forced unemployment.Can the Prime Minister tell the people of La Malbaie whether compensation is provided for and what he is going to do for the hotel managers, innkeepers, and restaurant owners who are unable to put their employees to work before and during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, in a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent. There has been a considerable amount of misinformation on that side of the House in regard to the minister's decision to award the lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and those with close family ties to the Liberal Party of Canada.The minister, along with the Prime Minister, have repeatedly said this was about reconciliation, and they have misrepresented the previous government's commitment to the indigenous participation with this fishery.Yesterday at committee the minister's most senior staff acknowledged the commitment of the previous government to aboriginal participation in this fishery. In order to clear up the government's inaccurate misrepresentation once and for all, I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Government of Canada 2015 news release, which states: With this increase in TAC, the Integrated Fisheries Management Plan provision for new entrants has been triggered and, as such, Fisheries and Oceans Canada is commencing a process to introduce a new entrant or new entrants to the fishery. This process includes consultation with the current licence holder, industry and First Nations and will conclude in the coming weeks.
Mr. Speaker, I would say that it is the NDP that talks, and talks, and talks, while we deliver results for first nations and indigenous peoples. We have eliminated many boil water advisories, we have built schools, and we are moving forward with partnerships on governance and on treaties. We are working hand in hand with indigenous communities across the country to keep our promise of nation-to-nation reconciliation.We will continue to respectfully work with first nations without claiming to speak for them like the NDP does.
Mr. Speaker, we are, of course, in ongoing discussions with our American counterparts on a broad range of border issues, and we will continue to be, but at the same time, I hope the NDP is not suggesting that somehow a sovereign country cannot make determinations about how it handles people entering its own borders. Of course, we would never expect or allow any other country to dictate to us who or how we can or cannot let someone into our country. We will ensure that we are also respecting other countries' sovereignty in doing that at the same time as we stand up for Canadians, and of course, for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years Stephen Harper and his Conservatives did nothing on protecting the environment. However, over those years, a number of provinces stepped up and put forward a price on carbon pollution. Actually, we presently have a situation in which 80% of our citizens live in jurisdictions where there is a carbon price in effect. We are continuing to move forward to demonstrate that a national price on carbon will be fair for those provinces that already have it and grow the economy for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions, and I hope you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: that the House hope for the success of the G7 meeting in La Malbaie and defend the right to protest, but denounce possible acts of violence and vandalism, thank the police forces who will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe, and call on the government to formally pledge to compensate residents and business owners in the unfortunate event of unrest and damage in the Charlevoix region and in the city of Quebec.
Members who are asking me to sit down should listen, especially the members of PROC, who know the rules.My good colleague from Red DeerLacombe gave an important point of order, and in response to it the government House leader said something like As a member who was here until midnight last night. It is an important convention in this House not to refer to the presence or absence of members during debate. I do not know if she was referring to herself or to my good friend from Red DeerLacombe, but especially during late sittings, it is a grievous violation of the rules of procedure for members to make insinuations about who was or was not here late into the night. I think the government House leader should be called to order.
Mr. Speaker, last week, I had the opportunity to visit La Malbaie in the Charlevoix region to meet with locals. They told me that they were proud to welcome the world, to show them the beauty of Charlevoix and to encourage people to come visit and discover this magnificent region.Obviously, they know that there will be some inconveniences and challenges that come with hosting our visitors and dealing with security. We are continuously working with the public and with their elected representatives to ensure that everything goes smoothly.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table some important documents I believe the House needs to see so everybody can then have a fulsome discussion. We asked the Prime Minister four times today, although we have actually been asking for weeks, about the price and the cost of the carbon tax. We have documents here that my hon. colleague, the member for Carleton, has worked very hard to get, which would reveal the cost of the carbon tax to Canadians. Unfortunately they have been redacted, but it would be important I table those documents today. This is something that has been in dispute. We are getting ready to rise very soon for the summer, and Canadians need to know how much the carbon tax is going to cost.
Mr. Speaker, today we are launching a new call for proposals under the youth gang prevention program and the crime prevention action fund. These programs address the impact of gangs and violence on youth, especially in indigenous and high-needs communities. This is on top of unprecedented annual funding we announced last year of up to $100 million. We will keep working to enhance public safety by focusing on prevention, effective law enforcement, and strong community partnerships.
Mr. Speaker, on the member's first comment, it is true that we just appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change.On the issue of pipelines, for 10 years the Conservatives tried to move forward on getting our oil resources to new markets, and they failed. They failed because they refused to understand that the only way to grow a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are demonstrating with a national price on carbon pollution, with a world-class oceans protection plan, with $8 billion worth of investment in clean energy projects and renewable technologies. We know the way
Mr. Speaker, we will continue to protect and to promote our culture.The Broadcasting Act has not been reviewed since 1991. It predates smart phones and the ubiquitous use of the Internet. We are reviewing the act to ensure that it reflects today's realities and that the system in place is fair for everyone. The guiding principle for the review is clear: anyone who profits must contribute. No one gets a free pass.We are also going to protect and strengthen CBC's mandate to make sure that Harper-style budget cuts can never happen again.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will once again be seeking unanimous support. Unfortunately, it seems the government continues to suppress the facts in the surf clam case. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Federal Court documents pertaining to the current case against the government in regard to the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard awarding a lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and his wife's cousin. These documents
Mr. Speaker, unlike the years of the Harper Conservatives, we work with provinces as we move forward on pan-Canadian issues and projects. That is why we are working with provinces like Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and others to establish how they want to move forward on putting a price on pollution. We know we need a price on pollution across the country. It needs to be equivalent and effective right across the country. However, every jurisdiction will get to determine how that money comes in and how it returns that money to the people who need it.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's own officials have confirmed that the deficit for this year will be over $18 billion.Can the Prime Minister tell us if he has any idea how much higher the deficit will be as a result of any support that may be necessary for the industries and workers affected by the trade disruption between the United States and Canada?
Mr. Speaker, our decision to introduce indigenous participation is consistent with our commitment to developing a renewed relationship between Canada and indigenous peoples. Enhancing access to the Arctic surf clam fishery broadens the distribution of benefits from this public resource, and it is a powerful step toward reconciliation. When the Conservatives went through a similar process to increase access to this fishery, they chose to exclude indigenous peoples. Of course, the member will continue to work with the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and follow his advice.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Saint-LéonardSaint-Michel for his question.Public transit is a priority for our government because it enables Canadians to spend less time on the road and more time with their loved ones. I am proud of this week's announcement that we will be giving the Société de transport de Montréal over $450 million to help it purchase buses, build a new garage, and renovate Montreal metro system equipment.That is what it means to invest in our communities.
Mr. Speaker, I want to pause to thank Canadians. Over the past months, and indeed over a year now, Canadians have been united in our approach to dealing with the U.S. administration. Across political lines, across provincial capitals, across industries, Canadians have been speaking with a clear and united voice that we stand together and that we stand against punitive measures by the United States, that we will support our neighbours, that we will support our workers, and that we will remain united and proud Canadians. I want to thank all members of this House and all Canadians for the solidarity they continue to show on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians that said we understood we needed to grow the economy and protect the environment together. Those on the other side of the House would have Canadians believe that there is still a choice to be made between what is good for the economy and what is good for the environment. We on this side of the House know they must go together. That is why we are moving forward with a world-class oceans protection plan, a national price on carbon pollution, and getting our resources to new markets, other than the United States, for our oil. That is what we know we need to do. That is what we are going to keep doing, despite the false choice proposed by the members opposite.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Today, during question, I referred to the defence spending shortfall by the government. This information comes from the document, Strong, Secure, Engaged So Far by David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. I am going to ask for consent to table this. The document states: ...the capital allocations to date are falling well short of the projections contained in SSE. The DND's capital allocation for 2017/2018 as of Supplementary Estimates C for 2017/2018 was $4 billion (the green dot in Figure 6). This final year-end allocation represents the maximum DND can spend on capital in 2017/2018. This is well short of the $6.3 billion in capital spending projected for 2017/2018 in SSE... I ask for unanimous consent to table this report so Canadians can get all the information they need, as well as inform the government of all its own shortfalls.
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives like to talk a good game on farmers, but the reality is different. While the previous government cut nearly $700 million from agriculture and agrifood, we have invested in hard-working Canadian farmers.Our government signed CETA, which will boost our agricultural exports by one and a half billion dollars a year, and the CPTPP, which will boost our agricultural exports by over a billion dollars a year. We have secured our $2-billion canola trade with China. We have invested $100 million in agricultural science and innovation. We have invested $350 million to help dairy farmers and processors modernize. We will always
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member opposite's expertise in trickle-down economics. That is what the Conservatives specialized in for 10 years. They gave boutique tax credits to wealthy Canadians, delivered child benefit cheques to millionaire families, and then when we moved forward with lowering taxes for the middle class and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, they voted against it. Then we moved forward on a Canada child benefit to give more money to nine out of 10 Canadian families and did not send child benefit cheques to millionaires, while lifting hundreds of thousands of kids out of poverty. The Conservatives voted against it. Their positions are clear.
Mr. Speaker, in March, the President of the United States announced that he would be introducing tariffs on steel and aluminum. After that, he announced there would be an exemption for Canada and Mexico until May 1. He then announced a further extension of that exemption until June 1. Most recently, he indicated that, of course, the exemption was going to be lifted. All through that time, the Prime Minister had an opportunity to consult on the tariffs that he is now proposing to counter the steel and aluminum tariffs. My question is simple. Why did he wait so long and put us in a position where we cannot react right away?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw to the attention of the House a matter concerning the notice of time allocation regarding Bill C-59. Bill C-59 was referred to committee before second reading and is now before the House at report stage. If you read Standing Order 78(3), Mr. Speaker, it allows a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading of a bill provided that the bill is consistent with Standing Order 76.1(10).Standing Order 76.1(10) refers to a bill that was sent to committee after second reading, not before second reading. Standing Order 76.1(10) is the Standing Order that deals with the report stage of a bill that was referred to committee before second reading and Standing Order 78(3) does not refer to it.Therefore, there is no provision in our Standing Orders that would allow a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading stages of a bill that was sent to committee prior to second reading.I concede time allocation motions have covered both the report and third reading stages of some bills that were referred to committee before second reading, however, no member had ever objected to this practice nor pointed out to the Speaker that it was simply out of order. The fact that the former opposition turned a blind eye to this breach does not make it right.Since Bill C-59 is the first in this Parliament that has been referred to committee before second reading and notice having been given to time allocate, now is the time, Mr. Speaker, for you to take a look at this matter and ensure the government begins following the House rules.Finally, I would add one point to my submission. Standing Order 76.1(10) deems the report stage of Bill C-59 to be an integral part of second reading. We are actually talking about two stages plus third reading, another situation not anticipated by Standing Order 78(3).
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be hosting world leaders in the beautiful region of Charlevoix. When I was there, I learned that a company from La Baie, a borough of Saguenay, won the contract to supply food to all the security and military personnel who will be present. This community will be reaping substantial profits.I can assure my colleague that the compensation policies for affected local businesses are exactly the same as they were when the Conservatives hosted their summit in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, we have known for a long time that under this U.S. administration, our trade relationship has been volatile and under grave risk.Given this, can the Prime Minister tell us how much money was set aside in his budget and where we might find any mention of a contingency plan to deal with the trade disruption between Canada and the United States?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister spoke about the review of the CRTC Act. The last time the Official Languages Act was comprehensively reviewed was when the Conservatives were in power in 1988. In light of the new challenges and issues they are dealing with, francophones, Acadians, and anglophones from Quebec are all asking that the act be reviewed. The Federal Court agrees and is asking Parliament to review the act. The Liberals are the only ones not on board.What exactly is the Prime Minister waiting for to modernize the Official Languages Act?
Mr. Speaker, now more than ever Canada needs to open up new markets and diversify our trading relationships. The trans-Pacific partnership would achieve just that. Despite the Prime Minister's delaying and jeopardizing that deal, it is essential that the bill implementing the deal be passed quickly. When will the Prime Minister commit to introducing the legislation for this trade agreement and can he commit that it will be passed before the House rises?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I had the privilege of sitting down with representatives of indigenous communities that will be affected by this new pipeline. We talked about the impact on their communities. We have set up a committee to consult and listen to communities. We will ensure that the pipeline has a positive impact, and we will minimize any negative repercussions. I am proud of the reconciliation work we are doing. We will keep working with all indigenous peoples. We will listen to them. We will respect all points of view.
Sorry, tax hikes.
Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House are very proud of the support we provide to our farmers. The Conservatives cut nearly $700 million from agriculture budgets, whereas we are investing in hard-working Canadian farmers. We reached a trade agreement with Europe that will increase our agricultural exports by over $1.5 billion per year, and the comprehensive progressive agreement on the trans-Pacific partnership will boost them by over $1 billion a year. We invested $350 million to help dairy producers and processors modernize their operations, and we will always support Canadian farmers.
Mr. Speaker, our party created supply management. Our party has always unequivocally defended supply management. We will continue to do so. Dairy producers in Quebec and across Canada know just how much we support for them.We will always defend the supply management system. However, if the Conservatives want to talk about supply management, I would ask the Leader of the Opposition why he appointed someone who opposes supply management as the critic for innovation and economic development.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is looking to politicize the fact that today is the 74th anniversary of the D-Day invasion, but we on this side of the House are thinking about what unfolded on the shores of Normandy and paying tribute to our fallen soldiers. The monumental achievements of those young men transformed this great country. Their determination to fight for freedom, democracy, peace, and security was passed down to future generations. As an expression of our gratitude to their bravery and perseverance, we thank and salute the men and women who played a pivotal role all those years ago. Lest we forget.
Mr. Speaker, strong action is needed to tackle climate change, all the while generating the long-term economic development that will grow the middle class and support a clean economy.Yesterday, on World Environment Day, we appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change. Working together on climate change, oceans, and clean energy is one of the key themes of our G7 presidency. We are working to ensure that we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids.
Mr. Speaker, responding to questions about the fisheries minister's surf clam decision, the minister's most senior official confirmed that the Liberal-connected Five Nations had the lowest participation of first nations out of all the applicants. She also confirmed that she had no knowledge of the minister's family connection to the unincorporated entity. She confirmed multiple times that this was the minister's sole, personal decision.When did the minister become aware of the minister's family connections, and when did he know that Five Nations had the least amount of indigenous participation?
Mr. Speaker, the real impact of climate change cannot be understated. The challenge governments face is striking the right balance between an evolving economy and protection of the environment now and for future generations.The Minister of Environment and Climate Change repeatedly says that We're all in this together as a global community and that international collaboration is essential to make sure we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids. Can the Prime Minister describe Canada's global plan to meet these global challenges?
Mr. Speaker, we are proud of the work we have done in diversifying Canada's trade. Under this government, we signed the CETA deal with Europe and we actually moved forward on a CPTPP, which highlights that a progressive trade deal can work for our workers and for the growing economies of Asia. We are pleased with our record on trade and growth. We are happy to announce that we will be introducing into the House the bill for the ratification of the new CPTPP before the House rises for the summer.
Mr. Speaker, Montreal's public transit system is the most heavily used in the country. Many Montrealers make the eco-friendly choice to get around the city by metro, bus, and bike share. I am very pleased with our government's recent decision to help with planning the blue line extension to Anjou.I would like to ask the Prime Minister how the government plans to help maintain the existing network and ensure quality service going forward.
Mr. Speaker, the Official Languages Act is important to our party and also to our country. Protecting Canada's linguistic minorities is at the core of who we are as a country. We will continue to stand up for linguistic minorities and strive to improve the Official Languages Act.I can confirm that we are preparing to modernize the Official Languages Act. We will work with all Canadians to ensure we get it right.
Mr. Speaker, I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to move the following motion: That the House: 1) send good wishes for the G7 summit in Charlevoix; 2) protect the right to protest, but condemn potential acts of violence; 3) thank and congratulate the police forces that will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe; and 4) support the enforcement of the same guidelines for compensating residents and business owners in the Charlevoix area and in Quebec City as those enforced by the Harper government in Huntsville in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague from BeauportCôte-de-BeaupréÎle d'OrléansCharlevoix, I would like to move a motion in the House, but first I would like to give some background. The G7, a major event, is starting soon. This kind of event sometimes attracts mass protests that sadly lead to unrest. Over the past few months, serious concerns about this event have been raised in the media or through public consultations by many residents from the ridings of Québec, represented by the Minister of Families, Louis-Hébert, represented by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, Louis-Saint-Laurent, CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles, and BeauportLimoilou, where protests will
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, Canadians asked our government to step up on reconciliation and build a new relationship, nation to nation, with indigenous peoples, and that is exactly what we are doing. In partnership with them, in respect with them, we are working with indigenous communities across this country to respond to their needs, to deliver on the services they need, to build the housing, invest in the schools, and create the infrastructure necessary for them to determine their own future and for them to thrive in this country.We are doing this hand in hand, in partnership, in respect, and that is what we will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the member opposite's voice, but I do need to highlight that there are a range of voices in indigenous communities and we need to listen to all of them. There are people in indigenous communities who were opposed to this pipeline and other economic development projects. There are some who are in favour of it. We are working with all of them, including through entities like the Indigenous Advisory and Monitoring Committee, a committee that we put together exactly for the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We are going to continue to work in the spirit of reconciliation on a nation-to-nation relationship that respects UNDRIP.
Mr. Speaker, we hear the government just spent $4.5 billion in renewable energies, but it spent it on a pipeline.Last week, the majority of MPs had the good sense to vote in favour of the bill introduced by my colleague from AbitibiBaie-JamesNunavikEeyou to enshrine the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People in Canadian law. The Prime Minister himself voted in favour of it.How can he say he respects indigenous rights while forcing a pipeline through despite opposition from a number of first nations?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am pleased to inform the House that proper notice was in fact given last night. There was a point of clarification. If the member checks Hansard and reads just a bit further on, as a member who was here until midnight, I can assure him clarification was indeed given.
Mr. Speaker, during question period, I did not refer to a historic event that occurred in 1971, the well-known Apollo 13, On the contrary, I was referring to a very specific document, issued in the United States, regarding Kinder Morgan's financial statements.As all Canadians know, Kinder Morgan just received $4.5 billion in Canadian taxpayers' money for the Trans Mountain pipeline. In the first table on page 134 of that document, it states in black and white that the pipeline was assessed at $2.5 billion.I ask for the unanimous consent of the House to table this document so that Canadians are fully informed of the facts.
Mr. Speaker, during his interview on U.S. television last weekend, the Prime Minister spoke about NAFTA negotiations on supply management.The Prime Minister said, We were moving towards flexibility in those areas that I thought was very, very promising.What concessions has the Prime Minister made on supply management?
Most negative speeches
Sorry, tax hikes.
Mr. Speaker, on June 6, 1944, 14,000 Canadian soldiers landed on the beaches of Normandy. On June 6, 2018, our soldiers are being asked to hand in their rucksacks and sleeping bags to the quartermaster. This is outrageous. What is the Prime Minister doing in the meantime? He is spending $10 million on Omar Khadr, $7 billion on a pipeline that a company could have taken care of itself, and $7 million on a temporary skating rink right here in front of Parliament.Mr. Prime Minister, do you think that we are going to send our soldiers to Mali under those conditions?
Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister announced that the G7 would be held in La Malbaie, his government also said that workers in the region would be put to use. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Workers everywhere are currently in a situation of forced unemployment.Can the Prime Minister tell the people of La Malbaie whether compensation is provided for and what he is going to do for the hotel managers, innkeepers, and restaurant owners who are unable to put their employees to work before and during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will once again be seeking unanimous support. Unfortunately, it seems the government continues to suppress the facts in the surf clam case. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Federal Court documents pertaining to the current case against the government in regard to the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard awarding a lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and his wife's cousin. These documents
Mr. Speaker, during question period I asked the Prime Minister a question about the upcoming food labelling policy. I asked him whether he believed that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice were health hazards. Based on the Prime Minister's answer, it seems clear that he had the wrong paper.I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to table the brief from Les Producteurs de lait du Québec, which confirms that the policy to put warning labels on the front of packaging could stigmatize a number of dairy products. I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to inform the Prime Minister of the impact that the food labelling policy will have on milk producers.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent to table some documents. The documents speak to the issue of Kinder Morgan and the fact that it valued its assets at $2.5 billion, yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion.I would like to table these documents, the SEC filings of Kinder Morgan Canada, to show that the assets are in fact valued at $2.5 billion in spite of the Prime Minister's assertion.
Mr. Speaker, farmers are struggling to survive and the Liberal imposed taxes are not helping. Now the agriculture minister is claiming that farmers support the Liberal carbon tax. The chair of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers said, I'm not sure who has been briefing [the] Minister... but he is dead wrong if he thinks that most farmers support a carbon tax.Does the Prime Minister agree with the minister that farmers like his carbon tax or will he listen to farmers and recognize that the carbon tax is crippling our farm families?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite pointed out that he thinks about tax cuts. The issue is that Conservatives think about tax cuts for the wealthiest Canadians.The first thing we did was bring in a tax cut for the middle class, and we raised taxes on the wealthiest 1%. For 10 years, Conservatives tried to put forward an agenda for growth that was focused on giving benefits and boutique tax cuts to the wealthiest Canadians, hoping that somehow it would trickle down to everyone else.It did not, which is why the Conservatives had terrible growth for 10 years. We are investing in the middle class and those working hard to join it, and giving them more money
Mr. Speaker, three years ago, a young Cree girl was suffering chronic pain and was taking daily medication for a jaw misalignment. She simply needed $6,000 in dental work. Instead of showing compassion and common sense, the government decided to take Josey and her family to court, for over $110,000 in costs, to fight. Seven months ago, we suggested that it was time to quit the fight and show some compassion and change the policy.Can the Prime Minister tell us how this represents using taxpayer dollars for reconciliation?
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the laundry list the member put forward. However, we can list the concrete results we have delivered for Canadians over the past two and a half years. Whether it be signing the CPTPP, which the Conservatives were not moving forward on; whether it was concretizing a CETA that was in dire straits when we came into office; whether it is delivering an energy infrastructure that will get our oil resources to new markets, which they failed to do for 10 years; whether it is actually investing in infrastructure in our communities, lowering taxes for the middle class, and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, these are the things that
Mr. Speaker, a Senate report has just concluded that Canadians who use cannabis after it is legalized and try to cross the border to the United States could be denied entry, but worse, those who do not answer certain questions in pre-clearance could face up to two years in prison under Bill C-23, which calls it resisting or wilfully obstructing an American officer, even on Canadian soil.Can the Prime Minister confirm whether or not Canadians who simply refuse to answer American officers in Canada about their cannabis use could face fines or imprisonment?
Mr. Speaker, one almost has to feel sorry for the Conservatives. For 10 years, they tried to get this done, and were unable to do it. Then, for two and a half years, while we were in government, they have been screaming at us to get this pipeline built, and now, when we are finally getting this pipeline built, they do not know what to do with themselves. So they fall back on their silly attacks, on playing politics, on their rigid ideology that somehow, suddenly, they do not think that public investment has any place in the development of our natural resources, which, of course, the great Peter Lougheed disagreed with them about. We know that we are doing the right thing, the right way.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite well knows that the government will be there for workers and industries affected by these punitive American measures. That is what I told steel and aluminum workers over the past months as I travelled across the country to engage with them.It is interesting that the member opposite speaks about deficits. In the last election, Canadians had a very clear choice. The Conservatives, their choice, their option, was actually austerity and cuts. Our proposal to Canadians was investing in the middle class and the people working hard to join it, investing in our communities, and growing the economy the way the Conservatives were not able to for 10 years.
Mr. Speaker, we recognize that the mental health challenges facing indigenous people are deep-rooted, and the need for support is immense. In Nunavut, we are working with our partners and have invested $189 million over 10 years in the community-led Nunavut wellness agreement as well as $8.4 million, this year alone, for mental health support for Inuit. We are supporting ITK's national Inuit suicide-prevention strategy and will continue to work with partners to respond to the mental health needs in the territory.
Mr. Speaker, it is a real shame to see the trapped ideology of the Conservatives who are playing politics with this issue. I can tell them that I was just in Alberta yesterday talking to oil sands workers, talking to pipeline workers, who are deeply grateful that we are able to move forward on building this pipeline project after years of the Conservatives being unable to do so. Why were the Conservatives unable to do so? It is because they did not understand that the only way to build a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. This government is doing both, and that is why we are getting it done.
[Member spoke in Inuktitut][English]Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Two communities in my riding have recently declared that they are in crisis. These declarations stem from the fact that there are too few mental health supports and an increased number of suicide attempts. Of the recent $118 million announced for first nations and Inuit mental health, Nunavut receives only $500,000 annually, despite the fact that the suicide rate is 10 times the national average. The current government has sent additional support to first nations communities in crisis. Will the government do the same for Inuit communities?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' budget has in fact turned out to be built on borrowing and tax cuts on those very same middle-class Canadians they pretend to want to help.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw to the attention of the House a matter concerning the notice of time allocation regarding Bill C-59. Bill C-59 was referred to committee before second reading and is now before the House at report stage. If you read Standing Order 78(3), Mr. Speaker, it allows a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading of a bill provided that the bill is consistent with Standing Order 76.1(10).Standing Order 76.1(10) refers to a bill that was sent to committee after second reading, not before second reading. Standing Order 76.1(10) is the Standing Order that deals with the report stage of a bill that was referred to committee before second reading and Standing Order 78(3) does not refer to it.Therefore, there is no provision in our Standing Orders that would allow a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading stages of a bill that was sent to committee prior to second reading.I concede time allocation motions have covered both the report and third reading stages of some bills that were referred to committee before second reading, however, no member had ever objected to this practice nor pointed out to the Speaker that it was simply out of order. The fact that the former opposition turned a blind eye to this breach does not make it right.Since Bill C-59 is the first in this Parliament that has been referred to committee before second reading and notice having been given to time allocate, now is the time, Mr. Speaker, for you to take a look at this matter and ensure the government begins following the House rules.Finally, I would add one point to my submission. Standing Order 76.1(10) deems the report stage of Bill C-59 to be an integral part of second reading. We are actually talking about two stages plus third reading, another situation not anticipated by Standing Order 78(3).
Mr. Speaker, after two years, one month, and 14 days of incessant consultation, the Minister of Canadian Heritage finally made an announcement yesterday. I could hardly believe it. Did she have new measures or reforms to announce? Of course not. She announced a new panel of experts, the second in two years, which will issue its recommendations in 2020, after the next election. That is cynicism. Two years ago, the minister was bragging about her political courage and promised legislative changes in 2017.By doing nothing for four years, is this government not jeopardizing our culture for no other reason than to get re-elected at the expense of our culture?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals voted against the NDP motion to implement the rights of indigenous peoples in their pipeline project, but just a few days ago voted to put those same rights into Canadian law. The Prime Minister cannot pretend that indigenous voices are all the same and ignore the clear opposition to his pipeline. The Liberals are denying the rights of first nations, Métis, and Inuit people. Does the government really not see that or does it just not care?
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives like to talk a good game on farmers, but the reality is different. While the previous government cut nearly $700 million from agriculture and agrifood, we have invested in hard-working Canadian farmers.Our government signed CETA, which will boost our agricultural exports by one and a half billion dollars a year, and the CPTPP, which will boost our agricultural exports by over a billion dollars a year. We have secured our $2-billion canola trade with China. We have invested $100 million in agricultural science and innovation. We have invested $350 million to help dairy farmers and processors modernize. We will always
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague from BeauportCôte-de-BeaupréÎle d'OrléansCharlevoix, I would like to move a motion in the House, but first I would like to give some background. The G7, a major event, is starting soon. This kind of event sometimes attracts mass protests that sadly lead to unrest. Over the past few months, serious concerns about this event have been raised in the media or through public consultations by many residents from the ridings of Québec, represented by the Minister of Families, Louis-Hébert, represented by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, Louis-Saint-Laurent, CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles, and BeauportLimoilou, where protests will
Mr. Speaker, during question period, I did not refer to a historic event that occurred in 1971, the well-known Apollo 13, On the contrary, I was referring to a very specific document, issued in the United States, regarding Kinder Morgan's financial statements.As all Canadians know, Kinder Morgan just received $4.5 billion in Canadian taxpayers' money for the Trans Mountain pipeline. In the first table on page 134 of that document, it states in black and white that the pipeline was assessed at $2.5 billion.I ask for the unanimous consent of the House to table this document so that Canadians are fully informed of the facts.
Members who are asking me to sit down should listen, especially the members of PROC, who know the rules.My good colleague from Red DeerLacombe gave an important point of order, and in response to it the government House leader said something like As a member who was here until midnight last night. It is an important convention in this House not to refer to the presence or absence of members during debate. I do not know if she was referring to herself or to my good friend from Red DeerLacombe, but especially during late sittings, it is a grievous violation of the rules of procedure for members to make insinuations about who was or was not here late into the night. I think the government House leader should be called to order.
Mr. Speaker, every day the Liberal government demonstrates how completely out of touch it is with the farming community. The Liberals called our farmers tax cheats and are imposing a carbon tax that farmers do not want. They are changing Canada's food guide and imposing labels that make no sense on agricultural products. All their actions are having so-called unintended consequences on farmers.My question for the Prime Minister is quite simple. Does he also believe that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice are a health hazard?
Mr. Speaker, we are, of course, in ongoing discussions with our American counterparts on a broad range of border issues, and we will continue to be, but at the same time, I hope the NDP is not suggesting that somehow a sovereign country cannot make determinations about how it handles people entering its own borders. Of course, we would never expect or allow any other country to dictate to us who or how we can or cannot let someone into our country. We will ensure that we are also respecting other countries' sovereignty in doing that at the same time as we stand up for Canadians, and of course, for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Conservatives are feeling a bit lost. For years, they have been demanding that we do what they could not, and that is to build a pipeline to give Canada access to new markets other than the United States. The Conservatives were unable to do that, but we did so, at their request. Now that we have delivered on their main demand, they have to try to find a way to attack us and play petty politics. Fortunately, workers across Canada understand that we did the right thing for them.
Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear about one thing. The reason we are moving forward on the legalization of marijuana is because the current system does not work. It does not protect our kids from the harmful impact of marijuana, and it delivers billions of dollars every year to criminal organizations that make profits off of that. We are also highlighting that cannabis is not somehow a positive health food supplement that we encourage everyone to use. It is a controlled substance. We are trying to make it more difficult for kids to access, and people need to be honest when they cross the border if they choose to enter a different country.
Mr. Speaker, if the provinces were already doing it, the Prime Minister would not have to introduce a budget bill forcing them to do it. Clearly this is a federally imposed tax. Clearly he would have read the briefing notes that his departments have given him about the cost of that tax. He knows the cost.Again, how much will this Liberal carbon tax imposed by the Prime Minister cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table some important documents I believe the House needs to see so everybody can then have a fulsome discussion. We asked the Prime Minister four times today, although we have actually been asking for weeks, about the price and the cost of the carbon tax. We have documents here that my hon. colleague, the member for Carleton, has worked very hard to get, which would reveal the cost of the carbon tax to Canadians. Unfortunately they have been redacted, but it would be important I table those documents today. This is something that has been in dispute. We are getting ready to rise very soon for the summer, and Canadians need to know how much the carbon tax is going to cost.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister uses the word stringent. There is no doubt that it will have a stringent effect on household budgets. There is also no doubt the Prime Minister supports high gas prices. He said so when he was in Vancouver, celebrating $1.60 a litre gas prices. There is also no doubt that his carbon tax will raise the price of consumer goods upon which middle-class Canadians rely.It is his bill, so how much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, we have known for a long time that under this U.S. administration, our trade relationship has been volatile and under grave risk.Given this, can the Prime Minister tell us how much money was set aside in his budget and where we might find any mention of a contingency plan to deal with the trade disruption between Canada and the United States?
Mr. Speaker, if policies are neglected, they are worthless. The government has to have zero tolerance for sexual abuse in Canadian sports. Right now, the onus is on sporting organizations to be responsible for policing these complaints. That is not fair to these organizations. Canada needs an independent body to handle cases of sexual abuse in Canadian sport. Under the recent Safe Sport Act in the United States, independent bodies investigate these cases. It is time for Canada to do the same. When is the government going to step up?
Mr. Speaker, an event like the G7 summit naturally has an impact on local residents. Everyone knows that. Not only are honest workers currently prevented from getting to their place of work, but local shops, businesses, and homes will be exposed to vandalism.Under such circumstances, we would expect the government to look after victims of vandalism and provide compensation.Will the Prime Minister formally promise to compensate every victim of vandalism during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, we have no doubt that the Prime Minister will work with any politician as part of his plan to raise taxes on Canadians. It is his form of trickle-down economics. He scoops up money from working class consumers, gives it to the federal government, trickles it down to provincial politicians, and then expects us to believe that a few drops will go back to the people who originally paid for it in the first place. If that is true, then why can he not tell us this. How much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, on the member's first comment, it is true that we just appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change.On the issue of pipelines, for 10 years the Conservatives tried to move forward on getting our oil resources to new markets, and they failed. They failed because they refused to understand that the only way to grow a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are demonstrating with a national price on carbon pollution, with a world-class oceans protection plan, with $8 billion worth of investment in clean energy projects and renewable technologies. We know the way
Mr. Speaker, this is not a novel point of order. It relates to Standing Order 16 and 18, but in particular to Standing Order 16, related to interrupting members when they speak, in this case, the Prime Minister. I can assure other members that I feel like screaming a good deal of the time when I listen to the Prime Minister, but I do not. It violates the rules of this place when I cannot hear the Prime Minister deliver a response. I do not recall, from this seat, having trouble hearing Stephen Harper. I do not think he spoke louder than the current Prime Minister. The noise from this quarter of Conservatives is unacceptable. It violates our rules.
Mr. Speaker, in a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent. There has been a considerable amount of misinformation on that side of the House in regard to the minister's decision to award the lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and those with close family ties to the Liberal Party of Canada.The minister, along with the Prime Minister, have repeatedly said this was about reconciliation, and they have misrepresented the previous government's commitment to the indigenous participation with this fishery.Yesterday at committee the minister's most senior staff acknowledged the commitment of the previous government to aboriginal participation in this fishery. In order to clear up the government's inaccurate misrepresentation once and for all, I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Government of Canada 2015 news release, which states: With this increase in TAC, the Integrated Fisheries Management Plan provision for new entrants has been triggered and, as such, Fisheries and Oceans Canada is commencing a process to introduce a new entrant or new entrants to the fishery. This process includes consultation with the current licence holder, industry and First Nations and will conclude in the coming weeks.
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions, and I hope you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: that the House hope for the success of the G7 meeting in La Malbaie and defend the right to protest, but denounce possible acts of violence and vandalism, thank the police forces who will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe, and call on the government to formally pledge to compensate residents and business owners in the unfortunate event of unrest and damage in the Charlevoix region and in the city of Quebec.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians really are watching what is going on because they are quite concerned. They see an economy that is going to be put at risk and they are looking for answers from the Prime Minister. Unfortunately, today we have not received any answers from the Prime Minister. He was asked four times about how much a carbon tax would cost a Canadian family. He did not tell us the answer. He was asked how much more deficit was going to be accumulated because of the trade war we are in. He did not give us an answer. These are things that Canadians care about. He did give us one answer. He told us that he is going to introduce legislation to affirm the CPTPP, the free-trade deal that we negotiated. Will he guarantee that it is going to pass?
Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to stand today in the House and express my concern in regard to comments made by our hon. Prime Minister during answering questions in regard to the carbon tax. He indicated to the House that he had worked with all the provinces and that the provinces were working toward this with him. Clearly, we all know the Province of Saskatchewan is not in agreement.
Mr. Speaker, at the moment I will not seek to table documents. I have a point of order on a totally unrelated standing order that I think is very well grounded.
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the member opposite's voice, but I do need to highlight that there are a range of voices in indigenous communities and we need to listen to all of them. There are people in indigenous communities who were opposed to this pipeline and other economic development projects. There are some who are in favour of it. We are working with all of them, including through entities like the Indigenous Advisory and Monitoring Committee, a committee that we put together exactly for the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We are going to continue to work in the spirit of reconciliation on a nation-to-nation relationship that respects UNDRIP.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to help the Prime Minister out. Conservatives and Liberals voted for Bill C-23, which gave unprecedented powers to American border officers on Canadian soil. Luckily, the NDP was here raising exactly these concerns, because now what we are seeing in the Senate report is that with the legalization of marijuana, any person on Canadian soil, not crossing the border and subject to another country's laws, but here in Canada, could potentially be fined or imprisoned under that very legislation.My question for the Prime Minister is simple. Is that the case, yes or no? When will he finally take that issue up with his American counterparts?
Mr. Speaker, in March, the President of the United States announced that he would be introducing tariffs on steel and aluminum. After that, he announced there would be an exemption for Canada and Mexico until May 1. He then announced a further extension of that exemption until June 1. Most recently, he indicated that, of course, the exemption was going to be lifted. All through that time, the Prime Minister had an opportunity to consult on the tariffs that he is now proposing to counter the steel and aluminum tariffs. My question is simple. Why did he wait so long and put us in a position where we cannot react right away?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised Canadians he would be a climate change leader, and he committed to eliminate public subsidies for oil and gas companies. However, climate change leaders do not buy pipelines with public money. Climate change leaders do not allow $3 million bonuses to be given to top oil executives. Climate change leaders do use public money to build long-term job creation in renewable energies. Could the government explain why it makes sense for a climate change leader to buy a pipeline?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am pleased to inform the House that proper notice was in fact given last night. There was a point of clarification. If the member checks Hansard and reads just a bit further on, as a member who was here until midnight, I can assure him clarification was indeed given.
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians that said we understood we needed to grow the economy and protect the environment together. Those on the other side of the House would have Canadians believe that there is still a choice to be made between what is good for the economy and what is good for the environment. We on this side of the House know they must go together. That is why we are moving forward with a world-class oceans protection plan, a national price on carbon pollution, and getting our resources to new markets, other than the United States, for our oil. That is what we know we need to do. That is what we are going to keep doing, despite the false choice proposed by the members opposite.
Mr. Speaker, during his interview on U.S. television last weekend, the Prime Minister spoke about NAFTA negotiations on supply management.The Prime Minister said, We were moving towards flexibility in those areas that I thought was very, very promising.What concessions has the Prime Minister made on supply management?
Mr. Speaker, I hate to have to correct the member opposite. In fact, it was during his government that many provinces moved forward on pricing carbon pollution. We have a situation in which British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Ontario have all moved forward with pricing of carbon pollution, and we know that it has to be done right across the country. That is exactly what we are ensuring, but we are working with the provinces to ensure they can put forward a model that works for them, as long as it is fairly stringent and impactful right across the country.
Mr. Speaker, our decision to introduce indigenous participation is consistent with our commitment to developing a renewed relationship between Canada and indigenous peoples. Enhancing access to the Arctic surf clam fishery broadens the distribution of benefits from this public resource, and it is a powerful step toward reconciliation. When the Conservatives went through a similar process to increase access to this fishery, they chose to exclude indigenous peoples. Of course, the member will continue to work with the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and follow his advice.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I had the privilege of sitting down with representatives of indigenous communities that will be affected by this new pipeline. We talked about the impact on their communities. We have set up a committee to consult and listen to communities. We will ensure that the pipeline has a positive impact, and we will minimize any negative repercussions. I am proud of the reconciliation work we are doing. We will keep working with all indigenous peoples. We will listen to them. We will respect all points of view.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has a budget bill before the House of Commons right now that Finance Canada admits will raise the price of gas, home heating, and most other consumer goods that Canadians buy.How much will the Prime Minister's carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the Prime Minister was a superstar, a breath of fresh air, and a new champion of the environment. Three years later, everyone is shaking their heads. What happened to Canada? What happened to Mr. Selfie, to Paris Match's new pet?After adopting Stephen Harper's targets, the Prime Minister bought a pipeline. Today, we learned that Canada ranks lowest among the G7 countries when it comes to eliminating oil subsidies. We came in seventh out seven.Will the Prime Minister finally keep his promise, do the right thing, and eliminate all oil subsidies?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Today, during question, I referred to the defence spending shortfall by the government. This information comes from the document, Strong, Secure, Engaged So Far by David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. I am going to ask for consent to table this. The document states: ...the capital allocations to date are falling well short of the projections contained in SSE. The DND's capital allocation for 2017/2018 as of Supplementary Estimates C for 2017/2018 was $4 billion (the green dot in Figure 6). This final year-end allocation represents the maximum DND can spend on capital in 2017/2018. This is well short of the $6.3 billion in capital spending projected for 2017/2018 in SSE... I ask for unanimous consent to table this report so Canadians can get all the information they need, as well as inform the government of all its own shortfalls.
Mr. Speaker, in Kinder Morgan's 2017 annual report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, it valued the Trans Mountain pipeline at $2.5 billion, and yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion to purchase the pipeline. We now know that a lot of the extra padding went to executive bonuses.If Kinder Morgan says its pipeline is worth $2.5 billion, why did the Prime Minister pay it $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money to leave Canada?
Mr. Speaker, Conservatives are always thinking about tax cuts. I will correct the blues after this to make sure they reflect tax hikes.On the subject of tariffs, we know that tariffs collected by the government will raise revenue for the Government of Canada. Will the Prime Minister assure the House and Canadians that any new revenue for the government will be used to lower taxes for affected workers and the businesses that employ them?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister spoke about the review of the CRTC Act. The last time the Official Languages Act was comprehensively reviewed was when the Conservatives were in power in 1988. In light of the new challenges and issues they are dealing with, francophones, Acadians, and anglophones from Quebec are all asking that the act be reviewed. The Federal Court agrees and is asking Parliament to review the act. The Liberals are the only ones not on board.What exactly is the Prime Minister waiting for to modernize the Official Languages Act?
Mr. Speaker, this is yet another example of a government that talks a lot, but is always missing in action when it comes to making important decisions that affect entire indigenous communities.Last week it voted to support the rights of indigenous peoples. This week, it is voting against our motion, which is a concrete way to support these rights.Can the Liberals do more than just talk, and talk, and talk about the rights of indigenous people?
Mr. Speaker, as we have said from the very beginning, with this particular American administration, we have to be ready for everything, and we are.That is why, as soon as the U.S. put forward punitive, unacceptable tariffs on steel and aluminum in Canada, we were, right away, ready with a list of retaliatory measures that target American companies and American producers for which there are alternatives available to Canadian citizens. We know that tariffs end up hurting the citizens of the country that brings them in. We want to avoid hurting Canadians. That is why we are consulting with Canadians on those retaliatory measures.
Mr. Speaker, I want to pause to thank Canadians. Over the past months, and indeed over a year now, Canadians have been united in our approach to dealing with the U.S. administration. Across political lines, across provincial capitals, across industries, Canadians have been speaking with a clear and united voice that we stand together and that we stand against punitive measures by the United States, that we will support our neighbours, that we will support our workers, and that we will remain united and proud Canadians. I want to thank all members of this House and all Canadians for the solidarity they continue to show on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, well, we only wish that were true.Canada is a country rich in natural resources, home to innovative businesses, and populated by hard-working Canadians. Our country should be attracting investment, but instead we are repelling it. In fact, we are so opposed to private sector investment in the energy sector that we have killed three pipeline projects worth over $100 billion. Now, we have taken $4.5 billion and given it to Kinder Morgan to take its projects elsewhere.When will the Prime Minister stop attacking Canada's energy sector and start putting the interests of Canadians first?
Mr. Speaker, we hear the government just spent $4.5 billion in renewable energies, but it spent it on a pipeline.Last week, the majority of MPs had the good sense to vote in favour of the bill introduced by my colleague from AbitibiBaie-JamesNunavikEeyou to enshrine the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People in Canadian law. The Prime Minister himself voted in favour of it.How can he say he respects indigenous rights while forcing a pipeline through despite opposition from a number of first nations?
Mr. Speaker, responding to questions about the fisheries minister's surf clam decision, the minister's most senior official confirmed that the Liberal-connected Five Nations had the lowest participation of first nations out of all the applicants. She also confirmed that she had no knowledge of the minister's family connection to the unincorporated entity. She confirmed multiple times that this was the minister's sole, personal decision.When did the minister become aware of the minister's family connections, and when did he know that Five Nations had the least amount of indigenous participation?
Mr. Speaker, now more than ever Canada needs to open up new markets and diversify our trading relationships. The trans-Pacific partnership would achieve just that. Despite the Prime Minister's delaying and jeopardizing that deal, it is essential that the bill implementing the deal be passed quickly. When will the Prime Minister commit to introducing the legislation for this trade agreement and can he commit that it will be passed before the House rises?
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, Canadians asked our government to step up on reconciliation and build a new relationship, nation to nation, with indigenous peoples, and that is exactly what we are doing. In partnership with them, in respect with them, we are working with indigenous communities across this country to respond to their needs, to deliver on the services they need, to build the housing, invest in the schools, and create the infrastructure necessary for them to determine their own future and for them to thrive in this country.We are doing this hand in hand, in partnership, in respect, and that is what we will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, our party created supply management. Our party has always unequivocally defended supply management. We will continue to do so. Dairy producers in Quebec and across Canada know just how much we support for them.We will always defend the supply management system. However, if the Conservatives want to talk about supply management, I would ask the Leader of the Opposition why he appointed someone who opposes supply management as the critic for innovation and economic development.
Mr. Speaker, the real impact of climate change cannot be understated. The challenge governments face is striking the right balance between an evolving economy and protection of the environment now and for future generations.The Minister of Environment and Climate Change repeatedly says that We're all in this together as a global community and that international collaboration is essential to make sure we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids. Can the Prime Minister describe Canada's global plan to meet these global challenges?
Mr. Speaker, Montreal's public transit system is the most heavily used in the country. Many Montrealers make the eco-friendly choice to get around the city by metro, bus, and bike share. I am very pleased with our government's recent decision to help with planning the blue line extension to Anjou.I would like to ask the Prime Minister how the government plans to help maintain the existing network and ensure quality service going forward.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member opposite's expertise in trickle-down economics. That is what the Conservatives specialized in for 10 years. They gave boutique tax credits to wealthy Canadians, delivered child benefit cheques to millionaire families, and then when we moved forward with lowering taxes for the middle class and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, they voted against it. Then we moved forward on a Canada child benefit to give more money to nine out of 10 Canadian families and did not send child benefit cheques to millionaires, while lifting hundreds of thousands of kids out of poverty. The Conservatives voted against it. Their positions are clear.
Mr. Speaker, the Official Languages Act is important to our party and also to our country. Protecting Canada's linguistic minorities is at the core of who we are as a country. We will continue to stand up for linguistic minorities and strive to improve the Official Languages Act.I can confirm that we are preparing to modernize the Official Languages Act. We will work with all Canadians to ensure we get it right.
Mr. Speaker, $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money is going directly to Houston, Texas. That is eight times more than Kinder Morgan spent on the pipeline. That is $2 billion more than Kinder Morgan itself estimated the pipeline to be worth.When Kinder Morgan executives made that deal, they called Houston.They did not say, Houston, we have a problem. No, instead, they said, Houston, it's party time with $4.5 billion of Canadian taxpayers' money, thanks to the Liberal Party of Canada.Why is the Liberal government sending $4.5 billion to Texas?
Mr. Speaker, I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to move the following motion: That the House: 1) send good wishes for the G7 summit in Charlevoix; 2) protect the right to protest, but condemn potential acts of violence; 3) thank and congratulate the police forces that will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe; and 4) support the enforcement of the same guidelines for compensating residents and business owners in the Charlevoix area and in Quebec City as those enforced by the Harper government in Huntsville in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is looking to politicize the fact that today is the 74th anniversary of the D-Day invasion, but we on this side of the House are thinking about what unfolded on the shores of Normandy and paying tribute to our fallen soldiers. The monumental achievements of those young men transformed this great country. Their determination to fight for freedom, democracy, peace, and security was passed down to future generations. As an expression of our gratitude to their bravery and perseverance, we thank and salute the men and women who played a pivotal role all those years ago. Lest we forget.
Mr. Speaker, strong action is needed to tackle climate change, all the while generating the long-term economic development that will grow the middle class and support a clean economy.Yesterday, on World Environment Day, we appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change. Working together on climate change, oceans, and clean energy is one of the key themes of our G7 presidency. We are working to ensure that we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be hosting world leaders in the beautiful region of Charlevoix. When I was there, I learned that a company from La Baie, a borough of Saguenay, won the contract to supply food to all the security and military personnel who will be present. This community will be reaping substantial profits.I can assure my colleague that the compensation policies for affected local businesses are exactly the same as they were when the Conservatives hosted their summit in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, this week we all heard the many traumatizing stories of sexual abuse from Canadian athletes. This is unacceptable, and the government must do something to protect our athletes. National sports bodies in Canada are responsible for policing themselves in matters of sexual abuse. What is wrong with this picture? It creates conflicts of interest and endangers the safety of our athletes.When will the government do something to keep these young athletes safe?
Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister prepares to play host to the G7, Canadians and many around the world are asking themselves, What happened to this guy? We all remember that great defender of the planet who promised to end fossil fuels subsidies. However, a new report shows that when it comes to the G7 and those same subsidies, Canada ranks seventh out of seven. That would be last. That would be after Donald Trump's America. Therefore, rather than eliminate the subsidies, the Prime Minister went out and bought a 65-year-old pipeline. When will he end this circle of hypocrisy and finally come clean with Canadians and keep his promise to them and to the world?
Mr. Speaker, today we are launching a new call for proposals under the youth gang prevention program and the crime prevention action fund. These programs address the impact of gangs and violence on youth, especially in indigenous and high-needs communities. This is on top of unprecedented annual funding we announced last year of up to $100 million. We will keep working to enhance public safety by focusing on prevention, effective law enforcement, and strong community partnerships.
Mr. Speaker, before selling the Trans Mountain pipeline to the Prime Minister for $4.5 billion, Kinder Morgan valued its Canadian assets at $2.5 billion. That is quite a deal if one is Kinder Morgan. Kinder Morgan did not ask for any Canadian tax dollars. All it wanted to do was to build a pipeline.Why did the Prime Minister pay Kinder Morgan $2 billion more than the pipeline was worth and allow Kinder Morgan to invest and create jobs outside of this country?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years Stephen Harper and his Conservatives did nothing on protecting the environment. However, over those years, a number of provinces stepped up and put forward a price on carbon pollution. Actually, we presently have a situation in which 80% of our citizens live in jurisdictions where there is a carbon price in effect. We are continuing to move forward to demonstrate that a national price on carbon will be fair for those provinces that already have it and grow the economy for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces were ordered to return their sleeping bags and rucksacks because of an equipment shortage. The Prime Minister is failing our Canadian Armed Forces. Already he broke the Liberal promise and cut another $2.3 billion from defence spending. This is unacceptable. How can Canadians trust the Prime Minister to buy navy ships and fighter jets when he cannot even get buying sleeping bags right? How can we trust him to provide the right equipment to our troops who are about to deploy to Mali?
Mr. Speaker, this government and all Canadians have been very clear. Harassment of any kind is completely unacceptable, and the safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination, harassment, and harmful behaviour. That is why all federally funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy in place to be eligible for sport support program funding, which Sport Canada reviews to ensure compliance. We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's own officials have confirmed that the deficit for this year will be over $18 billion.Can the Prime Minister tell us if he has any idea how much higher the deficit will be as a result of any support that may be necessary for the industries and workers affected by the trade disruption between the United States and Canada?
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the choice was clear for Canadians.The NDP was proposing to make Canadians choose between what is good for the environment and what is good for the economy. The Liberal Party told Canadians that we understood how important it was to create a strong economy while protecting the environment. The two go hand in hand.That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting a national price on carbon pollution, implementing a historic oceans protection plan, and securing new markets for our resources.That is what Canadians expect.
Mr. Speaker, Canada is generally a very safe country, but there have been recent trends of an increase in guns and gangs violence. The responsibility for keeping communities safe starts at home, and working with communities to prevent crime will help them stay safe and resilient. Can the Prime Minister tell us what our government is doing to keep Canadian kids away from gangs, which will allow them to live full and productive lives?
Mr. Speaker, I would say that it is the NDP that talks, and talks, and talks, while we deliver results for first nations and indigenous peoples. We have eliminated many boil water advisories, we have built schools, and we are moving forward with partnerships on governance and on treaties. We are working hand in hand with indigenous communities across the country to keep our promise of nation-to-nation reconciliation.We will continue to respectfully work with first nations without claiming to speak for them like the NDP does.
Mr. Speaker, we will continue to protect and to promote our culture.The Broadcasting Act has not been reviewed since 1991. It predates smart phones and the ubiquitous use of the Internet. We are reviewing the act to ensure that it reflects today's realities and that the system in place is fair for everyone. The guiding principle for the review is clear: anyone who profits must contribute. No one gets a free pass.We are also going to protect and strengthen CBC's mandate to make sure that Harper-style budget cuts can never happen again.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Saint-LéonardSaint-Michel for his question.Public transit is a priority for our government because it enables Canadians to spend less time on the road and more time with their loved ones. I am proud of this week's announcement that we will be giving the Société de transport de Montréal over $450 million to help it purchase buses, build a new garage, and renovate Montreal metro system equipment.That is what it means to invest in our communities.
Mr. Speaker, harassment of any kind is unacceptable.The safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination and harassment. That is why all federally-funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy.We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote healthy, harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to have the opportunity to reinforce that we have indeed committed, and are on track, to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies by the year 2025. To do this, we announced in our very first budget the expiration of the tax writeoffs on capital investments in LNG facilities. In budget 2017, we announced the elimination of certain tax credits for exploration expenses in the oil and gas sector. We are developing our resources while protecting our environment, including safeguarding our oceans and combatting climate change. Our government understands that a clean environment and a strong economy go hand in hand.
Mr. Speaker, here we go again. The Conservatives pretend that they are friends to our troops, but for 10 years they underinvested, they politicized, they played games with procurement, and they nickel-and-dimed our veterans, yet they are easy to stand up with inflated rhetoric any time there is a challenge. We are going to continue to work with the men and women of our Canadian Forces to ensure that they have the equipment and the support they need to do their jobs as they stand up for Canada with their lives and livelihoods on the line. We continue to support our troops, not just with words, like them, but with dollars and cents that go the distance.
Mr. Speaker, unlike the years of the Harper Conservatives, we work with provinces as we move forward on pan-Canadian issues and projects. That is why we are working with provinces like Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and others to establish how they want to move forward on putting a price on pollution. We know we need a price on pollution across the country. It needs to be equivalent and effective right across the country. However, every jurisdiction will get to determine how that money comes in and how it returns that money to the people who need it.
Mr. Speaker, we are proud of the work we have done in diversifying Canada's trade. Under this government, we signed the CETA deal with Europe and we actually moved forward on a CPTPP, which highlights that a progressive trade deal can work for our workers and for the growing economies of Asia. We are pleased with our record on trade and growth. We are happy to announce that we will be introducing into the House the bill for the ratification of the new CPTPP before the House rises for the summer.
Mr. Speaker, last week, I had the opportunity to visit La Malbaie in the Charlevoix region to meet with locals. They told me that they were proud to welcome the world, to show them the beauty of Charlevoix and to encourage people to come visit and discover this magnificent region.Obviously, they know that there will be some inconveniences and challenges that come with hosting our visitors and dealing with security. We are continuously working with the public and with their elected representatives to ensure that everything goes smoothly.
Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House are very proud of the support we provide to our farmers. The Conservatives cut nearly $700 million from agriculture budgets, whereas we are investing in hard-working Canadian farmers. We reached a trade agreement with Europe that will increase our agricultural exports by over $1.5 billion per year, and the comprehensive progressive agreement on the trans-Pacific partnership will boost them by over $1 billion a year. We invested $350 million to help dairy producers and processors modernize their operations, and we will always support Canadian farmers.
Sorry, tax hikes.
Mr. Speaker, on June 6, 1944, 14,000 Canadian soldiers landed on the beaches of Normandy. On June 6, 2018, our soldiers are being asked to hand in their rucksacks and sleeping bags to the quartermaster. This is outrageous. What is the Prime Minister doing in the meantime? He is spending $10 million on Omar Khadr, $7 billion on a pipeline that a company could have taken care of itself, and $7 million on a temporary skating rink right here in front of Parliament.Mr. Prime Minister, do you think that we are going to send our soldiers to Mali under those conditions?
Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister announced that the G7 would be held in La Malbaie, his government also said that workers in the region would be put to use. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Workers everywhere are currently in a situation of forced unemployment.Can the Prime Minister tell the people of La Malbaie whether compensation is provided for and what he is going to do for the hotel managers, innkeepers, and restaurant owners who are unable to put their employees to work before and during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will once again be seeking unanimous support. Unfortunately, it seems the government continues to suppress the facts in the surf clam case. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Federal Court documents pertaining to the current case against the government in regard to the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard awarding a lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and his wife's cousin. These documents
Mr. Speaker, during question period I asked the Prime Minister a question about the upcoming food labelling policy. I asked him whether he believed that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice were health hazards. Based on the Prime Minister's answer, it seems clear that he had the wrong paper.I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to table the brief from Les Producteurs de lait du Québec, which confirms that the policy to put warning labels on the front of packaging could stigmatize a number of dairy products. I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to inform the Prime Minister of the impact that the food labelling policy will have on milk producers.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent to table some documents. The documents speak to the issue of Kinder Morgan and the fact that it valued its assets at $2.5 billion, yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion.I would like to table these documents, the SEC filings of Kinder Morgan Canada, to show that the assets are in fact valued at $2.5 billion in spite of the Prime Minister's assertion.
Mr. Speaker, farmers are struggling to survive and the Liberal imposed taxes are not helping. Now the agriculture minister is claiming that farmers support the Liberal carbon tax. The chair of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers said, I'm not sure who has been briefing [the] Minister... but he is dead wrong if he thinks that most farmers support a carbon tax.Does the Prime Minister agree with the minister that farmers like his carbon tax or will he listen to farmers and recognize that the carbon tax is crippling our farm families?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite pointed out that he thinks about tax cuts. The issue is that Conservatives think about tax cuts for the wealthiest Canadians.The first thing we did was bring in a tax cut for the middle class, and we raised taxes on the wealthiest 1%. For 10 years, Conservatives tried to put forward an agenda for growth that was focused on giving benefits and boutique tax cuts to the wealthiest Canadians, hoping that somehow it would trickle down to everyone else.It did not, which is why the Conservatives had terrible growth for 10 years. We are investing in the middle class and those working hard to join it, and giving them more money
Mr. Speaker, three years ago, a young Cree girl was suffering chronic pain and was taking daily medication for a jaw misalignment. She simply needed $6,000 in dental work. Instead of showing compassion and common sense, the government decided to take Josey and her family to court, for over $110,000 in costs, to fight. Seven months ago, we suggested that it was time to quit the fight and show some compassion and change the policy.Can the Prime Minister tell us how this represents using taxpayer dollars for reconciliation?
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the laundry list the member put forward. However, we can list the concrete results we have delivered for Canadians over the past two and a half years. Whether it be signing the CPTPP, which the Conservatives were not moving forward on; whether it was concretizing a CETA that was in dire straits when we came into office; whether it is delivering an energy infrastructure that will get our oil resources to new markets, which they failed to do for 10 years; whether it is actually investing in infrastructure in our communities, lowering taxes for the middle class, and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, these are the things that
Mr. Speaker, a Senate report has just concluded that Canadians who use cannabis after it is legalized and try to cross the border to the United States could be denied entry, but worse, those who do not answer certain questions in pre-clearance could face up to two years in prison under Bill C-23, which calls it resisting or wilfully obstructing an American officer, even on Canadian soil.Can the Prime Minister confirm whether or not Canadians who simply refuse to answer American officers in Canada about their cannabis use could face fines or imprisonment?
Mr. Speaker, one almost has to feel sorry for the Conservatives. For 10 years, they tried to get this done, and were unable to do it. Then, for two and a half years, while we were in government, they have been screaming at us to get this pipeline built, and now, when we are finally getting this pipeline built, they do not know what to do with themselves. So they fall back on their silly attacks, on playing politics, on their rigid ideology that somehow, suddenly, they do not think that public investment has any place in the development of our natural resources, which, of course, the great Peter Lougheed disagreed with them about. We know that we are doing the right thing, the right way.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite well knows that the government will be there for workers and industries affected by these punitive American measures. That is what I told steel and aluminum workers over the past months as I travelled across the country to engage with them.It is interesting that the member opposite speaks about deficits. In the last election, Canadians had a very clear choice. The Conservatives, their choice, their option, was actually austerity and cuts. Our proposal to Canadians was investing in the middle class and the people working hard to join it, investing in our communities, and growing the economy the way the Conservatives were not able to for 10 years.
Mr. Speaker, we recognize that the mental health challenges facing indigenous people are deep-rooted, and the need for support is immense. In Nunavut, we are working with our partners and have invested $189 million over 10 years in the community-led Nunavut wellness agreement as well as $8.4 million, this year alone, for mental health support for Inuit. We are supporting ITK's national Inuit suicide-prevention strategy and will continue to work with partners to respond to the mental health needs in the territory.
Mr. Speaker, it is a real shame to see the trapped ideology of the Conservatives who are playing politics with this issue. I can tell them that I was just in Alberta yesterday talking to oil sands workers, talking to pipeline workers, who are deeply grateful that we are able to move forward on building this pipeline project after years of the Conservatives being unable to do so. Why were the Conservatives unable to do so? It is because they did not understand that the only way to build a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. This government is doing both, and that is why we are getting it done.
[Member spoke in Inuktitut][English]Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Two communities in my riding have recently declared that they are in crisis. These declarations stem from the fact that there are too few mental health supports and an increased number of suicide attempts. Of the recent $118 million announced for first nations and Inuit mental health, Nunavut receives only $500,000 annually, despite the fact that the suicide rate is 10 times the national average. The current government has sent additional support to first nations communities in crisis. Will the government do the same for Inuit communities?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' budget has in fact turned out to be built on borrowing and tax cuts on those very same middle-class Canadians they pretend to want to help.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw to the attention of the House a matter concerning the notice of time allocation regarding Bill C-59. Bill C-59 was referred to committee before second reading and is now before the House at report stage. If you read Standing Order 78(3), Mr. Speaker, it allows a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading of a bill provided that the bill is consistent with Standing Order 76.1(10).Standing Order 76.1(10) refers to a bill that was sent to committee after second reading, not before second reading. Standing Order 76.1(10) is the Standing Order that deals with the report stage of a bill that was referred to committee before second reading and Standing Order 78(3) does not refer to it.Therefore, there is no provision in our Standing Orders that would allow a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading stages of a bill that was sent to committee prior to second reading.I concede time allocation motions have covered both the report and third reading stages of some bills that were referred to committee before second reading, however, no member had ever objected to this practice nor pointed out to the Speaker that it was simply out of order. The fact that the former opposition turned a blind eye to this breach does not make it right.Since Bill C-59 is the first in this Parliament that has been referred to committee before second reading and notice having been given to time allocate, now is the time, Mr. Speaker, for you to take a look at this matter and ensure the government begins following the House rules.Finally, I would add one point to my submission. Standing Order 76.1(10) deems the report stage of Bill C-59 to be an integral part of second reading. We are actually talking about two stages plus third reading, another situation not anticipated by Standing Order 78(3).
Mr. Speaker, after two years, one month, and 14 days of incessant consultation, the Minister of Canadian Heritage finally made an announcement yesterday. I could hardly believe it. Did she have new measures or reforms to announce? Of course not. She announced a new panel of experts, the second in two years, which will issue its recommendations in 2020, after the next election. That is cynicism. Two years ago, the minister was bragging about her political courage and promised legislative changes in 2017.By doing nothing for four years, is this government not jeopardizing our culture for no other reason than to get re-elected at the expense of our culture?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals voted against the NDP motion to implement the rights of indigenous peoples in their pipeline project, but just a few days ago voted to put those same rights into Canadian law. The Prime Minister cannot pretend that indigenous voices are all the same and ignore the clear opposition to his pipeline. The Liberals are denying the rights of first nations, Métis, and Inuit people. Does the government really not see that or does it just not care?
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives like to talk a good game on farmers, but the reality is different. While the previous government cut nearly $700 million from agriculture and agrifood, we have invested in hard-working Canadian farmers.Our government signed CETA, which will boost our agricultural exports by one and a half billion dollars a year, and the CPTPP, which will boost our agricultural exports by over a billion dollars a year. We have secured our $2-billion canola trade with China. We have invested $100 million in agricultural science and innovation. We have invested $350 million to help dairy farmers and processors modernize. We will always
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague from BeauportCôte-de-BeaupréÎle d'OrléansCharlevoix, I would like to move a motion in the House, but first I would like to give some background. The G7, a major event, is starting soon. This kind of event sometimes attracts mass protests that sadly lead to unrest. Over the past few months, serious concerns about this event have been raised in the media or through public consultations by many residents from the ridings of Québec, represented by the Minister of Families, Louis-Hébert, represented by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, Louis-Saint-Laurent, CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles, and BeauportLimoilou, where protests will
Mr. Speaker, during question period, I did not refer to a historic event that occurred in 1971, the well-known Apollo 13, On the contrary, I was referring to a very specific document, issued in the United States, regarding Kinder Morgan's financial statements.As all Canadians know, Kinder Morgan just received $4.5 billion in Canadian taxpayers' money for the Trans Mountain pipeline. In the first table on page 134 of that document, it states in black and white that the pipeline was assessed at $2.5 billion.I ask for the unanimous consent of the House to table this document so that Canadians are fully informed of the facts.
Members who are asking me to sit down should listen, especially the members of PROC, who know the rules.My good colleague from Red DeerLacombe gave an important point of order, and in response to it the government House leader said something like As a member who was here until midnight last night. It is an important convention in this House not to refer to the presence or absence of members during debate. I do not know if she was referring to herself or to my good friend from Red DeerLacombe, but especially during late sittings, it is a grievous violation of the rules of procedure for members to make insinuations about who was or was not here late into the night. I think the government House leader should be called to order.
Mr. Speaker, every day the Liberal government demonstrates how completely out of touch it is with the farming community. The Liberals called our farmers tax cheats and are imposing a carbon tax that farmers do not want. They are changing Canada's food guide and imposing labels that make no sense on agricultural products. All their actions are having so-called unintended consequences on farmers.My question for the Prime Minister is quite simple. Does he also believe that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice are a health hazard?
Mr. Speaker, we are, of course, in ongoing discussions with our American counterparts on a broad range of border issues, and we will continue to be, but at the same time, I hope the NDP is not suggesting that somehow a sovereign country cannot make determinations about how it handles people entering its own borders. Of course, we would never expect or allow any other country to dictate to us who or how we can or cannot let someone into our country. We will ensure that we are also respecting other countries' sovereignty in doing that at the same time as we stand up for Canadians, and of course, for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Conservatives are feeling a bit lost. For years, they have been demanding that we do what they could not, and that is to build a pipeline to give Canada access to new markets other than the United States. The Conservatives were unable to do that, but we did so, at their request. Now that we have delivered on their main demand, they have to try to find a way to attack us and play petty politics. Fortunately, workers across Canada understand that we did the right thing for them.
Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear about one thing. The reason we are moving forward on the legalization of marijuana is because the current system does not work. It does not protect our kids from the harmful impact of marijuana, and it delivers billions of dollars every year to criminal organizations that make profits off of that. We are also highlighting that cannabis is not somehow a positive health food supplement that we encourage everyone to use. It is a controlled substance. We are trying to make it more difficult for kids to access, and people need to be honest when they cross the border if they choose to enter a different country.
Mr. Speaker, if the provinces were already doing it, the Prime Minister would not have to introduce a budget bill forcing them to do it. Clearly this is a federally imposed tax. Clearly he would have read the briefing notes that his departments have given him about the cost of that tax. He knows the cost.Again, how much will this Liberal carbon tax imposed by the Prime Minister cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table some important documents I believe the House needs to see so everybody can then have a fulsome discussion. We asked the Prime Minister four times today, although we have actually been asking for weeks, about the price and the cost of the carbon tax. We have documents here that my hon. colleague, the member for Carleton, has worked very hard to get, which would reveal the cost of the carbon tax to Canadians. Unfortunately they have been redacted, but it would be important I table those documents today. This is something that has been in dispute. We are getting ready to rise very soon for the summer, and Canadians need to know how much the carbon tax is going to cost.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister uses the word stringent. There is no doubt that it will have a stringent effect on household budgets. There is also no doubt the Prime Minister supports high gas prices. He said so when he was in Vancouver, celebrating $1.60 a litre gas prices. There is also no doubt that his carbon tax will raise the price of consumer goods upon which middle-class Canadians rely.It is his bill, so how much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, we have known for a long time that under this U.S. administration, our trade relationship has been volatile and under grave risk.Given this, can the Prime Minister tell us how much money was set aside in his budget and where we might find any mention of a contingency plan to deal with the trade disruption between Canada and the United States?
Mr. Speaker, if policies are neglected, they are worthless. The government has to have zero tolerance for sexual abuse in Canadian sports. Right now, the onus is on sporting organizations to be responsible for policing these complaints. That is not fair to these organizations. Canada needs an independent body to handle cases of sexual abuse in Canadian sport. Under the recent Safe Sport Act in the United States, independent bodies investigate these cases. It is time for Canada to do the same. When is the government going to step up?
Mr. Speaker, an event like the G7 summit naturally has an impact on local residents. Everyone knows that. Not only are honest workers currently prevented from getting to their place of work, but local shops, businesses, and homes will be exposed to vandalism.Under such circumstances, we would expect the government to look after victims of vandalism and provide compensation.Will the Prime Minister formally promise to compensate every victim of vandalism during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, we have no doubt that the Prime Minister will work with any politician as part of his plan to raise taxes on Canadians. It is his form of trickle-down economics. He scoops up money from working class consumers, gives it to the federal government, trickles it down to provincial politicians, and then expects us to believe that a few drops will go back to the people who originally paid for it in the first place. If that is true, then why can he not tell us this. How much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, on the member's first comment, it is true that we just appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change.On the issue of pipelines, for 10 years the Conservatives tried to move forward on getting our oil resources to new markets, and they failed. They failed because they refused to understand that the only way to grow a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are demonstrating with a national price on carbon pollution, with a world-class oceans protection plan, with $8 billion worth of investment in clean energy projects and renewable technologies. We know the way
Mr. Speaker, this is not a novel point of order. It relates to Standing Order 16 and 18, but in particular to Standing Order 16, related to interrupting members when they speak, in this case, the Prime Minister. I can assure other members that I feel like screaming a good deal of the time when I listen to the Prime Minister, but I do not. It violates the rules of this place when I cannot hear the Prime Minister deliver a response. I do not recall, from this seat, having trouble hearing Stephen Harper. I do not think he spoke louder than the current Prime Minister. The noise from this quarter of Conservatives is unacceptable. It violates our rules.
Mr. Speaker, in a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent. There has been a considerable amount of misinformation on that side of the House in regard to the minister's decision to award the lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and those with close family ties to the Liberal Party of Canada.The minister, along with the Prime Minister, have repeatedly said this was about reconciliation, and they have misrepresented the previous government's commitment to the indigenous participation with this fishery.Yesterday at committee the minister's most senior staff acknowledged the commitment of the previous government to aboriginal participation in this fishery. In order to clear up the government's inaccurate misrepresentation once and for all, I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Government of Canada 2015 news release, which states: With this increase in TAC, the Integrated Fisheries Management Plan provision for new entrants has been triggered and, as such, Fisheries and Oceans Canada is commencing a process to introduce a new entrant or new entrants to the fishery. This process includes consultation with the current licence holder, industry and First Nations and will conclude in the coming weeks.
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions, and I hope you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: that the House hope for the success of the G7 meeting in La Malbaie and defend the right to protest, but denounce possible acts of violence and vandalism, thank the police forces who will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe, and call on the government to formally pledge to compensate residents and business owners in the unfortunate event of unrest and damage in the Charlevoix region and in the city of Quebec.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians really are watching what is going on because they are quite concerned. They see an economy that is going to be put at risk and they are looking for answers from the Prime Minister. Unfortunately, today we have not received any answers from the Prime Minister. He was asked four times about how much a carbon tax would cost a Canadian family. He did not tell us the answer. He was asked how much more deficit was going to be accumulated because of the trade war we are in. He did not give us an answer. These are things that Canadians care about. He did give us one answer. He told us that he is going to introduce legislation to affirm the CPTPP, the free-trade deal that we negotiated. Will he guarantee that it is going to pass?
Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to stand today in the House and express my concern in regard to comments made by our hon. Prime Minister during answering questions in regard to the carbon tax. He indicated to the House that he had worked with all the provinces and that the provinces were working toward this with him. Clearly, we all know the Province of Saskatchewan is not in agreement.
Mr. Speaker, at the moment I will not seek to table documents. I have a point of order on a totally unrelated standing order that I think is very well grounded.
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the member opposite's voice, but I do need to highlight that there are a range of voices in indigenous communities and we need to listen to all of them. There are people in indigenous communities who were opposed to this pipeline and other economic development projects. There are some who are in favour of it. We are working with all of them, including through entities like the Indigenous Advisory and Monitoring Committee, a committee that we put together exactly for the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We are going to continue to work in the spirit of reconciliation on a nation-to-nation relationship that respects UNDRIP.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to help the Prime Minister out. Conservatives and Liberals voted for Bill C-23, which gave unprecedented powers to American border officers on Canadian soil. Luckily, the NDP was here raising exactly these concerns, because now what we are seeing in the Senate report is that with the legalization of marijuana, any person on Canadian soil, not crossing the border and subject to another country's laws, but here in Canada, could potentially be fined or imprisoned under that very legislation.My question for the Prime Minister is simple. Is that the case, yes or no? When will he finally take that issue up with his American counterparts?
Mr. Speaker, in March, the President of the United States announced that he would be introducing tariffs on steel and aluminum. After that, he announced there would be an exemption for Canada and Mexico until May 1. He then announced a further extension of that exemption until June 1. Most recently, he indicated that, of course, the exemption was going to be lifted. All through that time, the Prime Minister had an opportunity to consult on the tariffs that he is now proposing to counter the steel and aluminum tariffs. My question is simple. Why did he wait so long and put us in a position where we cannot react right away?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised Canadians he would be a climate change leader, and he committed to eliminate public subsidies for oil and gas companies. However, climate change leaders do not buy pipelines with public money. Climate change leaders do not allow $3 million bonuses to be given to top oil executives. Climate change leaders do use public money to build long-term job creation in renewable energies. Could the government explain why it makes sense for a climate change leader to buy a pipeline?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am pleased to inform the House that proper notice was in fact given last night. There was a point of clarification. If the member checks Hansard and reads just a bit further on, as a member who was here until midnight, I can assure him clarification was indeed given.
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians that said we understood we needed to grow the economy and protect the environment together. Those on the other side of the House would have Canadians believe that there is still a choice to be made between what is good for the economy and what is good for the environment. We on this side of the House know they must go together. That is why we are moving forward with a world-class oceans protection plan, a national price on carbon pollution, and getting our resources to new markets, other than the United States, for our oil. That is what we know we need to do. That is what we are going to keep doing, despite the false choice proposed by the members opposite.
Mr. Speaker, during his interview on U.S. television last weekend, the Prime Minister spoke about NAFTA negotiations on supply management.The Prime Minister said, We were moving towards flexibility in those areas that I thought was very, very promising.What concessions has the Prime Minister made on supply management?
Mr. Speaker, I hate to have to correct the member opposite. In fact, it was during his government that many provinces moved forward on pricing carbon pollution. We have a situation in which British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Ontario have all moved forward with pricing of carbon pollution, and we know that it has to be done right across the country. That is exactly what we are ensuring, but we are working with the provinces to ensure they can put forward a model that works for them, as long as it is fairly stringent and impactful right across the country.
Mr. Speaker, our decision to introduce indigenous participation is consistent with our commitment to developing a renewed relationship between Canada and indigenous peoples. Enhancing access to the Arctic surf clam fishery broadens the distribution of benefits from this public resource, and it is a powerful step toward reconciliation. When the Conservatives went through a similar process to increase access to this fishery, they chose to exclude indigenous peoples. Of course, the member will continue to work with the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and follow his advice.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I had the privilege of sitting down with representatives of indigenous communities that will be affected by this new pipeline. We talked about the impact on their communities. We have set up a committee to consult and listen to communities. We will ensure that the pipeline has a positive impact, and we will minimize any negative repercussions. I am proud of the reconciliation work we are doing. We will keep working with all indigenous peoples. We will listen to them. We will respect all points of view.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has a budget bill before the House of Commons right now that Finance Canada admits will raise the price of gas, home heating, and most other consumer goods that Canadians buy.How much will the Prime Minister's carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the Prime Minister was a superstar, a breath of fresh air, and a new champion of the environment. Three years later, everyone is shaking their heads. What happened to Canada? What happened to Mr. Selfie, to Paris Match's new pet?After adopting Stephen Harper's targets, the Prime Minister bought a pipeline. Today, we learned that Canada ranks lowest among the G7 countries when it comes to eliminating oil subsidies. We came in seventh out seven.Will the Prime Minister finally keep his promise, do the right thing, and eliminate all oil subsidies?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Today, during question, I referred to the defence spending shortfall by the government. This information comes from the document, Strong, Secure, Engaged So Far by David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. I am going to ask for consent to table this. The document states: ...the capital allocations to date are falling well short of the projections contained in SSE. The DND's capital allocation for 2017/2018 as of Supplementary Estimates C for 2017/2018 was $4 billion (the green dot in Figure 6). This final year-end allocation represents the maximum DND can spend on capital in 2017/2018. This is well short of the $6.3 billion in capital spending projected for 2017/2018 in SSE... I ask for unanimous consent to table this report so Canadians can get all the information they need, as well as inform the government of all its own shortfalls.
Mr. Speaker, in Kinder Morgan's 2017 annual report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, it valued the Trans Mountain pipeline at $2.5 billion, and yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion to purchase the pipeline. We now know that a lot of the extra padding went to executive bonuses.If Kinder Morgan says its pipeline is worth $2.5 billion, why did the Prime Minister pay it $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money to leave Canada?
Mr. Speaker, Conservatives are always thinking about tax cuts. I will correct the blues after this to make sure they reflect tax hikes.On the subject of tariffs, we know that tariffs collected by the government will raise revenue for the Government of Canada. Will the Prime Minister assure the House and Canadians that any new revenue for the government will be used to lower taxes for affected workers and the businesses that employ them?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister spoke about the review of the CRTC Act. The last time the Official Languages Act was comprehensively reviewed was when the Conservatives were in power in 1988. In light of the new challenges and issues they are dealing with, francophones, Acadians, and anglophones from Quebec are all asking that the act be reviewed. The Federal Court agrees and is asking Parliament to review the act. The Liberals are the only ones not on board.What exactly is the Prime Minister waiting for to modernize the Official Languages Act?
Mr. Speaker, this is yet another example of a government that talks a lot, but is always missing in action when it comes to making important decisions that affect entire indigenous communities.Last week it voted to support the rights of indigenous peoples. This week, it is voting against our motion, which is a concrete way to support these rights.Can the Liberals do more than just talk, and talk, and talk about the rights of indigenous people?
Mr. Speaker, as we have said from the very beginning, with this particular American administration, we have to be ready for everything, and we are.That is why, as soon as the U.S. put forward punitive, unacceptable tariffs on steel and aluminum in Canada, we were, right away, ready with a list of retaliatory measures that target American companies and American producers for which there are alternatives available to Canadian citizens. We know that tariffs end up hurting the citizens of the country that brings them in. We want to avoid hurting Canadians. That is why we are consulting with Canadians on those retaliatory measures.
Mr. Speaker, I want to pause to thank Canadians. Over the past months, and indeed over a year now, Canadians have been united in our approach to dealing with the U.S. administration. Across political lines, across provincial capitals, across industries, Canadians have been speaking with a clear and united voice that we stand together and that we stand against punitive measures by the United States, that we will support our neighbours, that we will support our workers, and that we will remain united and proud Canadians. I want to thank all members of this House and all Canadians for the solidarity they continue to show on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, well, we only wish that were true.Canada is a country rich in natural resources, home to innovative businesses, and populated by hard-working Canadians. Our country should be attracting investment, but instead we are repelling it. In fact, we are so opposed to private sector investment in the energy sector that we have killed three pipeline projects worth over $100 billion. Now, we have taken $4.5 billion and given it to Kinder Morgan to take its projects elsewhere.When will the Prime Minister stop attacking Canada's energy sector and start putting the interests of Canadians first?
Mr. Speaker, we hear the government just spent $4.5 billion in renewable energies, but it spent it on a pipeline.Last week, the majority of MPs had the good sense to vote in favour of the bill introduced by my colleague from AbitibiBaie-JamesNunavikEeyou to enshrine the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People in Canadian law. The Prime Minister himself voted in favour of it.How can he say he respects indigenous rights while forcing a pipeline through despite opposition from a number of first nations?
Mr. Speaker, responding to questions about the fisheries minister's surf clam decision, the minister's most senior official confirmed that the Liberal-connected Five Nations had the lowest participation of first nations out of all the applicants. She also confirmed that she had no knowledge of the minister's family connection to the unincorporated entity. She confirmed multiple times that this was the minister's sole, personal decision.When did the minister become aware of the minister's family connections, and when did he know that Five Nations had the least amount of indigenous participation?
Mr. Speaker, now more than ever Canada needs to open up new markets and diversify our trading relationships. The trans-Pacific partnership would achieve just that. Despite the Prime Minister's delaying and jeopardizing that deal, it is essential that the bill implementing the deal be passed quickly. When will the Prime Minister commit to introducing the legislation for this trade agreement and can he commit that it will be passed before the House rises?
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, Canadians asked our government to step up on reconciliation and build a new relationship, nation to nation, with indigenous peoples, and that is exactly what we are doing. In partnership with them, in respect with them, we are working with indigenous communities across this country to respond to their needs, to deliver on the services they need, to build the housing, invest in the schools, and create the infrastructure necessary for them to determine their own future and for them to thrive in this country.We are doing this hand in hand, in partnership, in respect, and that is what we will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, our party created supply management. Our party has always unequivocally defended supply management. We will continue to do so. Dairy producers in Quebec and across Canada know just how much we support for them.We will always defend the supply management system. However, if the Conservatives want to talk about supply management, I would ask the Leader of the Opposition why he appointed someone who opposes supply management as the critic for innovation and economic development.
Mr. Speaker, the real impact of climate change cannot be understated. The challenge governments face is striking the right balance between an evolving economy and protection of the environment now and for future generations.The Minister of Environment and Climate Change repeatedly says that We're all in this together as a global community and that international collaboration is essential to make sure we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids. Can the Prime Minister describe Canada's global plan to meet these global challenges?
Mr. Speaker, Montreal's public transit system is the most heavily used in the country. Many Montrealers make the eco-friendly choice to get around the city by metro, bus, and bike share. I am very pleased with our government's recent decision to help with planning the blue line extension to Anjou.I would like to ask the Prime Minister how the government plans to help maintain the existing network and ensure quality service going forward.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member opposite's expertise in trickle-down economics. That is what the Conservatives specialized in for 10 years. They gave boutique tax credits to wealthy Canadians, delivered child benefit cheques to millionaire families, and then when we moved forward with lowering taxes for the middle class and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, they voted against it. Then we moved forward on a Canada child benefit to give more money to nine out of 10 Canadian families and did not send child benefit cheques to millionaires, while lifting hundreds of thousands of kids out of poverty. The Conservatives voted against it. Their positions are clear.
Mr. Speaker, the Official Languages Act is important to our party and also to our country. Protecting Canada's linguistic minorities is at the core of who we are as a country. We will continue to stand up for linguistic minorities and strive to improve the Official Languages Act.I can confirm that we are preparing to modernize the Official Languages Act. We will work with all Canadians to ensure we get it right.
Mr. Speaker, $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money is going directly to Houston, Texas. That is eight times more than Kinder Morgan spent on the pipeline. That is $2 billion more than Kinder Morgan itself estimated the pipeline to be worth.When Kinder Morgan executives made that deal, they called Houston.They did not say, Houston, we have a problem. No, instead, they said, Houston, it's party time with $4.5 billion of Canadian taxpayers' money, thanks to the Liberal Party of Canada.Why is the Liberal government sending $4.5 billion to Texas?
Mr. Speaker, I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to move the following motion: That the House: 1) send good wishes for the G7 summit in Charlevoix; 2) protect the right to protest, but condemn potential acts of violence; 3) thank and congratulate the police forces that will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe; and 4) support the enforcement of the same guidelines for compensating residents and business owners in the Charlevoix area and in Quebec City as those enforced by the Harper government in Huntsville in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is looking to politicize the fact that today is the 74th anniversary of the D-Day invasion, but we on this side of the House are thinking about what unfolded on the shores of Normandy and paying tribute to our fallen soldiers. The monumental achievements of those young men transformed this great country. Their determination to fight for freedom, democracy, peace, and security was passed down to future generations. As an expression of our gratitude to their bravery and perseverance, we thank and salute the men and women who played a pivotal role all those years ago. Lest we forget.
Mr. Speaker, strong action is needed to tackle climate change, all the while generating the long-term economic development that will grow the middle class and support a clean economy.Yesterday, on World Environment Day, we appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change. Working together on climate change, oceans, and clean energy is one of the key themes of our G7 presidency. We are working to ensure that we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be hosting world leaders in the beautiful region of Charlevoix. When I was there, I learned that a company from La Baie, a borough of Saguenay, won the contract to supply food to all the security and military personnel who will be present. This community will be reaping substantial profits.I can assure my colleague that the compensation policies for affected local businesses are exactly the same as they were when the Conservatives hosted their summit in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, this week we all heard the many traumatizing stories of sexual abuse from Canadian athletes. This is unacceptable, and the government must do something to protect our athletes. National sports bodies in Canada are responsible for policing themselves in matters of sexual abuse. What is wrong with this picture? It creates conflicts of interest and endangers the safety of our athletes.When will the government do something to keep these young athletes safe?
Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister prepares to play host to the G7, Canadians and many around the world are asking themselves, What happened to this guy? We all remember that great defender of the planet who promised to end fossil fuels subsidies. However, a new report shows that when it comes to the G7 and those same subsidies, Canada ranks seventh out of seven. That would be last. That would be after Donald Trump's America. Therefore, rather than eliminate the subsidies, the Prime Minister went out and bought a 65-year-old pipeline. When will he end this circle of hypocrisy and finally come clean with Canadians and keep his promise to them and to the world?
Mr. Speaker, today we are launching a new call for proposals under the youth gang prevention program and the crime prevention action fund. These programs address the impact of gangs and violence on youth, especially in indigenous and high-needs communities. This is on top of unprecedented annual funding we announced last year of up to $100 million. We will keep working to enhance public safety by focusing on prevention, effective law enforcement, and strong community partnerships.
Mr. Speaker, before selling the Trans Mountain pipeline to the Prime Minister for $4.5 billion, Kinder Morgan valued its Canadian assets at $2.5 billion. That is quite a deal if one is Kinder Morgan. Kinder Morgan did not ask for any Canadian tax dollars. All it wanted to do was to build a pipeline.Why did the Prime Minister pay Kinder Morgan $2 billion more than the pipeline was worth and allow Kinder Morgan to invest and create jobs outside of this country?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years Stephen Harper and his Conservatives did nothing on protecting the environment. However, over those years, a number of provinces stepped up and put forward a price on carbon pollution. Actually, we presently have a situation in which 80% of our citizens live in jurisdictions where there is a carbon price in effect. We are continuing to move forward to demonstrate that a national price on carbon will be fair for those provinces that already have it and grow the economy for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces were ordered to return their sleeping bags and rucksacks because of an equipment shortage. The Prime Minister is failing our Canadian Armed Forces. Already he broke the Liberal promise and cut another $2.3 billion from defence spending. This is unacceptable. How can Canadians trust the Prime Minister to buy navy ships and fighter jets when he cannot even get buying sleeping bags right? How can we trust him to provide the right equipment to our troops who are about to deploy to Mali?
Mr. Speaker, this government and all Canadians have been very clear. Harassment of any kind is completely unacceptable, and the safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination, harassment, and harmful behaviour. That is why all federally funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy in place to be eligible for sport support program funding, which Sport Canada reviews to ensure compliance. We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's own officials have confirmed that the deficit for this year will be over $18 billion.Can the Prime Minister tell us if he has any idea how much higher the deficit will be as a result of any support that may be necessary for the industries and workers affected by the trade disruption between the United States and Canada?
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the choice was clear for Canadians.The NDP was proposing to make Canadians choose between what is good for the environment and what is good for the economy. The Liberal Party told Canadians that we understood how important it was to create a strong economy while protecting the environment. The two go hand in hand.That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting a national price on carbon pollution, implementing a historic oceans protection plan, and securing new markets for our resources.That is what Canadians expect.
Mr. Speaker, Canada is generally a very safe country, but there have been recent trends of an increase in guns and gangs violence. The responsibility for keeping communities safe starts at home, and working with communities to prevent crime will help them stay safe and resilient. Can the Prime Minister tell us what our government is doing to keep Canadian kids away from gangs, which will allow them to live full and productive lives?
Mr. Speaker, I would say that it is the NDP that talks, and talks, and talks, while we deliver results for first nations and indigenous peoples. We have eliminated many boil water advisories, we have built schools, and we are moving forward with partnerships on governance and on treaties. We are working hand in hand with indigenous communities across the country to keep our promise of nation-to-nation reconciliation.We will continue to respectfully work with first nations without claiming to speak for them like the NDP does.
Mr. Speaker, we will continue to protect and to promote our culture.The Broadcasting Act has not been reviewed since 1991. It predates smart phones and the ubiquitous use of the Internet. We are reviewing the act to ensure that it reflects today's realities and that the system in place is fair for everyone. The guiding principle for the review is clear: anyone who profits must contribute. No one gets a free pass.We are also going to protect and strengthen CBC's mandate to make sure that Harper-style budget cuts can never happen again.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Saint-LéonardSaint-Michel for his question.Public transit is a priority for our government because it enables Canadians to spend less time on the road and more time with their loved ones. I am proud of this week's announcement that we will be giving the Société de transport de Montréal over $450 million to help it purchase buses, build a new garage, and renovate Montreal metro system equipment.That is what it means to invest in our communities.
Mr. Speaker, harassment of any kind is unacceptable.The safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination and harassment. That is why all federally-funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy.We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote healthy, harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to have the opportunity to reinforce that we have indeed committed, and are on track, to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies by the year 2025. To do this, we announced in our very first budget the expiration of the tax writeoffs on capital investments in LNG facilities. In budget 2017, we announced the elimination of certain tax credits for exploration expenses in the oil and gas sector. We are developing our resources while protecting our environment, including safeguarding our oceans and combatting climate change. Our government understands that a clean environment and a strong economy go hand in hand.
Mr. Speaker, here we go again. The Conservatives pretend that they are friends to our troops, but for 10 years they underinvested, they politicized, they played games with procurement, and they nickel-and-dimed our veterans, yet they are easy to stand up with inflated rhetoric any time there is a challenge. We are going to continue to work with the men and women of our Canadian Forces to ensure that they have the equipment and the support they need to do their jobs as they stand up for Canada with their lives and livelihoods on the line. We continue to support our troops, not just with words, like them, but with dollars and cents that go the distance.
Mr. Speaker, unlike the years of the Harper Conservatives, we work with provinces as we move forward on pan-Canadian issues and projects. That is why we are working with provinces like Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and others to establish how they want to move forward on putting a price on pollution. We know we need a price on pollution across the country. It needs to be equivalent and effective right across the country. However, every jurisdiction will get to determine how that money comes in and how it returns that money to the people who need it.
Mr. Speaker, we are proud of the work we have done in diversifying Canada's trade. Under this government, we signed the CETA deal with Europe and we actually moved forward on a CPTPP, which highlights that a progressive trade deal can work for our workers and for the growing economies of Asia. We are pleased with our record on trade and growth. We are happy to announce that we will be introducing into the House the bill for the ratification of the new CPTPP before the House rises for the summer.
Mr. Speaker, last week, I had the opportunity to visit La Malbaie in the Charlevoix region to meet with locals. They told me that they were proud to welcome the world, to show them the beauty of Charlevoix and to encourage people to come visit and discover this magnificent region.Obviously, they know that there will be some inconveniences and challenges that come with hosting our visitors and dealing with security. We are continuously working with the public and with their elected representatives to ensure that everything goes smoothly.
Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House are very proud of the support we provide to our farmers. The Conservatives cut nearly $700 million from agriculture budgets, whereas we are investing in hard-working Canadian farmers. We reached a trade agreement with Europe that will increase our agricultural exports by over $1.5 billion per year, and the comprehensive progressive agreement on the trans-Pacific partnership will boost them by over $1 billion a year. We invested $350 million to help dairy producers and processors modernize their operations, and we will always support Canadian farmers.
Most positive speeches
Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House are very proud of the support we provide to our farmers. The Conservatives cut nearly $700 million from agriculture budgets, whereas we are investing in hard-working Canadian farmers. We reached a trade agreement with Europe that will increase our agricultural exports by over $1.5 billion per year, and the comprehensive progressive agreement on the trans-Pacific partnership will boost them by over $1 billion a year. We invested $350 million to help dairy producers and processors modernize their operations, and we will always support Canadian farmers.
Mr. Speaker, last week, I had the opportunity to visit La Malbaie in the Charlevoix region to meet with locals. They told me that they were proud to welcome the world, to show them the beauty of Charlevoix and to encourage people to come visit and discover this magnificent region.Obviously, they know that there will be some inconveniences and challenges that come with hosting our visitors and dealing with security. We are continuously working with the public and with their elected representatives to ensure that everything goes smoothly.
Mr. Speaker, we are proud of the work we have done in diversifying Canada's trade. Under this government, we signed the CETA deal with Europe and we actually moved forward on a CPTPP, which highlights that a progressive trade deal can work for our workers and for the growing economies of Asia. We are pleased with our record on trade and growth. We are happy to announce that we will be introducing into the House the bill for the ratification of the new CPTPP before the House rises for the summer.
Mr. Speaker, unlike the years of the Harper Conservatives, we work with provinces as we move forward on pan-Canadian issues and projects. That is why we are working with provinces like Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and others to establish how they want to move forward on putting a price on pollution. We know we need a price on pollution across the country. It needs to be equivalent and effective right across the country. However, every jurisdiction will get to determine how that money comes in and how it returns that money to the people who need it.
Mr. Speaker, here we go again. The Conservatives pretend that they are friends to our troops, but for 10 years they underinvested, they politicized, they played games with procurement, and they nickel-and-dimed our veterans, yet they are easy to stand up with inflated rhetoric any time there is a challenge. We are going to continue to work with the men and women of our Canadian Forces to ensure that they have the equipment and the support they need to do their jobs as they stand up for Canada with their lives and livelihoods on the line. We continue to support our troops, not just with words, like them, but with dollars and cents that go the distance.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to have the opportunity to reinforce that we have indeed committed, and are on track, to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies by the year 2025. To do this, we announced in our very first budget the expiration of the tax writeoffs on capital investments in LNG facilities. In budget 2017, we announced the elimination of certain tax credits for exploration expenses in the oil and gas sector. We are developing our resources while protecting our environment, including safeguarding our oceans and combatting climate change. Our government understands that a clean environment and a strong economy go hand in hand.
Mr. Speaker, harassment of any kind is unacceptable.The safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination and harassment. That is why all federally-funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy.We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote healthy, harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Saint-LéonardSaint-Michel for his question.Public transit is a priority for our government because it enables Canadians to spend less time on the road and more time with their loved ones. I am proud of this week's announcement that we will be giving the Société de transport de Montréal over $450 million to help it purchase buses, build a new garage, and renovate Montreal metro system equipment.That is what it means to invest in our communities.
Mr. Speaker, we will continue to protect and to promote our culture.The Broadcasting Act has not been reviewed since 1991. It predates smart phones and the ubiquitous use of the Internet. We are reviewing the act to ensure that it reflects today's realities and that the system in place is fair for everyone. The guiding principle for the review is clear: anyone who profits must contribute. No one gets a free pass.We are also going to protect and strengthen CBC's mandate to make sure that Harper-style budget cuts can never happen again.
Mr. Speaker, I would say that it is the NDP that talks, and talks, and talks, while we deliver results for first nations and indigenous peoples. We have eliminated many boil water advisories, we have built schools, and we are moving forward with partnerships on governance and on treaties. We are working hand in hand with indigenous communities across the country to keep our promise of nation-to-nation reconciliation.We will continue to respectfully work with first nations without claiming to speak for them like the NDP does.
Mr. Speaker, Canada is generally a very safe country, but there have been recent trends of an increase in guns and gangs violence. The responsibility for keeping communities safe starts at home, and working with communities to prevent crime will help them stay safe and resilient. Can the Prime Minister tell us what our government is doing to keep Canadian kids away from gangs, which will allow them to live full and productive lives?
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the choice was clear for Canadians.The NDP was proposing to make Canadians choose between what is good for the environment and what is good for the economy. The Liberal Party told Canadians that we understood how important it was to create a strong economy while protecting the environment. The two go hand in hand.That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting a national price on carbon pollution, implementing a historic oceans protection plan, and securing new markets for our resources.That is what Canadians expect.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's own officials have confirmed that the deficit for this year will be over $18 billion.Can the Prime Minister tell us if he has any idea how much higher the deficit will be as a result of any support that may be necessary for the industries and workers affected by the trade disruption between the United States and Canada?
Mr. Speaker, this government and all Canadians have been very clear. Harassment of any kind is completely unacceptable, and the safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination, harassment, and harmful behaviour. That is why all federally funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy in place to be eligible for sport support program funding, which Sport Canada reviews to ensure compliance. We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces were ordered to return their sleeping bags and rucksacks because of an equipment shortage. The Prime Minister is failing our Canadian Armed Forces. Already he broke the Liberal promise and cut another $2.3 billion from defence spending. This is unacceptable. How can Canadians trust the Prime Minister to buy navy ships and fighter jets when he cannot even get buying sleeping bags right? How can we trust him to provide the right equipment to our troops who are about to deploy to Mali?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years Stephen Harper and his Conservatives did nothing on protecting the environment. However, over those years, a number of provinces stepped up and put forward a price on carbon pollution. Actually, we presently have a situation in which 80% of our citizens live in jurisdictions where there is a carbon price in effect. We are continuing to move forward to demonstrate that a national price on carbon will be fair for those provinces that already have it and grow the economy for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, before selling the Trans Mountain pipeline to the Prime Minister for $4.5 billion, Kinder Morgan valued its Canadian assets at $2.5 billion. That is quite a deal if one is Kinder Morgan. Kinder Morgan did not ask for any Canadian tax dollars. All it wanted to do was to build a pipeline.Why did the Prime Minister pay Kinder Morgan $2 billion more than the pipeline was worth and allow Kinder Morgan to invest and create jobs outside of this country?
Mr. Speaker, today we are launching a new call for proposals under the youth gang prevention program and the crime prevention action fund. These programs address the impact of gangs and violence on youth, especially in indigenous and high-needs communities. This is on top of unprecedented annual funding we announced last year of up to $100 million. We will keep working to enhance public safety by focusing on prevention, effective law enforcement, and strong community partnerships.
Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister prepares to play host to the G7, Canadians and many around the world are asking themselves, What happened to this guy? We all remember that great defender of the planet who promised to end fossil fuels subsidies. However, a new report shows that when it comes to the G7 and those same subsidies, Canada ranks seventh out of seven. That would be last. That would be after Donald Trump's America. Therefore, rather than eliminate the subsidies, the Prime Minister went out and bought a 65-year-old pipeline. When will he end this circle of hypocrisy and finally come clean with Canadians and keep his promise to them and to the world?
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be hosting world leaders in the beautiful region of Charlevoix. When I was there, I learned that a company from La Baie, a borough of Saguenay, won the contract to supply food to all the security and military personnel who will be present. This community will be reaping substantial profits.I can assure my colleague that the compensation policies for affected local businesses are exactly the same as they were when the Conservatives hosted their summit in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, this week we all heard the many traumatizing stories of sexual abuse from Canadian athletes. This is unacceptable, and the government must do something to protect our athletes. National sports bodies in Canada are responsible for policing themselves in matters of sexual abuse. What is wrong with this picture? It creates conflicts of interest and endangers the safety of our athletes.When will the government do something to keep these young athletes safe?
Mr. Speaker, strong action is needed to tackle climate change, all the while generating the long-term economic development that will grow the middle class and support a clean economy.Yesterday, on World Environment Day, we appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change. Working together on climate change, oceans, and clean energy is one of the key themes of our G7 presidency. We are working to ensure that we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is looking to politicize the fact that today is the 74th anniversary of the D-Day invasion, but we on this side of the House are thinking about what unfolded on the shores of Normandy and paying tribute to our fallen soldiers. The monumental achievements of those young men transformed this great country. Their determination to fight for freedom, democracy, peace, and security was passed down to future generations. As an expression of our gratitude to their bravery and perseverance, we thank and salute the men and women who played a pivotal role all those years ago. Lest we forget.
Mr. Speaker, I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to move the following motion: That the House: 1) send good wishes for the G7 summit in Charlevoix; 2) protect the right to protest, but condemn potential acts of violence; 3) thank and congratulate the police forces that will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe; and 4) support the enforcement of the same guidelines for compensating residents and business owners in the Charlevoix area and in Quebec City as those enforced by the Harper government in Huntsville in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money is going directly to Houston, Texas. That is eight times more than Kinder Morgan spent on the pipeline. That is $2 billion more than Kinder Morgan itself estimated the pipeline to be worth.When Kinder Morgan executives made that deal, they called Houston.They did not say, Houston, we have a problem. No, instead, they said, Houston, it's party time with $4.5 billion of Canadian taxpayers' money, thanks to the Liberal Party of Canada.Why is the Liberal government sending $4.5 billion to Texas?
Mr. Speaker, the Official Languages Act is important to our party and also to our country. Protecting Canada's linguistic minorities is at the core of who we are as a country. We will continue to stand up for linguistic minorities and strive to improve the Official Languages Act.I can confirm that we are preparing to modernize the Official Languages Act. We will work with all Canadians to ensure we get it right.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member opposite's expertise in trickle-down economics. That is what the Conservatives specialized in for 10 years. They gave boutique tax credits to wealthy Canadians, delivered child benefit cheques to millionaire families, and then when we moved forward with lowering taxes for the middle class and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, they voted against it. Then we moved forward on a Canada child benefit to give more money to nine out of 10 Canadian families and did not send child benefit cheques to millionaires, while lifting hundreds of thousands of kids out of poverty. The Conservatives voted against it. Their positions are clear.
Mr. Speaker, Montreal's public transit system is the most heavily used in the country. Many Montrealers make the eco-friendly choice to get around the city by metro, bus, and bike share. I am very pleased with our government's recent decision to help with planning the blue line extension to Anjou.I would like to ask the Prime Minister how the government plans to help maintain the existing network and ensure quality service going forward.
Mr. Speaker, the real impact of climate change cannot be understated. The challenge governments face is striking the right balance between an evolving economy and protection of the environment now and for future generations.The Minister of Environment and Climate Change repeatedly says that We're all in this together as a global community and that international collaboration is essential to make sure we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids. Can the Prime Minister describe Canada's global plan to meet these global challenges?
Mr. Speaker, our party created supply management. Our party has always unequivocally defended supply management. We will continue to do so. Dairy producers in Quebec and across Canada know just how much we support for them.We will always defend the supply management system. However, if the Conservatives want to talk about supply management, I would ask the Leader of the Opposition why he appointed someone who opposes supply management as the critic for innovation and economic development.
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, Canadians asked our government to step up on reconciliation and build a new relationship, nation to nation, with indigenous peoples, and that is exactly what we are doing. In partnership with them, in respect with them, we are working with indigenous communities across this country to respond to their needs, to deliver on the services they need, to build the housing, invest in the schools, and create the infrastructure necessary for them to determine their own future and for them to thrive in this country.We are doing this hand in hand, in partnership, in respect, and that is what we will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, now more than ever Canada needs to open up new markets and diversify our trading relationships. The trans-Pacific partnership would achieve just that. Despite the Prime Minister's delaying and jeopardizing that deal, it is essential that the bill implementing the deal be passed quickly. When will the Prime Minister commit to introducing the legislation for this trade agreement and can he commit that it will be passed before the House rises?
Mr. Speaker, responding to questions about the fisheries minister's surf clam decision, the minister's most senior official confirmed that the Liberal-connected Five Nations had the lowest participation of first nations out of all the applicants. She also confirmed that she had no knowledge of the minister's family connection to the unincorporated entity. She confirmed multiple times that this was the minister's sole, personal decision.When did the minister become aware of the minister's family connections, and when did he know that Five Nations had the least amount of indigenous participation?
Mr. Speaker, we hear the government just spent $4.5 billion in renewable energies, but it spent it on a pipeline.Last week, the majority of MPs had the good sense to vote in favour of the bill introduced by my colleague from AbitibiBaie-JamesNunavikEeyou to enshrine the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People in Canadian law. The Prime Minister himself voted in favour of it.How can he say he respects indigenous rights while forcing a pipeline through despite opposition from a number of first nations?
Mr. Speaker, well, we only wish that were true.Canada is a country rich in natural resources, home to innovative businesses, and populated by hard-working Canadians. Our country should be attracting investment, but instead we are repelling it. In fact, we are so opposed to private sector investment in the energy sector that we have killed three pipeline projects worth over $100 billion. Now, we have taken $4.5 billion and given it to Kinder Morgan to take its projects elsewhere.When will the Prime Minister stop attacking Canada's energy sector and start putting the interests of Canadians first?
Mr. Speaker, I want to pause to thank Canadians. Over the past months, and indeed over a year now, Canadians have been united in our approach to dealing with the U.S. administration. Across political lines, across provincial capitals, across industries, Canadians have been speaking with a clear and united voice that we stand together and that we stand against punitive measures by the United States, that we will support our neighbours, that we will support our workers, and that we will remain united and proud Canadians. I want to thank all members of this House and all Canadians for the solidarity they continue to show on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, as we have said from the very beginning, with this particular American administration, we have to be ready for everything, and we are.That is why, as soon as the U.S. put forward punitive, unacceptable tariffs on steel and aluminum in Canada, we were, right away, ready with a list of retaliatory measures that target American companies and American producers for which there are alternatives available to Canadian citizens. We know that tariffs end up hurting the citizens of the country that brings them in. We want to avoid hurting Canadians. That is why we are consulting with Canadians on those retaliatory measures.
Mr. Speaker, this is yet another example of a government that talks a lot, but is always missing in action when it comes to making important decisions that affect entire indigenous communities.Last week it voted to support the rights of indigenous peoples. This week, it is voting against our motion, which is a concrete way to support these rights.Can the Liberals do more than just talk, and talk, and talk about the rights of indigenous people?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister spoke about the review of the CRTC Act. The last time the Official Languages Act was comprehensively reviewed was when the Conservatives were in power in 1988. In light of the new challenges and issues they are dealing with, francophones, Acadians, and anglophones from Quebec are all asking that the act be reviewed. The Federal Court agrees and is asking Parliament to review the act. The Liberals are the only ones not on board.What exactly is the Prime Minister waiting for to modernize the Official Languages Act?
Mr. Speaker, Conservatives are always thinking about tax cuts. I will correct the blues after this to make sure they reflect tax hikes.On the subject of tariffs, we know that tariffs collected by the government will raise revenue for the Government of Canada. Will the Prime Minister assure the House and Canadians that any new revenue for the government will be used to lower taxes for affected workers and the businesses that employ them?
Mr. Speaker, in Kinder Morgan's 2017 annual report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, it valued the Trans Mountain pipeline at $2.5 billion, and yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion to purchase the pipeline. We now know that a lot of the extra padding went to executive bonuses.If Kinder Morgan says its pipeline is worth $2.5 billion, why did the Prime Minister pay it $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money to leave Canada?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Today, during question, I referred to the defence spending shortfall by the government. This information comes from the document, Strong, Secure, Engaged So Far by David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. I am going to ask for consent to table this. The document states: ...the capital allocations to date are falling well short of the projections contained in SSE. The DND's capital allocation for 2017/2018 as of Supplementary Estimates C for 2017/2018 was $4 billion (the green dot in Figure 6). This final year-end allocation represents the maximum DND can spend on capital in 2017/2018. This is well short of the $6.3 billion in capital spending projected for 2017/2018 in SSE... I ask for unanimous consent to table this report so Canadians can get all the information they need, as well as inform the government of all its own shortfalls.
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the Prime Minister was a superstar, a breath of fresh air, and a new champion of the environment. Three years later, everyone is shaking their heads. What happened to Canada? What happened to Mr. Selfie, to Paris Match's new pet?After adopting Stephen Harper's targets, the Prime Minister bought a pipeline. Today, we learned that Canada ranks lowest among the G7 countries when it comes to eliminating oil subsidies. We came in seventh out seven.Will the Prime Minister finally keep his promise, do the right thing, and eliminate all oil subsidies?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has a budget bill before the House of Commons right now that Finance Canada admits will raise the price of gas, home heating, and most other consumer goods that Canadians buy.How much will the Prime Minister's carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I had the privilege of sitting down with representatives of indigenous communities that will be affected by this new pipeline. We talked about the impact on their communities. We have set up a committee to consult and listen to communities. We will ensure that the pipeline has a positive impact, and we will minimize any negative repercussions. I am proud of the reconciliation work we are doing. We will keep working with all indigenous peoples. We will listen to them. We will respect all points of view.
Mr. Speaker, our decision to introduce indigenous participation is consistent with our commitment to developing a renewed relationship between Canada and indigenous peoples. Enhancing access to the Arctic surf clam fishery broadens the distribution of benefits from this public resource, and it is a powerful step toward reconciliation. When the Conservatives went through a similar process to increase access to this fishery, they chose to exclude indigenous peoples. Of course, the member will continue to work with the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and follow his advice.
Mr. Speaker, I hate to have to correct the member opposite. In fact, it was during his government that many provinces moved forward on pricing carbon pollution. We have a situation in which British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Ontario have all moved forward with pricing of carbon pollution, and we know that it has to be done right across the country. That is exactly what we are ensuring, but we are working with the provinces to ensure they can put forward a model that works for them, as long as it is fairly stringent and impactful right across the country.
Mr. Speaker, during his interview on U.S. television last weekend, the Prime Minister spoke about NAFTA negotiations on supply management.The Prime Minister said, We were moving towards flexibility in those areas that I thought was very, very promising.What concessions has the Prime Minister made on supply management?
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians that said we understood we needed to grow the economy and protect the environment together. Those on the other side of the House would have Canadians believe that there is still a choice to be made between what is good for the economy and what is good for the environment. We on this side of the House know they must go together. That is why we are moving forward with a world-class oceans protection plan, a national price on carbon pollution, and getting our resources to new markets, other than the United States, for our oil. That is what we know we need to do. That is what we are going to keep doing, despite the false choice proposed by the members opposite.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised Canadians he would be a climate change leader, and he committed to eliminate public subsidies for oil and gas companies. However, climate change leaders do not buy pipelines with public money. Climate change leaders do not allow $3 million bonuses to be given to top oil executives. Climate change leaders do use public money to build long-term job creation in renewable energies. Could the government explain why it makes sense for a climate change leader to buy a pipeline?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am pleased to inform the House that proper notice was in fact given last night. There was a point of clarification. If the member checks Hansard and reads just a bit further on, as a member who was here until midnight, I can assure him clarification was indeed given.
Mr. Speaker, in March, the President of the United States announced that he would be introducing tariffs on steel and aluminum. After that, he announced there would be an exemption for Canada and Mexico until May 1. He then announced a further extension of that exemption until June 1. Most recently, he indicated that, of course, the exemption was going to be lifted. All through that time, the Prime Minister had an opportunity to consult on the tariffs that he is now proposing to counter the steel and aluminum tariffs. My question is simple. Why did he wait so long and put us in a position where we cannot react right away?
Mr. Speaker, I am going to help the Prime Minister out. Conservatives and Liberals voted for Bill C-23, which gave unprecedented powers to American border officers on Canadian soil. Luckily, the NDP was here raising exactly these concerns, because now what we are seeing in the Senate report is that with the legalization of marijuana, any person on Canadian soil, not crossing the border and subject to another country's laws, but here in Canada, could potentially be fined or imprisoned under that very legislation.My question for the Prime Minister is simple. Is that the case, yes or no? When will he finally take that issue up with his American counterparts?
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the member opposite's voice, but I do need to highlight that there are a range of voices in indigenous communities and we need to listen to all of them. There are people in indigenous communities who were opposed to this pipeline and other economic development projects. There are some who are in favour of it. We are working with all of them, including through entities like the Indigenous Advisory and Monitoring Committee, a committee that we put together exactly for the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We are going to continue to work in the spirit of reconciliation on a nation-to-nation relationship that respects UNDRIP.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians really are watching what is going on because they are quite concerned. They see an economy that is going to be put at risk and they are looking for answers from the Prime Minister. Unfortunately, today we have not received any answers from the Prime Minister. He was asked four times about how much a carbon tax would cost a Canadian family. He did not tell us the answer. He was asked how much more deficit was going to be accumulated because of the trade war we are in. He did not give us an answer. These are things that Canadians care about. He did give us one answer. He told us that he is going to introduce legislation to affirm the CPTPP, the free-trade deal that we negotiated. Will he guarantee that it is going to pass?
Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to stand today in the House and express my concern in regard to comments made by our hon. Prime Minister during answering questions in regard to the carbon tax. He indicated to the House that he had worked with all the provinces and that the provinces were working toward this with him. Clearly, we all know the Province of Saskatchewan is not in agreement.
Mr. Speaker, at the moment I will not seek to table documents. I have a point of order on a totally unrelated standing order that I think is very well grounded.
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions, and I hope you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: that the House hope for the success of the G7 meeting in La Malbaie and defend the right to protest, but denounce possible acts of violence and vandalism, thank the police forces who will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe, and call on the government to formally pledge to compensate residents and business owners in the unfortunate event of unrest and damage in the Charlevoix region and in the city of Quebec.
Mr. Speaker, in a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent. There has been a considerable amount of misinformation on that side of the House in regard to the minister's decision to award the lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and those with close family ties to the Liberal Party of Canada.The minister, along with the Prime Minister, have repeatedly said this was about reconciliation, and they have misrepresented the previous government's commitment to the indigenous participation with this fishery.Yesterday at committee the minister's most senior staff acknowledged the commitment of the previous government to aboriginal participation in this fishery. In order to clear up the government's inaccurate misrepresentation once and for all, I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Government of Canada 2015 news release, which states: With this increase in TAC, the Integrated Fisheries Management Plan provision for new entrants has been triggered and, as such, Fisheries and Oceans Canada is commencing a process to introduce a new entrant or new entrants to the fishery. This process includes consultation with the current licence holder, industry and First Nations and will conclude in the coming weeks.
Mr. Speaker, this is not a novel point of order. It relates to Standing Order 16 and 18, but in particular to Standing Order 16, related to interrupting members when they speak, in this case, the Prime Minister. I can assure other members that I feel like screaming a good deal of the time when I listen to the Prime Minister, but I do not. It violates the rules of this place when I cannot hear the Prime Minister deliver a response. I do not recall, from this seat, having trouble hearing Stephen Harper. I do not think he spoke louder than the current Prime Minister. The noise from this quarter of Conservatives is unacceptable. It violates our rules.
Mr. Speaker, on the member's first comment, it is true that we just appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change.On the issue of pipelines, for 10 years the Conservatives tried to move forward on getting our oil resources to new markets, and they failed. They failed because they refused to understand that the only way to grow a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are demonstrating with a national price on carbon pollution, with a world-class oceans protection plan, with $8 billion worth of investment in clean energy projects and renewable technologies. We know the way
Mr. Speaker, we have no doubt that the Prime Minister will work with any politician as part of his plan to raise taxes on Canadians. It is his form of trickle-down economics. He scoops up money from working class consumers, gives it to the federal government, trickles it down to provincial politicians, and then expects us to believe that a few drops will go back to the people who originally paid for it in the first place. If that is true, then why can he not tell us this. How much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, an event like the G7 summit naturally has an impact on local residents. Everyone knows that. Not only are honest workers currently prevented from getting to their place of work, but local shops, businesses, and homes will be exposed to vandalism.Under such circumstances, we would expect the government to look after victims of vandalism and provide compensation.Will the Prime Minister formally promise to compensate every victim of vandalism during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, if policies are neglected, they are worthless. The government has to have zero tolerance for sexual abuse in Canadian sports. Right now, the onus is on sporting organizations to be responsible for policing these complaints. That is not fair to these organizations. Canada needs an independent body to handle cases of sexual abuse in Canadian sport. Under the recent Safe Sport Act in the United States, independent bodies investigate these cases. It is time for Canada to do the same. When is the government going to step up?
Mr. Speaker, we have known for a long time that under this U.S. administration, our trade relationship has been volatile and under grave risk.Given this, can the Prime Minister tell us how much money was set aside in his budget and where we might find any mention of a contingency plan to deal with the trade disruption between Canada and the United States?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister uses the word stringent. There is no doubt that it will have a stringent effect on household budgets. There is also no doubt the Prime Minister supports high gas prices. He said so when he was in Vancouver, celebrating $1.60 a litre gas prices. There is also no doubt that his carbon tax will raise the price of consumer goods upon which middle-class Canadians rely.It is his bill, so how much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table some important documents I believe the House needs to see so everybody can then have a fulsome discussion. We asked the Prime Minister four times today, although we have actually been asking for weeks, about the price and the cost of the carbon tax. We have documents here that my hon. colleague, the member for Carleton, has worked very hard to get, which would reveal the cost of the carbon tax to Canadians. Unfortunately they have been redacted, but it would be important I table those documents today. This is something that has been in dispute. We are getting ready to rise very soon for the summer, and Canadians need to know how much the carbon tax is going to cost.
Mr. Speaker, if the provinces were already doing it, the Prime Minister would not have to introduce a budget bill forcing them to do it. Clearly this is a federally imposed tax. Clearly he would have read the briefing notes that his departments have given him about the cost of that tax. He knows the cost.Again, how much will this Liberal carbon tax imposed by the Prime Minister cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear about one thing. The reason we are moving forward on the legalization of marijuana is because the current system does not work. It does not protect our kids from the harmful impact of marijuana, and it delivers billions of dollars every year to criminal organizations that make profits off of that. We are also highlighting that cannabis is not somehow a positive health food supplement that we encourage everyone to use. It is a controlled substance. We are trying to make it more difficult for kids to access, and people need to be honest when they cross the border if they choose to enter a different country.
Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Conservatives are feeling a bit lost. For years, they have been demanding that we do what they could not, and that is to build a pipeline to give Canada access to new markets other than the United States. The Conservatives were unable to do that, but we did so, at their request. Now that we have delivered on their main demand, they have to try to find a way to attack us and play petty politics. Fortunately, workers across Canada understand that we did the right thing for them.
Mr. Speaker, we are, of course, in ongoing discussions with our American counterparts on a broad range of border issues, and we will continue to be, but at the same time, I hope the NDP is not suggesting that somehow a sovereign country cannot make determinations about how it handles people entering its own borders. Of course, we would never expect or allow any other country to dictate to us who or how we can or cannot let someone into our country. We will ensure that we are also respecting other countries' sovereignty in doing that at the same time as we stand up for Canadians, and of course, for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, every day the Liberal government demonstrates how completely out of touch it is with the farming community. The Liberals called our farmers tax cheats and are imposing a carbon tax that farmers do not want. They are changing Canada's food guide and imposing labels that make no sense on agricultural products. All their actions are having so-called unintended consequences on farmers.My question for the Prime Minister is quite simple. Does he also believe that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice are a health hazard?
Members who are asking me to sit down should listen, especially the members of PROC, who know the rules.My good colleague from Red DeerLacombe gave an important point of order, and in response to it the government House leader said something like As a member who was here until midnight last night. It is an important convention in this House not to refer to the presence or absence of members during debate. I do not know if she was referring to herself or to my good friend from Red DeerLacombe, but especially during late sittings, it is a grievous violation of the rules of procedure for members to make insinuations about who was or was not here late into the night. I think the government House leader should be called to order.
Mr. Speaker, during question period, I did not refer to a historic event that occurred in 1971, the well-known Apollo 13, On the contrary, I was referring to a very specific document, issued in the United States, regarding Kinder Morgan's financial statements.As all Canadians know, Kinder Morgan just received $4.5 billion in Canadian taxpayers' money for the Trans Mountain pipeline. In the first table on page 134 of that document, it states in black and white that the pipeline was assessed at $2.5 billion.I ask for the unanimous consent of the House to table this document so that Canadians are fully informed of the facts.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague from BeauportCôte-de-BeaupréÎle d'OrléansCharlevoix, I would like to move a motion in the House, but first I would like to give some background. The G7, a major event, is starting soon. This kind of event sometimes attracts mass protests that sadly lead to unrest. Over the past few months, serious concerns about this event have been raised in the media or through public consultations by many residents from the ridings of Québec, represented by the Minister of Families, Louis-Hébert, represented by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, Louis-Saint-Laurent, CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles, and BeauportLimoilou, where protests will
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives like to talk a good game on farmers, but the reality is different. While the previous government cut nearly $700 million from agriculture and agrifood, we have invested in hard-working Canadian farmers.Our government signed CETA, which will boost our agricultural exports by one and a half billion dollars a year, and the CPTPP, which will boost our agricultural exports by over a billion dollars a year. We have secured our $2-billion canola trade with China. We have invested $100 million in agricultural science and innovation. We have invested $350 million to help dairy farmers and processors modernize. We will always
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals voted against the NDP motion to implement the rights of indigenous peoples in their pipeline project, but just a few days ago voted to put those same rights into Canadian law. The Prime Minister cannot pretend that indigenous voices are all the same and ignore the clear opposition to his pipeline. The Liberals are denying the rights of first nations, Métis, and Inuit people. Does the government really not see that or does it just not care?
Mr. Speaker, after two years, one month, and 14 days of incessant consultation, the Minister of Canadian Heritage finally made an announcement yesterday. I could hardly believe it. Did she have new measures or reforms to announce? Of course not. She announced a new panel of experts, the second in two years, which will issue its recommendations in 2020, after the next election. That is cynicism. Two years ago, the minister was bragging about her political courage and promised legislative changes in 2017.By doing nothing for four years, is this government not jeopardizing our culture for no other reason than to get re-elected at the expense of our culture?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' budget has in fact turned out to be built on borrowing and tax cuts on those very same middle-class Canadians they pretend to want to help.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw to the attention of the House a matter concerning the notice of time allocation regarding Bill C-59. Bill C-59 was referred to committee before second reading and is now before the House at report stage. If you read Standing Order 78(3), Mr. Speaker, it allows a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading of a bill provided that the bill is consistent with Standing Order 76.1(10).Standing Order 76.1(10) refers to a bill that was sent to committee after second reading, not before second reading. Standing Order 76.1(10) is the Standing Order that deals with the report stage of a bill that was referred to committee before second reading and Standing Order 78(3) does not refer to it.Therefore, there is no provision in our Standing Orders that would allow a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading stages of a bill that was sent to committee prior to second reading.I concede time allocation motions have covered both the report and third reading stages of some bills that were referred to committee before second reading, however, no member had ever objected to this practice nor pointed out to the Speaker that it was simply out of order. The fact that the former opposition turned a blind eye to this breach does not make it right.Since Bill C-59 is the first in this Parliament that has been referred to committee before second reading and notice having been given to time allocate, now is the time, Mr. Speaker, for you to take a look at this matter and ensure the government begins following the House rules.Finally, I would add one point to my submission. Standing Order 76.1(10) deems the report stage of Bill C-59 to be an integral part of second reading. We are actually talking about two stages plus third reading, another situation not anticipated by Standing Order 78(3).
[Member spoke in Inuktitut][English]Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Two communities in my riding have recently declared that they are in crisis. These declarations stem from the fact that there are too few mental health supports and an increased number of suicide attempts. Of the recent $118 million announced for first nations and Inuit mental health, Nunavut receives only $500,000 annually, despite the fact that the suicide rate is 10 times the national average. The current government has sent additional support to first nations communities in crisis. Will the government do the same for Inuit communities?
Mr. Speaker, it is a real shame to see the trapped ideology of the Conservatives who are playing politics with this issue. I can tell them that I was just in Alberta yesterday talking to oil sands workers, talking to pipeline workers, who are deeply grateful that we are able to move forward on building this pipeline project after years of the Conservatives being unable to do so. Why were the Conservatives unable to do so? It is because they did not understand that the only way to build a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. This government is doing both, and that is why we are getting it done.
Mr. Speaker, we recognize that the mental health challenges facing indigenous people are deep-rooted, and the need for support is immense. In Nunavut, we are working with our partners and have invested $189 million over 10 years in the community-led Nunavut wellness agreement as well as $8.4 million, this year alone, for mental health support for Inuit. We are supporting ITK's national Inuit suicide-prevention strategy and will continue to work with partners to respond to the mental health needs in the territory.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite well knows that the government will be there for workers and industries affected by these punitive American measures. That is what I told steel and aluminum workers over the past months as I travelled across the country to engage with them.It is interesting that the member opposite speaks about deficits. In the last election, Canadians had a very clear choice. The Conservatives, their choice, their option, was actually austerity and cuts. Our proposal to Canadians was investing in the middle class and the people working hard to join it, investing in our communities, and growing the economy the way the Conservatives were not able to for 10 years.
Mr. Speaker, one almost has to feel sorry for the Conservatives. For 10 years, they tried to get this done, and were unable to do it. Then, for two and a half years, while we were in government, they have been screaming at us to get this pipeline built, and now, when we are finally getting this pipeline built, they do not know what to do with themselves. So they fall back on their silly attacks, on playing politics, on their rigid ideology that somehow, suddenly, they do not think that public investment has any place in the development of our natural resources, which, of course, the great Peter Lougheed disagreed with them about. We know that we are doing the right thing, the right way.
Mr. Speaker, a Senate report has just concluded that Canadians who use cannabis after it is legalized and try to cross the border to the United States could be denied entry, but worse, those who do not answer certain questions in pre-clearance could face up to two years in prison under Bill C-23, which calls it resisting or wilfully obstructing an American officer, even on Canadian soil.Can the Prime Minister confirm whether or not Canadians who simply refuse to answer American officers in Canada about their cannabis use could face fines or imprisonment?
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the laundry list the member put forward. However, we can list the concrete results we have delivered for Canadians over the past two and a half years. Whether it be signing the CPTPP, which the Conservatives were not moving forward on; whether it was concretizing a CETA that was in dire straits when we came into office; whether it is delivering an energy infrastructure that will get our oil resources to new markets, which they failed to do for 10 years; whether it is actually investing in infrastructure in our communities, lowering taxes for the middle class, and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, these are the things that
Mr. Speaker, three years ago, a young Cree girl was suffering chronic pain and was taking daily medication for a jaw misalignment. She simply needed $6,000 in dental work. Instead of showing compassion and common sense, the government decided to take Josey and her family to court, for over $110,000 in costs, to fight. Seven months ago, we suggested that it was time to quit the fight and show some compassion and change the policy.Can the Prime Minister tell us how this represents using taxpayer dollars for reconciliation?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite pointed out that he thinks about tax cuts. The issue is that Conservatives think about tax cuts for the wealthiest Canadians.The first thing we did was bring in a tax cut for the middle class, and we raised taxes on the wealthiest 1%. For 10 years, Conservatives tried to put forward an agenda for growth that was focused on giving benefits and boutique tax cuts to the wealthiest Canadians, hoping that somehow it would trickle down to everyone else.It did not, which is why the Conservatives had terrible growth for 10 years. We are investing in the middle class and those working hard to join it, and giving them more money
Mr. Speaker, farmers are struggling to survive and the Liberal imposed taxes are not helping. Now the agriculture minister is claiming that farmers support the Liberal carbon tax. The chair of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers said, I'm not sure who has been briefing [the] Minister... but he is dead wrong if he thinks that most farmers support a carbon tax.Does the Prime Minister agree with the minister that farmers like his carbon tax or will he listen to farmers and recognize that the carbon tax is crippling our farm families?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent to table some documents. The documents speak to the issue of Kinder Morgan and the fact that it valued its assets at $2.5 billion, yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion.I would like to table these documents, the SEC filings of Kinder Morgan Canada, to show that the assets are in fact valued at $2.5 billion in spite of the Prime Minister's assertion.
Mr. Speaker, during question period I asked the Prime Minister a question about the upcoming food labelling policy. I asked him whether he believed that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice were health hazards. Based on the Prime Minister's answer, it seems clear that he had the wrong paper.I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to table the brief from Les Producteurs de lait du Québec, which confirms that the policy to put warning labels on the front of packaging could stigmatize a number of dairy products. I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to inform the Prime Minister of the impact that the food labelling policy will have on milk producers.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will once again be seeking unanimous support. Unfortunately, it seems the government continues to suppress the facts in the surf clam case. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Federal Court documents pertaining to the current case against the government in regard to the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard awarding a lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and his wife's cousin. These documents
Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister announced that the G7 would be held in La Malbaie, his government also said that workers in the region would be put to use. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Workers everywhere are currently in a situation of forced unemployment.Can the Prime Minister tell the people of La Malbaie whether compensation is provided for and what he is going to do for the hotel managers, innkeepers, and restaurant owners who are unable to put their employees to work before and during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, on June 6, 1944, 14,000 Canadian soldiers landed on the beaches of Normandy. On June 6, 2018, our soldiers are being asked to hand in their rucksacks and sleeping bags to the quartermaster. This is outrageous. What is the Prime Minister doing in the meantime? He is spending $10 million on Omar Khadr, $7 billion on a pipeline that a company could have taken care of itself, and $7 million on a temporary skating rink right here in front of Parliament.Mr. Prime Minister, do you think that we are going to send our soldiers to Mali under those conditions?
Sorry, tax hikes.
Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House are very proud of the support we provide to our farmers. The Conservatives cut nearly $700 million from agriculture budgets, whereas we are investing in hard-working Canadian farmers. We reached a trade agreement with Europe that will increase our agricultural exports by over $1.5 billion per year, and the comprehensive progressive agreement on the trans-Pacific partnership will boost them by over $1 billion a year. We invested $350 million to help dairy producers and processors modernize their operations, and we will always support Canadian farmers.
Mr. Speaker, last week, I had the opportunity to visit La Malbaie in the Charlevoix region to meet with locals. They told me that they were proud to welcome the world, to show them the beauty of Charlevoix and to encourage people to come visit and discover this magnificent region.Obviously, they know that there will be some inconveniences and challenges that come with hosting our visitors and dealing with security. We are continuously working with the public and with their elected representatives to ensure that everything goes smoothly.
Mr. Speaker, we are proud of the work we have done in diversifying Canada's trade. Under this government, we signed the CETA deal with Europe and we actually moved forward on a CPTPP, which highlights that a progressive trade deal can work for our workers and for the growing economies of Asia. We are pleased with our record on trade and growth. We are happy to announce that we will be introducing into the House the bill for the ratification of the new CPTPP before the House rises for the summer.
Mr. Speaker, unlike the years of the Harper Conservatives, we work with provinces as we move forward on pan-Canadian issues and projects. That is why we are working with provinces like Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and others to establish how they want to move forward on putting a price on pollution. We know we need a price on pollution across the country. It needs to be equivalent and effective right across the country. However, every jurisdiction will get to determine how that money comes in and how it returns that money to the people who need it.
Mr. Speaker, here we go again. The Conservatives pretend that they are friends to our troops, but for 10 years they underinvested, they politicized, they played games with procurement, and they nickel-and-dimed our veterans, yet they are easy to stand up with inflated rhetoric any time there is a challenge. We are going to continue to work with the men and women of our Canadian Forces to ensure that they have the equipment and the support they need to do their jobs as they stand up for Canada with their lives and livelihoods on the line. We continue to support our troops, not just with words, like them, but with dollars and cents that go the distance.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to have the opportunity to reinforce that we have indeed committed, and are on track, to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies by the year 2025. To do this, we announced in our very first budget the expiration of the tax writeoffs on capital investments in LNG facilities. In budget 2017, we announced the elimination of certain tax credits for exploration expenses in the oil and gas sector. We are developing our resources while protecting our environment, including safeguarding our oceans and combatting climate change. Our government understands that a clean environment and a strong economy go hand in hand.
Mr. Speaker, harassment of any kind is unacceptable.The safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination and harassment. That is why all federally-funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy.We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote healthy, harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Saint-LéonardSaint-Michel for his question.Public transit is a priority for our government because it enables Canadians to spend less time on the road and more time with their loved ones. I am proud of this week's announcement that we will be giving the Société de transport de Montréal over $450 million to help it purchase buses, build a new garage, and renovate Montreal metro system equipment.That is what it means to invest in our communities.
Mr. Speaker, we will continue to protect and to promote our culture.The Broadcasting Act has not been reviewed since 1991. It predates smart phones and the ubiquitous use of the Internet. We are reviewing the act to ensure that it reflects today's realities and that the system in place is fair for everyone. The guiding principle for the review is clear: anyone who profits must contribute. No one gets a free pass.We are also going to protect and strengthen CBC's mandate to make sure that Harper-style budget cuts can never happen again.
Mr. Speaker, I would say that it is the NDP that talks, and talks, and talks, while we deliver results for first nations and indigenous peoples. We have eliminated many boil water advisories, we have built schools, and we are moving forward with partnerships on governance and on treaties. We are working hand in hand with indigenous communities across the country to keep our promise of nation-to-nation reconciliation.We will continue to respectfully work with first nations without claiming to speak for them like the NDP does.
Mr. Speaker, Canada is generally a very safe country, but there have been recent trends of an increase in guns and gangs violence. The responsibility for keeping communities safe starts at home, and working with communities to prevent crime will help them stay safe and resilient. Can the Prime Minister tell us what our government is doing to keep Canadian kids away from gangs, which will allow them to live full and productive lives?
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the choice was clear for Canadians.The NDP was proposing to make Canadians choose between what is good for the environment and what is good for the economy. The Liberal Party told Canadians that we understood how important it was to create a strong economy while protecting the environment. The two go hand in hand.That is exactly what we are doing. We are putting a national price on carbon pollution, implementing a historic oceans protection plan, and securing new markets for our resources.That is what Canadians expect.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's own officials have confirmed that the deficit for this year will be over $18 billion.Can the Prime Minister tell us if he has any idea how much higher the deficit will be as a result of any support that may be necessary for the industries and workers affected by the trade disruption between the United States and Canada?
Mr. Speaker, this government and all Canadians have been very clear. Harassment of any kind is completely unacceptable, and the safety and security of athletes, coaches, and officials is always our top priority. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to participate in a sport environment that is free of discrimination, harassment, and harmful behaviour. That is why all federally funded sport organizations must have an anti-discrimination, harassment, and abuse policy in place to be eligible for sport support program funding, which Sport Canada reviews to ensure compliance. We are currently reviewing our existing funding policies to ensure that organizations continue to promote harassment-free environments.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces were ordered to return their sleeping bags and rucksacks because of an equipment shortage. The Prime Minister is failing our Canadian Armed Forces. Already he broke the Liberal promise and cut another $2.3 billion from defence spending. This is unacceptable. How can Canadians trust the Prime Minister to buy navy ships and fighter jets when he cannot even get buying sleeping bags right? How can we trust him to provide the right equipment to our troops who are about to deploy to Mali?
Mr. Speaker, for 10 years Stephen Harper and his Conservatives did nothing on protecting the environment. However, over those years, a number of provinces stepped up and put forward a price on carbon pollution. Actually, we presently have a situation in which 80% of our citizens live in jurisdictions where there is a carbon price in effect. We are continuing to move forward to demonstrate that a national price on carbon will be fair for those provinces that already have it and grow the economy for everyone.
Mr. Speaker, before selling the Trans Mountain pipeline to the Prime Minister for $4.5 billion, Kinder Morgan valued its Canadian assets at $2.5 billion. That is quite a deal if one is Kinder Morgan. Kinder Morgan did not ask for any Canadian tax dollars. All it wanted to do was to build a pipeline.Why did the Prime Minister pay Kinder Morgan $2 billion more than the pipeline was worth and allow Kinder Morgan to invest and create jobs outside of this country?
Mr. Speaker, today we are launching a new call for proposals under the youth gang prevention program and the crime prevention action fund. These programs address the impact of gangs and violence on youth, especially in indigenous and high-needs communities. This is on top of unprecedented annual funding we announced last year of up to $100 million. We will keep working to enhance public safety by focusing on prevention, effective law enforcement, and strong community partnerships.
Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister prepares to play host to the G7, Canadians and many around the world are asking themselves, What happened to this guy? We all remember that great defender of the planet who promised to end fossil fuels subsidies. However, a new report shows that when it comes to the G7 and those same subsidies, Canada ranks seventh out of seven. That would be last. That would be after Donald Trump's America. Therefore, rather than eliminate the subsidies, the Prime Minister went out and bought a 65-year-old pipeline. When will he end this circle of hypocrisy and finally come clean with Canadians and keep his promise to them and to the world?
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be hosting world leaders in the beautiful region of Charlevoix. When I was there, I learned that a company from La Baie, a borough of Saguenay, won the contract to supply food to all the security and military personnel who will be present. This community will be reaping substantial profits.I can assure my colleague that the compensation policies for affected local businesses are exactly the same as they were when the Conservatives hosted their summit in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, this week we all heard the many traumatizing stories of sexual abuse from Canadian athletes. This is unacceptable, and the government must do something to protect our athletes. National sports bodies in Canada are responsible for policing themselves in matters of sexual abuse. What is wrong with this picture? It creates conflicts of interest and endangers the safety of our athletes.When will the government do something to keep these young athletes safe?
Mr. Speaker, strong action is needed to tackle climate change, all the while generating the long-term economic development that will grow the middle class and support a clean economy.Yesterday, on World Environment Day, we appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change. Working together on climate change, oceans, and clean energy is one of the key themes of our G7 presidency. We are working to ensure that we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is looking to politicize the fact that today is the 74th anniversary of the D-Day invasion, but we on this side of the House are thinking about what unfolded on the shores of Normandy and paying tribute to our fallen soldiers. The monumental achievements of those young men transformed this great country. Their determination to fight for freedom, democracy, peace, and security was passed down to future generations. As an expression of our gratitude to their bravery and perseverance, we thank and salute the men and women who played a pivotal role all those years ago. Lest we forget.
Mr. Speaker, I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to move the following motion: That the House: 1) send good wishes for the G7 summit in Charlevoix; 2) protect the right to protest, but condemn potential acts of violence; 3) thank and congratulate the police forces that will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe; and 4) support the enforcement of the same guidelines for compensating residents and business owners in the Charlevoix area and in Quebec City as those enforced by the Harper government in Huntsville in 2010.
Mr. Speaker, $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money is going directly to Houston, Texas. That is eight times more than Kinder Morgan spent on the pipeline. That is $2 billion more than Kinder Morgan itself estimated the pipeline to be worth.When Kinder Morgan executives made that deal, they called Houston.They did not say, Houston, we have a problem. No, instead, they said, Houston, it's party time with $4.5 billion of Canadian taxpayers' money, thanks to the Liberal Party of Canada.Why is the Liberal government sending $4.5 billion to Texas?
Mr. Speaker, the Official Languages Act is important to our party and also to our country. Protecting Canada's linguistic minorities is at the core of who we are as a country. We will continue to stand up for linguistic minorities and strive to improve the Official Languages Act.I can confirm that we are preparing to modernize the Official Languages Act. We will work with all Canadians to ensure we get it right.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member opposite's expertise in trickle-down economics. That is what the Conservatives specialized in for 10 years. They gave boutique tax credits to wealthy Canadians, delivered child benefit cheques to millionaire families, and then when we moved forward with lowering taxes for the middle class and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, they voted against it. Then we moved forward on a Canada child benefit to give more money to nine out of 10 Canadian families and did not send child benefit cheques to millionaires, while lifting hundreds of thousands of kids out of poverty. The Conservatives voted against it. Their positions are clear.
Mr. Speaker, Montreal's public transit system is the most heavily used in the country. Many Montrealers make the eco-friendly choice to get around the city by metro, bus, and bike share. I am very pleased with our government's recent decision to help with planning the blue line extension to Anjou.I would like to ask the Prime Minister how the government plans to help maintain the existing network and ensure quality service going forward.
Mr. Speaker, the real impact of climate change cannot be understated. The challenge governments face is striking the right balance between an evolving economy and protection of the environment now and for future generations.The Minister of Environment and Climate Change repeatedly says that We're all in this together as a global community and that international collaboration is essential to make sure we are leaving a healthy environment and a strong economy to our kids and grandkids. Can the Prime Minister describe Canada's global plan to meet these global challenges?
Mr. Speaker, our party created supply management. Our party has always unequivocally defended supply management. We will continue to do so. Dairy producers in Quebec and across Canada know just how much we support for them.We will always defend the supply management system. However, if the Conservatives want to talk about supply management, I would ask the Leader of the Opposition why he appointed someone who opposes supply management as the critic for innovation and economic development.
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, Canadians asked our government to step up on reconciliation and build a new relationship, nation to nation, with indigenous peoples, and that is exactly what we are doing. In partnership with them, in respect with them, we are working with indigenous communities across this country to respond to their needs, to deliver on the services they need, to build the housing, invest in the schools, and create the infrastructure necessary for them to determine their own future and for them to thrive in this country.We are doing this hand in hand, in partnership, in respect, and that is what we will continue to do.
Mr. Speaker, now more than ever Canada needs to open up new markets and diversify our trading relationships. The trans-Pacific partnership would achieve just that. Despite the Prime Minister's delaying and jeopardizing that deal, it is essential that the bill implementing the deal be passed quickly. When will the Prime Minister commit to introducing the legislation for this trade agreement and can he commit that it will be passed before the House rises?
Mr. Speaker, responding to questions about the fisheries minister's surf clam decision, the minister's most senior official confirmed that the Liberal-connected Five Nations had the lowest participation of first nations out of all the applicants. She also confirmed that she had no knowledge of the minister's family connection to the unincorporated entity. She confirmed multiple times that this was the minister's sole, personal decision.When did the minister become aware of the minister's family connections, and when did he know that Five Nations had the least amount of indigenous participation?
Mr. Speaker, we hear the government just spent $4.5 billion in renewable energies, but it spent it on a pipeline.Last week, the majority of MPs had the good sense to vote in favour of the bill introduced by my colleague from AbitibiBaie-JamesNunavikEeyou to enshrine the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People in Canadian law. The Prime Minister himself voted in favour of it.How can he say he respects indigenous rights while forcing a pipeline through despite opposition from a number of first nations?
Mr. Speaker, well, we only wish that were true.Canada is a country rich in natural resources, home to innovative businesses, and populated by hard-working Canadians. Our country should be attracting investment, but instead we are repelling it. In fact, we are so opposed to private sector investment in the energy sector that we have killed three pipeline projects worth over $100 billion. Now, we have taken $4.5 billion and given it to Kinder Morgan to take its projects elsewhere.When will the Prime Minister stop attacking Canada's energy sector and start putting the interests of Canadians first?
Mr. Speaker, I want to pause to thank Canadians. Over the past months, and indeed over a year now, Canadians have been united in our approach to dealing with the U.S. administration. Across political lines, across provincial capitals, across industries, Canadians have been speaking with a clear and united voice that we stand together and that we stand against punitive measures by the United States, that we will support our neighbours, that we will support our workers, and that we will remain united and proud Canadians. I want to thank all members of this House and all Canadians for the solidarity they continue to show on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, as we have said from the very beginning, with this particular American administration, we have to be ready for everything, and we are.That is why, as soon as the U.S. put forward punitive, unacceptable tariffs on steel and aluminum in Canada, we were, right away, ready with a list of retaliatory measures that target American companies and American producers for which there are alternatives available to Canadian citizens. We know that tariffs end up hurting the citizens of the country that brings them in. We want to avoid hurting Canadians. That is why we are consulting with Canadians on those retaliatory measures.
Mr. Speaker, this is yet another example of a government that talks a lot, but is always missing in action when it comes to making important decisions that affect entire indigenous communities.Last week it voted to support the rights of indigenous peoples. This week, it is voting against our motion, which is a concrete way to support these rights.Can the Liberals do more than just talk, and talk, and talk about the rights of indigenous people?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister spoke about the review of the CRTC Act. The last time the Official Languages Act was comprehensively reviewed was when the Conservatives were in power in 1988. In light of the new challenges and issues they are dealing with, francophones, Acadians, and anglophones from Quebec are all asking that the act be reviewed. The Federal Court agrees and is asking Parliament to review the act. The Liberals are the only ones not on board.What exactly is the Prime Minister waiting for to modernize the Official Languages Act?
Mr. Speaker, Conservatives are always thinking about tax cuts. I will correct the blues after this to make sure they reflect tax hikes.On the subject of tariffs, we know that tariffs collected by the government will raise revenue for the Government of Canada. Will the Prime Minister assure the House and Canadians that any new revenue for the government will be used to lower taxes for affected workers and the businesses that employ them?
Mr. Speaker, in Kinder Morgan's 2017 annual report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, it valued the Trans Mountain pipeline at $2.5 billion, and yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion to purchase the pipeline. We now know that a lot of the extra padding went to executive bonuses.If Kinder Morgan says its pipeline is worth $2.5 billion, why did the Prime Minister pay it $4.5 billion in taxpayers' money to leave Canada?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Today, during question, I referred to the defence spending shortfall by the government. This information comes from the document, Strong, Secure, Engaged So Far by David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. I am going to ask for consent to table this. The document states: ...the capital allocations to date are falling well short of the projections contained in SSE. The DND's capital allocation for 2017/2018 as of Supplementary Estimates C for 2017/2018 was $4 billion (the green dot in Figure 6). This final year-end allocation represents the maximum DND can spend on capital in 2017/2018. This is well short of the $6.3 billion in capital spending projected for 2017/2018 in SSE... I ask for unanimous consent to table this report so Canadians can get all the information they need, as well as inform the government of all its own shortfalls.
Mr. Speaker, in 2015, the Prime Minister was a superstar, a breath of fresh air, and a new champion of the environment. Three years later, everyone is shaking their heads. What happened to Canada? What happened to Mr. Selfie, to Paris Match's new pet?After adopting Stephen Harper's targets, the Prime Minister bought a pipeline. Today, we learned that Canada ranks lowest among the G7 countries when it comes to eliminating oil subsidies. We came in seventh out seven.Will the Prime Minister finally keep his promise, do the right thing, and eliminate all oil subsidies?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has a budget bill before the House of Commons right now that Finance Canada admits will raise the price of gas, home heating, and most other consumer goods that Canadians buy.How much will the Prime Minister's carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I had the privilege of sitting down with representatives of indigenous communities that will be affected by this new pipeline. We talked about the impact on their communities. We have set up a committee to consult and listen to communities. We will ensure that the pipeline has a positive impact, and we will minimize any negative repercussions. I am proud of the reconciliation work we are doing. We will keep working with all indigenous peoples. We will listen to them. We will respect all points of view.
Mr. Speaker, our decision to introduce indigenous participation is consistent with our commitment to developing a renewed relationship between Canada and indigenous peoples. Enhancing access to the Arctic surf clam fishery broadens the distribution of benefits from this public resource, and it is a powerful step toward reconciliation. When the Conservatives went through a similar process to increase access to this fishery, they chose to exclude indigenous peoples. Of course, the member will continue to work with the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and follow his advice.
Mr. Speaker, I hate to have to correct the member opposite. In fact, it was during his government that many provinces moved forward on pricing carbon pollution. We have a situation in which British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Ontario have all moved forward with pricing of carbon pollution, and we know that it has to be done right across the country. That is exactly what we are ensuring, but we are working with the provinces to ensure they can put forward a model that works for them, as long as it is fairly stringent and impactful right across the country.
Mr. Speaker, during his interview on U.S. television last weekend, the Prime Minister spoke about NAFTA negotiations on supply management.The Prime Minister said, We were moving towards flexibility in those areas that I thought was very, very promising.What concessions has the Prime Minister made on supply management?
Mr. Speaker, we made a commitment to Canadians that said we understood we needed to grow the economy and protect the environment together. Those on the other side of the House would have Canadians believe that there is still a choice to be made between what is good for the economy and what is good for the environment. We on this side of the House know they must go together. That is why we are moving forward with a world-class oceans protection plan, a national price on carbon pollution, and getting our resources to new markets, other than the United States, for our oil. That is what we know we need to do. That is what we are going to keep doing, despite the false choice proposed by the members opposite.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised Canadians he would be a climate change leader, and he committed to eliminate public subsidies for oil and gas companies. However, climate change leaders do not buy pipelines with public money. Climate change leaders do not allow $3 million bonuses to be given to top oil executives. Climate change leaders do use public money to build long-term job creation in renewable energies. Could the government explain why it makes sense for a climate change leader to buy a pipeline?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am pleased to inform the House that proper notice was in fact given last night. There was a point of clarification. If the member checks Hansard and reads just a bit further on, as a member who was here until midnight, I can assure him clarification was indeed given.
Mr. Speaker, in March, the President of the United States announced that he would be introducing tariffs on steel and aluminum. After that, he announced there would be an exemption for Canada and Mexico until May 1. He then announced a further extension of that exemption until June 1. Most recently, he indicated that, of course, the exemption was going to be lifted. All through that time, the Prime Minister had an opportunity to consult on the tariffs that he is now proposing to counter the steel and aluminum tariffs. My question is simple. Why did he wait so long and put us in a position where we cannot react right away?
Mr. Speaker, I am going to help the Prime Minister out. Conservatives and Liberals voted for Bill C-23, which gave unprecedented powers to American border officers on Canadian soil. Luckily, the NDP was here raising exactly these concerns, because now what we are seeing in the Senate report is that with the legalization of marijuana, any person on Canadian soil, not crossing the border and subject to another country's laws, but here in Canada, could potentially be fined or imprisoned under that very legislation.My question for the Prime Minister is simple. Is that the case, yes or no? When will he finally take that issue up with his American counterparts?
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the member opposite's voice, but I do need to highlight that there are a range of voices in indigenous communities and we need to listen to all of them. There are people in indigenous communities who were opposed to this pipeline and other economic development projects. There are some who are in favour of it. We are working with all of them, including through entities like the Indigenous Advisory and Monitoring Committee, a committee that we put together exactly for the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. We are going to continue to work in the spirit of reconciliation on a nation-to-nation relationship that respects UNDRIP.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians really are watching what is going on because they are quite concerned. They see an economy that is going to be put at risk and they are looking for answers from the Prime Minister. Unfortunately, today we have not received any answers from the Prime Minister. He was asked four times about how much a carbon tax would cost a Canadian family. He did not tell us the answer. He was asked how much more deficit was going to be accumulated because of the trade war we are in. He did not give us an answer. These are things that Canadians care about. He did give us one answer. He told us that he is going to introduce legislation to affirm the CPTPP, the free-trade deal that we negotiated. Will he guarantee that it is going to pass?
Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to stand today in the House and express my concern in regard to comments made by our hon. Prime Minister during answering questions in regard to the carbon tax. He indicated to the House that he had worked with all the provinces and that the provinces were working toward this with him. Clearly, we all know the Province of Saskatchewan is not in agreement.
Mr. Speaker, at the moment I will not seek to table documents. I have a point of order on a totally unrelated standing order that I think is very well grounded.
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions, and I hope you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: that the House hope for the success of the G7 meeting in La Malbaie and defend the right to protest, but denounce possible acts of violence and vandalism, thank the police forces who will be deployed this week to keep residents and visitors safe, and call on the government to formally pledge to compensate residents and business owners in the unfortunate event of unrest and damage in the Charlevoix region and in the city of Quebec.
Mr. Speaker, in a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent. There has been a considerable amount of misinformation on that side of the House in regard to the minister's decision to award the lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and those with close family ties to the Liberal Party of Canada.The minister, along with the Prime Minister, have repeatedly said this was about reconciliation, and they have misrepresented the previous government's commitment to the indigenous participation with this fishery.Yesterday at committee the minister's most senior staff acknowledged the commitment of the previous government to aboriginal participation in this fishery. In order to clear up the government's inaccurate misrepresentation once and for all, I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Government of Canada 2015 news release, which states: With this increase in TAC, the Integrated Fisheries Management Plan provision for new entrants has been triggered and, as such, Fisheries and Oceans Canada is commencing a process to introduce a new entrant or new entrants to the fishery. This process includes consultation with the current licence holder, industry and First Nations and will conclude in the coming weeks.
Mr. Speaker, this is not a novel point of order. It relates to Standing Order 16 and 18, but in particular to Standing Order 16, related to interrupting members when they speak, in this case, the Prime Minister. I can assure other members that I feel like screaming a good deal of the time when I listen to the Prime Minister, but I do not. It violates the rules of this place when I cannot hear the Prime Minister deliver a response. I do not recall, from this seat, having trouble hearing Stephen Harper. I do not think he spoke louder than the current Prime Minister. The noise from this quarter of Conservatives is unacceptable. It violates our rules.
Mr. Speaker, on the member's first comment, it is true that we just appointed Patricia Fuller as Canada's new ambassador for climate change.On the issue of pipelines, for 10 years the Conservatives tried to move forward on getting our oil resources to new markets, and they failed. They failed because they refused to understand that the only way to grow a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. That is what we are demonstrating with a national price on carbon pollution, with a world-class oceans protection plan, with $8 billion worth of investment in clean energy projects and renewable technologies. We know the way
Mr. Speaker, we have no doubt that the Prime Minister will work with any politician as part of his plan to raise taxes on Canadians. It is his form of trickle-down economics. He scoops up money from working class consumers, gives it to the federal government, trickles it down to provincial politicians, and then expects us to believe that a few drops will go back to the people who originally paid for it in the first place. If that is true, then why can he not tell us this. How much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, an event like the G7 summit naturally has an impact on local residents. Everyone knows that. Not only are honest workers currently prevented from getting to their place of work, but local shops, businesses, and homes will be exposed to vandalism.Under such circumstances, we would expect the government to look after victims of vandalism and provide compensation.Will the Prime Minister formally promise to compensate every victim of vandalism during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, if policies are neglected, they are worthless. The government has to have zero tolerance for sexual abuse in Canadian sports. Right now, the onus is on sporting organizations to be responsible for policing these complaints. That is not fair to these organizations. Canada needs an independent body to handle cases of sexual abuse in Canadian sport. Under the recent Safe Sport Act in the United States, independent bodies investigate these cases. It is time for Canada to do the same. When is the government going to step up?
Mr. Speaker, we have known for a long time that under this U.S. administration, our trade relationship has been volatile and under grave risk.Given this, can the Prime Minister tell us how much money was set aside in his budget and where we might find any mention of a contingency plan to deal with the trade disruption between Canada and the United States?
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister uses the word stringent. There is no doubt that it will have a stringent effect on household budgets. There is also no doubt the Prime Minister supports high gas prices. He said so when he was in Vancouver, celebrating $1.60 a litre gas prices. There is also no doubt that his carbon tax will raise the price of consumer goods upon which middle-class Canadians rely.It is his bill, so how much will his carbon tax cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table some important documents I believe the House needs to see so everybody can then have a fulsome discussion. We asked the Prime Minister four times today, although we have actually been asking for weeks, about the price and the cost of the carbon tax. We have documents here that my hon. colleague, the member for Carleton, has worked very hard to get, which would reveal the cost of the carbon tax to Canadians. Unfortunately they have been redacted, but it would be important I table those documents today. This is something that has been in dispute. We are getting ready to rise very soon for the summer, and Canadians need to know how much the carbon tax is going to cost.
Mr. Speaker, if the provinces were already doing it, the Prime Minister would not have to introduce a budget bill forcing them to do it. Clearly this is a federally imposed tax. Clearly he would have read the briefing notes that his departments have given him about the cost of that tax. He knows the cost.Again, how much will this Liberal carbon tax imposed by the Prime Minister cost the average Canadian family?
Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear about one thing. The reason we are moving forward on the legalization of marijuana is because the current system does not work. It does not protect our kids from the harmful impact of marijuana, and it delivers billions of dollars every year to criminal organizations that make profits off of that. We are also highlighting that cannabis is not somehow a positive health food supplement that we encourage everyone to use. It is a controlled substance. We are trying to make it more difficult for kids to access, and people need to be honest when they cross the border if they choose to enter a different country.
Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Conservatives are feeling a bit lost. For years, they have been demanding that we do what they could not, and that is to build a pipeline to give Canada access to new markets other than the United States. The Conservatives were unable to do that, but we did so, at their request. Now that we have delivered on their main demand, they have to try to find a way to attack us and play petty politics. Fortunately, workers across Canada understand that we did the right thing for them.
Mr. Speaker, we are, of course, in ongoing discussions with our American counterparts on a broad range of border issues, and we will continue to be, but at the same time, I hope the NDP is not suggesting that somehow a sovereign country cannot make determinations about how it handles people entering its own borders. Of course, we would never expect or allow any other country to dictate to us who or how we can or cannot let someone into our country. We will ensure that we are also respecting other countries' sovereignty in doing that at the same time as we stand up for Canadians, and of course, for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Mr. Speaker, every day the Liberal government demonstrates how completely out of touch it is with the farming community. The Liberals called our farmers tax cheats and are imposing a carbon tax that farmers do not want. They are changing Canada's food guide and imposing labels that make no sense on agricultural products. All their actions are having so-called unintended consequences on farmers.My question for the Prime Minister is quite simple. Does he also believe that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice are a health hazard?
Members who are asking me to sit down should listen, especially the members of PROC, who know the rules.My good colleague from Red DeerLacombe gave an important point of order, and in response to it the government House leader said something like As a member who was here until midnight last night. It is an important convention in this House not to refer to the presence or absence of members during debate. I do not know if she was referring to herself or to my good friend from Red DeerLacombe, but especially during late sittings, it is a grievous violation of the rules of procedure for members to make insinuations about who was or was not here late into the night. I think the government House leader should be called to order.
Mr. Speaker, during question period, I did not refer to a historic event that occurred in 1971, the well-known Apollo 13, On the contrary, I was referring to a very specific document, issued in the United States, regarding Kinder Morgan's financial statements.As all Canadians know, Kinder Morgan just received $4.5 billion in Canadian taxpayers' money for the Trans Mountain pipeline. In the first table on page 134 of that document, it states in black and white that the pipeline was assessed at $2.5 billion.I ask for the unanimous consent of the House to table this document so that Canadians are fully informed of the facts.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague from BeauportCôte-de-BeaupréÎle d'OrléansCharlevoix, I would like to move a motion in the House, but first I would like to give some background. The G7, a major event, is starting soon. This kind of event sometimes attracts mass protests that sadly lead to unrest. Over the past few months, serious concerns about this event have been raised in the media or through public consultations by many residents from the ridings of Québec, represented by the Minister of Families, Louis-Hébert, represented by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, Louis-Saint-Laurent, CharlesbourgHaute-Saint-Charles, and BeauportLimoilou, where protests will
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives like to talk a good game on farmers, but the reality is different. While the previous government cut nearly $700 million from agriculture and agrifood, we have invested in hard-working Canadian farmers.Our government signed CETA, which will boost our agricultural exports by one and a half billion dollars a year, and the CPTPP, which will boost our agricultural exports by over a billion dollars a year. We have secured our $2-billion canola trade with China. We have invested $100 million in agricultural science and innovation. We have invested $350 million to help dairy farmers and processors modernize. We will always
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals voted against the NDP motion to implement the rights of indigenous peoples in their pipeline project, but just a few days ago voted to put those same rights into Canadian law. The Prime Minister cannot pretend that indigenous voices are all the same and ignore the clear opposition to his pipeline. The Liberals are denying the rights of first nations, Métis, and Inuit people. Does the government really not see that or does it just not care?
Mr. Speaker, after two years, one month, and 14 days of incessant consultation, the Minister of Canadian Heritage finally made an announcement yesterday. I could hardly believe it. Did she have new measures or reforms to announce? Of course not. She announced a new panel of experts, the second in two years, which will issue its recommendations in 2020, after the next election. That is cynicism. Two years ago, the minister was bragging about her political courage and promised legislative changes in 2017.By doing nothing for four years, is this government not jeopardizing our culture for no other reason than to get re-elected at the expense of our culture?
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' budget has in fact turned out to be built on borrowing and tax cuts on those very same middle-class Canadians they pretend to want to help.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw to the attention of the House a matter concerning the notice of time allocation regarding Bill C-59. Bill C-59 was referred to committee before second reading and is now before the House at report stage. If you read Standing Order 78(3), Mr. Speaker, it allows a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading of a bill provided that the bill is consistent with Standing Order 76.1(10).Standing Order 76.1(10) refers to a bill that was sent to committee after second reading, not before second reading. Standing Order 76.1(10) is the Standing Order that deals with the report stage of a bill that was referred to committee before second reading and Standing Order 78(3) does not refer to it.Therefore, there is no provision in our Standing Orders that would allow a time allocation motion to cover both the report and third reading stages of a bill that was sent to committee prior to second reading.I concede time allocation motions have covered both the report and third reading stages of some bills that were referred to committee before second reading, however, no member had ever objected to this practice nor pointed out to the Speaker that it was simply out of order. The fact that the former opposition turned a blind eye to this breach does not make it right.Since Bill C-59 is the first in this Parliament that has been referred to committee before second reading and notice having been given to time allocate, now is the time, Mr. Speaker, for you to take a look at this matter and ensure the government begins following the House rules.Finally, I would add one point to my submission. Standing Order 76.1(10) deems the report stage of Bill C-59 to be an integral part of second reading. We are actually talking about two stages plus third reading, another situation not anticipated by Standing Order 78(3).
[Member spoke in Inuktitut][English]Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Two communities in my riding have recently declared that they are in crisis. These declarations stem from the fact that there are too few mental health supports and an increased number of suicide attempts. Of the recent $118 million announced for first nations and Inuit mental health, Nunavut receives only $500,000 annually, despite the fact that the suicide rate is 10 times the national average. The current government has sent additional support to first nations communities in crisis. Will the government do the same for Inuit communities?
Mr. Speaker, it is a real shame to see the trapped ideology of the Conservatives who are playing politics with this issue. I can tell them that I was just in Alberta yesterday talking to oil sands workers, talking to pipeline workers, who are deeply grateful that we are able to move forward on building this pipeline project after years of the Conservatives being unable to do so. Why were the Conservatives unable to do so? It is because they did not understand that the only way to build a strong economy is to protect the environment at the same time. This government is doing both, and that is why we are getting it done.
Mr. Speaker, we recognize that the mental health challenges facing indigenous people are deep-rooted, and the need for support is immense. In Nunavut, we are working with our partners and have invested $189 million over 10 years in the community-led Nunavut wellness agreement as well as $8.4 million, this year alone, for mental health support for Inuit. We are supporting ITK's national Inuit suicide-prevention strategy and will continue to work with partners to respond to the mental health needs in the territory.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite well knows that the government will be there for workers and industries affected by these punitive American measures. That is what I told steel and aluminum workers over the past months as I travelled across the country to engage with them.It is interesting that the member opposite speaks about deficits. In the last election, Canadians had a very clear choice. The Conservatives, their choice, their option, was actually austerity and cuts. Our proposal to Canadians was investing in the middle class and the people working hard to join it, investing in our communities, and growing the economy the way the Conservatives were not able to for 10 years.
Mr. Speaker, one almost has to feel sorry for the Conservatives. For 10 years, they tried to get this done, and were unable to do it. Then, for two and a half years, while we were in government, they have been screaming at us to get this pipeline built, and now, when we are finally getting this pipeline built, they do not know what to do with themselves. So they fall back on their silly attacks, on playing politics, on their rigid ideology that somehow, suddenly, they do not think that public investment has any place in the development of our natural resources, which, of course, the great Peter Lougheed disagreed with them about. We know that we are doing the right thing, the right way.
Mr. Speaker, a Senate report has just concluded that Canadians who use cannabis after it is legalized and try to cross the border to the United States could be denied entry, but worse, those who do not answer certain questions in pre-clearance could face up to two years in prison under Bill C-23, which calls it resisting or wilfully obstructing an American officer, even on Canadian soil.Can the Prime Minister confirm whether or not Canadians who simply refuse to answer American officers in Canada about their cannabis use could face fines or imprisonment?
Mr. Speaker, I very much respect the laundry list the member put forward. However, we can list the concrete results we have delivered for Canadians over the past two and a half years. Whether it be signing the CPTPP, which the Conservatives were not moving forward on; whether it was concretizing a CETA that was in dire straits when we came into office; whether it is delivering an energy infrastructure that will get our oil resources to new markets, which they failed to do for 10 years; whether it is actually investing in infrastructure in our communities, lowering taxes for the middle class, and raising them on the wealthiest 1%, these are the things that
Mr. Speaker, three years ago, a young Cree girl was suffering chronic pain and was taking daily medication for a jaw misalignment. She simply needed $6,000 in dental work. Instead of showing compassion and common sense, the government decided to take Josey and her family to court, for over $110,000 in costs, to fight. Seven months ago, we suggested that it was time to quit the fight and show some compassion and change the policy.Can the Prime Minister tell us how this represents using taxpayer dollars for reconciliation?
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite pointed out that he thinks about tax cuts. The issue is that Conservatives think about tax cuts for the wealthiest Canadians.The first thing we did was bring in a tax cut for the middle class, and we raised taxes on the wealthiest 1%. For 10 years, Conservatives tried to put forward an agenda for growth that was focused on giving benefits and boutique tax cuts to the wealthiest Canadians, hoping that somehow it would trickle down to everyone else.It did not, which is why the Conservatives had terrible growth for 10 years. We are investing in the middle class and those working hard to join it, and giving them more money
Mr. Speaker, farmers are struggling to survive and the Liberal imposed taxes are not helping. Now the agriculture minister is claiming that farmers support the Liberal carbon tax. The chair of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers said, I'm not sure who has been briefing [the] Minister... but he is dead wrong if he thinks that most farmers support a carbon tax.Does the Prime Minister agree with the minister that farmers like his carbon tax or will he listen to farmers and recognize that the carbon tax is crippling our farm families?
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will be asking for unanimous consent to table some documents. The documents speak to the issue of Kinder Morgan and the fact that it valued its assets at $2.5 billion, yet the Prime Minister paid $4.5 billion.I would like to table these documents, the SEC filings of Kinder Morgan Canada, to show that the assets are in fact valued at $2.5 billion in spite of the Prime Minister's assertion.
Mr. Speaker, during question period I asked the Prime Minister a question about the upcoming food labelling policy. I asked him whether he believed that yogourt, cheese, and fruit juice were health hazards. Based on the Prime Minister's answer, it seems clear that he had the wrong paper.I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to table the brief from Les Producteurs de lait du Québec, which confirms that the policy to put warning labels on the front of packaging could stigmatize a number of dairy products. I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House to inform the Prime Minister of the impact that the food labelling policy will have on milk producers.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a moment I will once again be seeking unanimous support. Unfortunately, it seems the government continues to suppress the facts in the surf clam case. I would like to seek unanimous consent to table the Federal Court documents pertaining to the current case against the government in regard to the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard awarding a lucrative surf clam contract to his colleague's brother and his wife's cousin. These documents
Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister announced that the G7 would be held in La Malbaie, his government also said that workers in the region would be put to use. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Workers everywhere are currently in a situation of forced unemployment.Can the Prime Minister tell the people of La Malbaie whether compensation is provided for and what he is going to do for the hotel managers, innkeepers, and restaurant owners who are unable to put their employees to work before and during the G7?
Mr. Speaker, on June 6, 1944, 14,000 Canadian soldiers landed on the beaches of Normandy. On June 6, 2018, our soldiers are being asked to hand in their rucksacks and sleeping bags to the quartermaster. This is outrageous. What is the Prime Minister doing in the meantime? He is spending $10 million on Omar Khadr, $7 billion on a pipeline that a company could have taken care of itself, and $7 million on a temporary skating rink right here in front of Parliament.Mr. Prime Minister, do you think that we are going to send our soldiers to Mali under those conditions?
Sorry, tax hikes.