2018-10-30

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister continues to treat our democracy like his own personal game. He sets the rules and Canadians are his pawns. Canadians were told today that he had chosen a commissioner of debates for federal elections. He has done this without any discussion or consultation with Canadians. When will the Prime Minister stop acting like a dictator and start respecting our democracy?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have seen the egregious holes in our income tax system with the paradise papers, the Panama papers, the Isle of Man scam and offshore tax havens. Wealthy Canadians getting off the hook on paying taxes.The Liberal government has done virtually nothing to crack down on offshore tax havens, but it has targeted regular Canadians. Under the Liberal government, well over $1 billion has been clawed back from Canadians, many of whom qualify for the disability tax credit or Canada child benefits.Why are the Liberals denying benefits to families who deserve them?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians just do not trust Liberals with their private information. However, just as importantly, Canadians want to know why the government needs to know who they pay, how much they pay, what they purchase online and what they are giving to their children through e-transfers. Canadians want to know why the government needs to know that and not even tell Canadians they are going to be told about it.This is Big Brother on steroids. It needs to stop. The Prime Minister has the ability to stop it. Why will he not stop this unauthorized surveillance of Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, the minister says these questions are inappropriate. In the first part of question period, there was a lot of talk about data protection. Mark Norman wants data for his legal defence. The only protection going on is the Liberals protecting their butts, both literally and figuratively, with Mr. Butts.Will the government permit the Clerk of the Privy Council to appear before the ethics committee to confirm that none of the materials related to the shipbuilding cabinet discussions have been destroyed, deleted or amended?

Mr. Speaker, identity theft is not a joke. Millions of families suffer every year. The Prime Minister is putting Canadians' personal information and identity at risk. There is no way to ensure this information will be protected when earlier this year Statistics Canada lost 600 files under his watch. The government has no right to track every financial decision of every Canadian citizen. Will the Liberals cancel this unprecedented and unauthorized surveillance?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday on the picket line with Canada Post workers I learned that the company has suspended a number of benefits, including short-term disability payments. Michael Wall, who has been employed at the company since 2004 and has a serious illness, is depending on those payments in order to make ends meet. For Canada Post to respond to the strike by attacking its most vulnerable workers is cynical and cruel. While the strike is rotating, these cuts in payments are not. Will the minister be complicit in this mistreatment of Michael and those like him or will she get on the phone today and tell Canada Post to back off?

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege concerning a deliberate attempt by the government to deny me information I requested through Order Paper Question No. 1316. This question read as follows: With regard to the tweet by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change on November 7, 2017, which stated that “Canada salutes Nicaragua and Syria for joining on to the Paris Agreement”: what are the titles of all individuals who approved the tweet? The answer states: We have been clear: the murderous Assad regime must end the indiscriminate violence against its own people. The people of Syria deserve a life free from violence. Canada will continue to support the Syrian people in reaching this goal and in achieving a long-term political solution. Clearly the tweet was a mistake for which the Minister of Environment and Climate Change took full responsibility both through online communications and in the House of Commons. In addition to this being a non-answer, and the subject of my question of privilege, I believe, Mr. Speaker, that you will find that the response actually breaches the Standing Orders as well, and that is a point I will get to later.I was contacted last week by Dean Beeby, of the CBC, about an access to information request he had received an answer to. It is in reference to the tweet I referenced in my question. He suggested that his ATIP had turned up the actual document that shows the names and titles of those who were involved in approving the tweet. Mr. Beeby went on to publish this article on Thursday, October 25, 2018, and the article confirms that Mr. Beeby had indeed obtained information from the government through an ATIP that I could not obtain through a legitimate proceeding of Parliament. The article says: CBC News has obtained documents under the Access to Information Act showing the minister's office gave a final thumbs-up to the tweet 51 minutes before it popped up on [the Minister of the Environment]'s official ministerial Twitter feed last Nov. 7.... The minister noted repeatedly that the social-media misstep occurred on the departmental Twitter account, rather than on her personal Twitter account, suggesting public servants were to blame. Mr. Speaker, I did suspect all along that this was true as well. Because the government held back these details from me, I could not present the evidence to the House in my role as an opposition member. The article went on to report: “The tweet in question was approved by the MO [minister's office] at 2:09 p.m. today and issued at 3:00 PM," says an assessment.... The package shows the names of at least 31 public servants involved in the ill-advised tweet. The released documents show the pre-publication vetting was carried out in advance by the department's “social media” and “home” teams, as well as by [the Minister of the Environment]'s office staff, whose names have been removed from the file. Finally, the article points out that the government also violated the timelines set out in the Access to Information Act. Now, that is not your problem, Mr. Speaker, but it does provide you with more evidence of the government's intent to avoid this issue by withholding information from me and delaying information to the media.I would make one final point. Nowhere in the Access to Information Act does it permit a minister to refuse the names of ministerial staff when providing a response to an access to information request.I do not begrudge Mr. Beeby the fact that he received an answer, but when a journalist and a member of Parliament ask the same question, one would expect the government to at least give the same respect to the member of Parliament as it gave to the journalist, or put another way, treat a proceeding in Parliament with the same respect as an ATIP. In this case, I was given debate and an argument for an answer, whereas the journalist was actually given the answer. Not only is this an affront to the House, in so committing this offence, the government also breached the standing order I mentioned earlier. It is Standing Order 39(1), which says, in part: in putting any such question or in replying to the same no argument or opinion is to be offered, nor any facts stated, except so far as may be necessary to explain the same; and in answering any such question the matter to which the same refers shall not be debated. On December 16, 1980, at page 5797 of Hansard, the Speaker ruled: While it is correct to say that the government is not required by our rules to answer written or oral questions, it would be bold to suggest that no circumstance could ever exist for a prima facie question of privilege to be made where there was a deliberate attempt to deny answers to an hon. member. Omitting the information I was seeking in the government's response to my question and providing exactly what I was seeking to Mr. Beeby demonstrates that the government deliberately withheld information from the House.On page 251 of the 24th edition of Erskin May, it described the contempt as follows: Generally speaking, any action or omission which obstructs or impedes either House of Parliament in the performance of its functions, or which obstructs or impedes any Member or officer of such House in the discharge of his duty, or which has a tendency, directly or indirectly, to produce such results, may be treated as contempt even though there is no precedence of the offence. The government keeps repeating the same offence over and over again. After numerous questions of privilege and warnings from the Chair, it continues to deny members information while providing the same or more accurate information to the media. I think it is important at this time to present to the House a few select examples of when you, Mr. Speaker, took notice of this pattern and heeded a warning. On April 16, 2016, the Speaker found a prima facie question of privilege after the Leader of the Opposition pointed out that specific and detailed information contained in Bill C-14 was given to the media ahead of this House and members of Parliament. During that discussion, Speaker Milliken was referenced, from his ruling of March 19, 2001, when he said: To deny to Members information concerning business that is about to come before the House, while at the same time providing such information to media that will likely be questioning Members about that business, is a situation that the Chair cannot condone. That is exactly the situation I was facing when Mr. Beeby approached me to comment on information he was given and I was not. While he was not impeded in the performance of his function as a journalist, clearly I was impeded in the performance of my function as a member in this place, which breaches my privileges and constitutes a contempt of this House, as outlined in our procedural authorities.

I want to be very clear, Mr. Speaker. The Prime Minister is telling Canadians that it is okay for their government to understand all of their financial information held by banks, all of their financial information held by credit agencies, all of their financial information held by utilities and by their mobile phones. Every single thing we use in our lives is something that the current government wants to have its hands on. This is ridiculous. Will the government tell Statistics Canada to back down from—

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals made that appointment without any consultation with the other parties. What the Prime Minister has done is made a unilateral decision to name the debates commissioner, set the rules and spend $5.5 million to set up the officer of the commissioner, an office nobody was asking for except for the Prime Minister's Office. The Prime Minister continues to abuse our democracy for his own political gain. Will the Prime Minister abandon his attempt to manipulate and rig the upcoming election?

Mr. Speaker, to go back to the CRA, we have made historic investments to fight against tax cheats. We fully adopted the international standard for automatic information exchange with our partners in the OECD to give the CRA useful data to help fight tax cheats even more effectively. With respect to offshore tax evasion, the CRA is currently conducting audits on over more than 1,100 taxpayers and has opened over 50 criminal investigations. As for the by-elections, we look forward to calling them soon. I look forward to campaigning against people who are so enthusiastic about the democratic process.

Mr. Speaker, Google and Facebook are reputable organizations too, yet they have had data stolen. The government wants to invade Canadians' privacy.Considering all the chaos the government has caused over the past three years, how can we possibly trust it?The Liberal government is planning to access Canadians' personal and financial information without telling them. Our credit card purchases, our cash withdrawals, our bill payments and our deposits belong to us.When will the Prime Minister stop this unacceptable invasion of Canadian citizens' privacy?

Mr. Speaker, he says now the carbon tax will create business opportunities. Yesterday the parliamentary secretary was saying exactly the opposite. He said that exempting business from the carbon tax was being done because “The point is to keep jobs in Canada so that emitters do not pollute elsewhere.” We have been saying exactly that. The carbon tax will drive business out of the country to places with poorer environmental standards, killing jobs at home and driving global emissions up abroad. Now that the Liberals agree, will they not axe the tax?

Mr. Speaker, again, the innuendo that is buried in that question is absurd.

Mr. Speaker, our plan is clear. We are putting a price on pollution and making life more affordable for Canadians. Climate change is real. Canadians deserve to know their government has a plan to deal with it, something the Conservative Party does not have. What they do not expect is for the Leader of the Opposition to get ordered around by Premier Ford, who is pushing Stephen Harper's failed agenda of 10 years of doing nothing to deal with climate change. Canadians deserve better.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians across the country expect their government to take action to deal with climate change. That is exactly what our government is doing. We are ensuring a price across Canada on what we do not want, pollution, so we can get more of what we want, lower emissions, new business opportunities and more money in the pockets of Canadians. The Leader of the Opposition is at Queen's Park today getting his marching orders from Doug Ford on Stephen Harper's failed plan to deal with climate change. Canadians expect better from the leader of the Conservative Party.

Mr. Speaker, he will take the conversation any time, except for the first two questions. The CBC has written that the Liberal plan will allow 96% of Belledune's greenhouse gas emissions to pass through its giant 168-metre smoke stack for free.The Liberals say carbon taxes will save the earth. Why are they taking carbon taxes then off their coal-fired plants?

Mr. Speaker, working with the Privacy Commissioner means heeding concerns about privacy for Canadians, not using his office for political cover. One expert has said that the law has never really contemplated anything on this scale. We are not talking about transactions with possible criminal links. These are regular Canadians going about their business and the Liberal government wants to know every detail of their financial lives.It is 2018, not 1984. When will the Liberals hear the privacy concerns or are they going to continue their plans for an Orwellian intrusion into the lives of Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, that is the problem right there. They are not going to provide benefits; they are going to take them out of people's pockets.This kind of reminds me of how the Liberals promised to stop subjecting charities to gratuitous audits. It was even included in the minister's mandate letter. Furthermore, this summer, Ontario's Superior Court told them to stop.Are the Liberals going to stop? No, they are planning to appeal the decision.Are they going to stop going after Canadians who receive benefits? No, because these Canadians are too easy a target.Are they going to go after the wealthy individuals named in the Panama papers? They have not done it so far, so why would they start now?I will repeat my question. Why maintain this two-tier tax system?

Mr. Speaker, Liberals should be targeting tax havens, not targeting families.The Prime Minister made a snide comment yesterday about the NDP when I asked him about the by-elections. It is not just the NDP calling for a vote. It is Canadians.Today, party leaders from across the political spectrum called on the Prime Minister to show respect to voters. Three hundred thousand Canadians are being denied the right to representation by the Prime Minister.Will he listen to parties representing 150 members of Parliament and call the vote now?

Mr. Speaker, steelworkers are on the Hill this week to put pressure on the government to end pension theft. They were blindsided when the government announced a change to creditor protection legislation without including the measures needed to protect pensions.The Liberals promised action in their last budget. The NDP has a bill ready to go. All we have to do is pass it.When will the Liberals listen to reason and protect workers' pensions?

Mr. Speaker, the law is clear. Under subsection 5(2) of the Privacy Act, the government cannot ask for Canadians' personal and confidential information without their permission.I want to repeat something the Prime Minister said yesterday in the House. He said he was fine with how Canadians' information is being collected without their consent. It is completely unacceptable.What is he waiting for to change tack, do the right thing and put an end to this situation immediately?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are breaking their promises.The Prime Minister and the Minister of Families promised to improve EI sickness benefits, but they are not doing anything. Was it all just lip service? I have to wonder.The Liberals are tabling the budget implementation act with partial reforms to EI, but it does not contain a single measure addressing sickness benefits. They have just one more chance, one more budget, before their term ends. Are they going to improve EI sickness benefits?

Mr. Speaker, the minister does not seem to have read the report. The Transportation Safety Board was clear. The government is managing safety very poorly, and the oversight regime for federally regulated transportation companies falls short.In addition, the department is falling unbelievably behind on regulating companies. In short, the transportation safety problem is the department's fault. When will the Liberals stop playing with the safety of Quebeckers and Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about pension theft, not CPP. A steelworkers delegation is on Parliament Hill this week to remind the government about the need to change Canada's inadequate bankruptcy and insolvency laws. These people understand that under current bankruptcy laws, their pensions could be reduced with a stroke of a pen.How can the government explain to these steelworkers its failure to protect millions of Canadian workers from the theft of their pensions? How can it explain this betrayal?

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that stabilizing the Phoenix pay system remains my absolute priority. We are seeing progress but it is taking too long. Public servants deserve to be paid accurately and on time. However, we are seeing progress. We have dealt with 100,000 transactions in the backlog since January. We have 1,500 people working at the pay centre. We have paid out $1.5 billion in retroactive pay as a result of the collective agreements that were not bargained and were not completed by the previous government.We are taking every step possible to ensure that our public servants are paid.

Mr. Speaker, once again, we are seeing that the Conservatives learned nothing from Canadians in the 2015 election. They scrapped the long-form census and we brought it back. That was the first thing we did when we took office. Quebeckers and Canadians across the country cheered because they know that pursuing policy based on data, facts and information gathered responsibly is the right way to go. They did not want to continue with the old way, Stephen Harper's way, of doing things.

Mr. Speaker, the innuendo in the hon. member's question is entirely inappropriate. The hon. members opposite are not legal counsel. They are not legal agents in the outstanding prosecution. They have no standing with either the defence or the prosecution. They are not parties to the legal proceedings. All members need to allow Canada's independent court system to do its job without partisan interference.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister continues to undermine democracy in our country by failing to call by-elections for three of the four vacant seats in Parliament. He is picking and choosing which Canadians get representation based upon his own political agenda.Rather than leaving over 300,000 Canadians without a voice in Parliament, when will the Prime Minister respect democracy and call these by-elections?

Mr. Speaker, the Canada Revenue Agency continues to be the talk of the town for all the wrong reasons. It dawdles endlessly when it comes to the wealthy KPMG clients and other names cited in the Panama papers yet ruthlessly attacks Canadians who receive government benefits but do not have the means to defend themselves. The CRA has recouped more than $1 billion in five years from audits of 332,000 files yet it is incapable of processing the 3,000 files on Canadians implicated in the Panama papers a year ago.Why are the Liberals condoning this double standard on tax justice?

Mr. Speaker, the member is upset that our leader is talking to my premier in my province. However, he should go back to his province for a moment and take a look at the new exemption that his government is giving to the Belledune coal-fired power plant, which will receive a 96% exemption on the emissions from the smokestack on that coal-fired plant. Could he explain why he is charging more to grandmothers driving to get groceries, but almost nothing to coal-fired plants back in his province?

Mr. Speaker, I absolutely apologize. It is my mistake. This actually already has been tabled. This is a response from the government. It was tabled on June 8, so it is actually in the record already that the breach of privacy has occurred tens of thousands of times in less than two years.

Well, Mr. Speaker, they say a gaffe is when someone accidentally tells the truth, and yesterday the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment had such a gaffe. I asked him why his government was exempting large industrial emitters from the carbon tax. He said that if they were forced to pay a tax, we “could potentially have jobs leave and it will do nothing for emissions”, which is exactly what our side has been saying: High taxes drive jobs out of the country, global emissions up and do nothing for the environment.Now that the Liberals agree, will they exempt all Canadians from their carbon tax?

Mr. Speaker, our government remains committed to ensuring that Canadians receive the credits and benefits to which they are entitled, as we recognize that they are essential for middle-class families to make ends meet.We have made significant progress in getting benefits to eligible Canadians. For example, the CRA now proactively communicates with low-income non-filers to encourage them to file so they can get the money they are owed.After 10 years of cuts under the Harper Conservatives, we will continue to invest in a new client-focused approach.

Mr. Speaker, we have 800 pages from just the last two years of times when Canadians' information had been breached by the government. Liberals do not protect data. They lose it, they misuse it and they leak it. Canadians do not trust Liberals when it comes to their information. I would be happy to table those documents after question period.When will the Prime Minister stop this unauthorized surveillance of Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear, when it comes to privacy and data, that we will continue to make sure that the processes are followed to protect consent and issues of privacy. What I find very interesting is the members opposite continue to undermine and attack Statistics Canada. They have a long track record against evidence-based decision-making, against facts, against data. What is their problem with good quality data? That is why the first decision point of our government was to reinstate the mandatory long-form census. This was applauded by Canadians from coast to coast to coast, including Conservative ridings. The members opposite should talk to Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the Harper government quietly latched on to an interpretation of sharia law to block international adoptions from Muslim majority countries in 2013. This strange rule applies in countries that do not even follow sharia law. Meanwhile, families like Sarah's are blocked. It has been six years and Sarah still cannot unite with her adopted son. The orphanage is now demanding that Sarah bring him home or give him up. Why did the Liberals take three years to just review this bizarre policy? Will the government stop using an interpretation of sharia law for adoptions?

Mr. Speaker, I can tell by the excitement on the other side of the House that the members have missed me dearly.I am so pleased to answer the question. Our government campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. Our plan involves putting a price on pollution, including a price on emitters. If the hon. member wants to talk about the coal industry, I would like to flag that we are actually phasing out coal by 2030. When the hon. member was actually sitting around the cabinet table under Stephen Harper's government, they did not plan to take this action until 2062. That is 32 years with cleaner air, less childhood asthma and a cleaner environment.If the hon. member wants to get serious about the environment, I will take this conversation any time.

Mr. Speaker, the government has no right to snoop through the personal financial information of Canadians, yet the Liberals are demanding that credit bureaus and banks secretly hand over comprehensive personal information, bank balances, mortgage payments, online purchases, credit card statements, they want it all. When will they stop this unauthorized surveillance on Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, again, listen to them: “Data has been stolen”. No data has been stolen. Information has been requested. Statistics Canada makes sure that it follows a process, which is very rigorous and very robust when it comes to making sure it protects privacy and data. It has also engaged the Privacy Commissioner. Members opposite have a fundamental problem with regards to Statistics Canada. They do not understand the importance of good quality data and of evidence-based policy-making. They have a fundamental ideological problem, and that is very unfortunate.

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow night, Canadian children will be curious to see what gets into their Halloween bags. Unfortunately, trick or treat remains an apt metaphor for how our federal public servants are compensated under the Phoenix pay system. Tomorrow is also the two-year anniversary of the government's deadline to fix Phoenix. How many more years will it take for the government to implement a payroll system that pays its workers accurately and on time?

Mr. Speaker, StatsCanada has written Canada's nine largest financial institutions and demanded that they hand over millions and millions of financial transactions by hundreds of thousands of Canadians, and were it not for a Global News report, Canadians would never know that the government was this far into their personal information. They know now and they are appalled.Will the Prime Minister use his power and direct StatsCan to cease and desist?

Mr. Speaker, for a lot of Canadians this line of questioning by the Conservatives is all too familiar. For 10 years under them in government, they chose to govern by ideology and not by facts or science. When facts got in the way, they simply stopped collecting them. They fired the chief science adviser and eliminated the long-form census. We brought back both of them. Statistics Canada is of course engaged with the Privacy Commissioner's office on this project to ensure that the information of Canadians remains protected.

Mr. Speaker, here are the facts: Statistics Canada wants to access the information of more than 500,000 Canadians without their consent. It wants to know our bank withdrawals, credit card purchases and even our social insurance numbers.The Prime Minister told the House of Commons yesterday that he supports this practice that allows the Liberal government to get the personal information of Canadian citizens without informing them. How can the Prime Minister agree to this request and allow this to happen?

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to ensuring that Canadians receive the tax credits and benefits to which they are entitled. We have made significant progress in getting benefits to eligible Canadians. For example, the CRA now proactively communicates with low-income non-filers so that they can get the money they are owed. After 10 years of Conservative cuts, we will continue to invest in a new client-focused approach.

Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear. We understand the importance of protecting individual privacy and data. Again, I fail to understand why the members opposite continue to undermine a statistical agency that is revered by Canadians. Well over 80% of Canadians respect Statistics Canada. It is a great organization that collects relevant information, that helps communities and businesses, particularly small and medium-sized businesses, with appropriate data so they can make informed decisions. What do members have against good quality, reliable data?

Mr. Speaker, this is how. On this side of the House, we have confidence in the Privacy Commissioner.We always ensure that the personal data of Canadians is protected. Statistics Canada will use anonymized data for statistical purposes only. No personal information will be made public.That said, Quebeckers and all Canadians understand that high quality data is critical to ensuring that government programs remain relevant and effective for all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, again, all the appropriate processes were followed. Statistics Canada makes routine requests. It has clear, robust provisions in place to protect privacy, to protect data, to make sure it is anonymized. It has clear processes in place.Members opposite fundamentally have an issue when it comes to data, because they do not believe in the facts. They do not believe in data. They fundamentally do not believe in making sure that we have a mandatory long-form census. This is where the disagreement occurs: We support good, quality, reliable data, they do not.

Mr. Speaker, women have been asking for pay equity legislation for decades. The act the Liberals introduced is a step in the right direction, but it includes none of the pay transparency measures advocates have called for. Will the pay equity commissioner have the resources she or he needs to do the job well? We still do not know.The Liberals have been making promises for the past three years, so why is there still so much work to do? Most importantly, why are women going to have to wait another four years for pay equity to become a reality?

Mr. Speaker, the Privy Council investigation into leaks from the Liberal cabinet meetings on shipbuilding revealed that 73 people were aware of the substance of the discussions. Of the 73, most were ignored; some were offered deals; one journalist was offered a job, and only one person is facing trial. The Prime Minister speculated that Admiral Norman might face charges, and eventually those charges came. Of the 73 people, only one is facing charges. How did the Prime Minister know that only Admiral Mark Norman would be charged?

Mr. Speaker, I am quoting the report of the Transportation Safety Board. It says that the slow pace of implementing recommendations perpetuates safety risks. More than 60 recommendations are still outstanding, and a third are more than 20 years old. Ottawa is asleep at the wheel.What will it take to get the Minister of Transportation to stop playing with Canadians' safety?

Mr. Speaker, it is such a pleasure for me to get up in the House and talk about democracy. Today Bill C-76 is at third reading. This means that more Canadians in 2019, if it passes through the other place, will have an opportunity to vote than they did under the previous government.The Canada Elections Act sets out a time period for elections and by-elections. Those will all be called within the time allocated. We are very proud of the upcoming by-election on December 3.

Mr. Speaker, again, in the last election, we campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment, grow the economy and help middle-class families. I am pleased to share with the hon. member that our plan to put a price on pollution applies to heavy emitters as well. Our plan is actually going to leave middle-class families better off. Stephen Harper's former director of policy said so and we have confirmed that. We have come forward with the details on how New Brunswickers and members of other provinces are going to do under our plan. I look forward to seeing the hon. member campaign in 2019 on a promise to take money from his constituents to make pollution free again.

Mr. Speaker, we know that transportation safety is extremely important to all Canadians. It is important when they travel on trains or planes and it is also important when products are transported across our vast country.We take transportation safety very seriously. We are doing everything we can to improve regulations, consult when necessary, and develop regulations that will keep our transportation system safe.

Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time the government has sought to receive private information from Canadians and not told them.In October 2017 and January 2018, Statistics Canada demanded that the TransUnion Credit Bureau hand over millions of files to the government, and these were not anonymous. It demanded social insurance numbers, names, addresses, dates of birth, detailed credit information, balances owed, balances overdue and 30 other fields of data.Will the Prime Minister tell Statistics Canada to stand down?

Mr. Speaker, since we took office, the Minister of National Revenue has been working hard to repair the damage the Harper Conservatives did to client service at the Canada Revenue Agency.Can the minister explain how the appointment of CRA's first chief service officer will help the agency to meet its client service objectives?

Mr. Speaker, after having band-aid solutions by the Harper government for 10 years, our grain farmers have asked our government for a solution to get hopper cars moving and to get our grain crops to international markets so they can make a living.I know we listened and took action to address these concerns. Would the Minister of Transport please inform the Manitoba farmers and all Canadians about what he has done to fix the rail system?

Mr. Speaker, I think it is time for the government to stop playing hide-and-seek in the Admiral Norman case. We are asking for assurances that the documents Admiral Norman needs for his defence have not been destroyed.Will the Prime Minister ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to appear before the committee to indicate whether the documents were destroyed, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Kildonan—St. Paul for her advocacy for Manitobans.The Harper Conservatives pretend to be the friends of our grain farmers, but for 10 long years they did not do anything. In fact, when we brought in freight rail legislation to help our farmers and shippers, the Conservatives voted against it.Our grain farmers and other producers in this country should know that this government has their backs.

Mr. Speaker, our government is ensuring that the personal data of Canadians is protected. Statistics Canada will use anonymized data for statistical purposes only. No personal information will be made public.Statistics Canada is actively engaged with the Privacy Commissioner's office on this project and is working with it to ensure that Canadians' banking information remains protected and private.However, high-quality and timely data are critical to ensuring that government programs remain relevant and effective for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals said during debate last night that the Minister of International Development has personally raised Canada's concerns about particularly problematic material in Palestinian textbooks with the Palestinian Prime Minister and the Minister of Education, and that she raised it as recently as this summer. If that is true, if the government is aware of and is raising the issue of anti-Semitic content in UNRWA textbooks, then why is it also funding them to the tune of $50 million?

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Mississauga—Erin Mills for her hard work on this issue. Yesterday I was so pleased to announce that our government was moving forward on implementing pay equity legislation. I want to thank the Minister of Status of Women and the President of the Treasury Board for their hard work on this file.Pay equity is not just the right thing to do; it is the smart thing to do. When Canadian women can count on equal pay for work of equal value, our economy grows stronger. A strong middle class depends on an economy where everyone has a real and fair chance at success. I want to thank employers, unions and advocates for the valuable input on our plan.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals waited so long to pass Bill C-49 that it may not even have an effect this year. Yesterday, the Liberal government proved once again that it has absolutely no understanding of the realities faced by supply-managed farmers. How can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food justify the fact that the USMCA was signed a month ago, yet farmers are still in the dark?Yesterday, the minister had a chance to announce how much money is available and how it will be distributed, but no, he is still figuring out how to set up two working groups.Should he not have set up these working groups before he sacrificed our farmers?

Mr. Speaker, pension security is important to our government. That is why in our last budget we committed to a solution to strengthen the pensions. In my mandate letter, I am also pleased to say I have been tasked with this. Our government has been consulting with stakeholders on this issue for the last number of years. We want to continue to get this right. We are consulting with stakeholders to ensure not that we get any solution, but that we get the right solution. This is a decades-old problem. What government is solving it? Our government is solving it. We are going to get the right solution to this problem.

Mr. Speaker, women have waited 42 years for the Liberals to keep their promise on pay equity. Meanwhile, the unions fought Canada Post 30 years in court, and women's organizations have worked tirelessly to get us to this point to finally have pay equity legislation in the House. They worked for decades. Women are done waiting. Do they really have to wait another four years in order to have equal pay?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek unanimous consent to table a rather large document. It is actually over 800 pages, and no, it is not the Liberals' omnibus budget implementation act. In fact, it is answers from the government in regard to how many departments, agencies, Crown corporations and other government entities have breached the privacy of Canadians. It is over 800 pages' worth, in less than two years, of when privacy has been breached. I wonder if I would have unanimous consent to table this.

Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear. Our government understands the importance of protecting privacy and protecting data. That is why we have engaged in a data and digital consultation process to further build more trust with Canadians when it comes to their data.Our government understands why it is important to make sure that, in a digital economy when transactions occur online, people have an understanding about privacy, consent, data ownership and data portability. We are taking additional measures to strengthen our privacy legislation as well.

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have absolutely nothing against His Excellency Mr. Johnston. I remind members that he was the moderator at the infamous 1984 debate in which Mr. Mulroney dealt a knockout blow to the Liberal prime minister with his famous quote:“We had an option; you had an option.” History repeats itself because the government had an option, consulting or imposing.Why is the government imposing a solution instead of holding consultations?

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, our government is taking meaningful action to ensure that tax evaders and tax avoiders are forced to pay taxes. During our first years in offie, we invested nearly $1 billion to help the Canada Revenue Agency better target individuals who are trying to avoid their responsibilities. We are also in the process of making sure that benefits reach those who are entitled to them, even if they have low incomes and lack the means to apply. That is the definition of a fair system that looks after people.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.Since 2015, we have introduced a number of initiatives to improve the CRA's services, but we recognize that we can do more. The chief service officer will be responsible for leading the transformation of CRA's service culture using a client-centred, integrated approach.My top priority is to improve the CRA's services to Canadians, including the people of Scarborough North, so that they are treated as important clients, worthy of respect.

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite's very thoughtful question is on an issue that we also think is very important. We support retirement security. That is why we strengthened the CPP, the Canadian pension plan. We also expanded the wage earner protection program. As the member also highlighted, in our 2018 budget, we put a whole-of-government approach when it comes to dealing with pensions in a meaningful way. We are absolutely committed to workers and pensioners.

Mr. Speaker, international adoptions must always protect the safety and well-being of the children, as well as comply with the laws of both countries. Harmonizing these laws can be challenging, but the Harper Conservatives did not conduct enough consultations to make sure the provinces and territories, which are responsible for adoption, were on board with the moratorium. They went ahead and cancelled all adoptions from Pakistan, without taking into consideration the generosity of Canadians who wanted to sponsor. We have asked the department to initiate a review of this policy, with the intent to institute a fairer process.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was proud to stand in this honourable place with my colleague, the Minister of Status of Women, and the President of the Treasury Board to announce that our government will be moving forward with proactive pay equity legislation. This is fundamental to address the wrongs of unequal pay for work of equal value. Hundreds of thousands of women will benefit from this action. I am very proud of our government that understands that equity in the workplace is good for all of us.

Mr. Speaker, there are obviously outstanding legal proceedings with respect to this matter. As has been explained in the House repeatedly, while those proceedings are outstanding, it is certainly inappropriate for the government to make comment on the proceedings. It is equally inappropriate for the opposition to press questions on that matter, because that has an interference with the judicial process, which members of Parliament are supposed to refrain from.

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to effective implementation and enforcement of proactive pay equity in federally regulated workplaces. Our pay equity plan was constructed with consultation from employers; yes, from labour; yes, from experts and advocates. That is why we are so sure that this approach is the right one to take.We are very proud of introducing this proactive pay equity legislation, the first federal government in the history of this country to take this issue seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as we have said time and again in the House, we believe in the collective bargaining process. We know this has been a difficult process. That is why last week I took the measure to appoint a new mediator. Both parties are working closely with the new mediator, and they are still at the table collectively bargaining, as they should. We look forward to an update on those talks in the near future.

Mr. Speaker, there were all kinds of consultations in the past year. We consulted parliamentarians. We consulted Canadians. We consulted media across Canada, and we developed an appropriate plan.I am pleased that my colleague opposite acknowledges the importance of leaders' debates. It is so important for Canadians to have that kind of spontaneous interaction with their leaders; they are the ones making the decisions, after all. This is excellent for democracy, and I hope everyone in the House will work with the Right Hon. David Johnston to ensure that our debates are—

Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing here is that the Conservative Party of Canada learned nothing from Canadians in the 2015 election. When we restored the long-form census as the very first thing we did when we took office in 2015, Canadians from coast to coast to coast cheered.The Conservatives attack data, science and evidence as the grounding of strong public policy. They continue to show they are still the party of Stephen Harper, that they are still the party of a war on science and facts.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for giving me a chance to remind all members of the House that employment insurance has an important role to play in helping families, especially those struggling to get by, because it is vital that they receive the high-quality services and benefits they need.I am also pleased to say that since 2015, we have reformed the five existing special benefits and added two others. All these benefits, including sickness benefits, now have added flexibility, making them more responsive to families' actual circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, after consulting with Canadians, after round tables organized by the IRPP, after the procedure and House affairs committee conducted an excellent study, and I thank it for its hard work on this, we are so proud to announce that the Right Hon. David Johnston is Canada's first independent commissioner for debates. This is so important. In 2015 that party's former leader, Mr. Harper, did not participate, did not want to have those national leader debates. This ensures that Canadians will have official debates in English and French, accessible to all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the chair of the Transportation Safety Board recognized that Canada has one of the safest transportation systems in the world.We think so, too. At Transport Canada, our top priority is the safety of all modes of transportation. That will continue to be our focus. We are especially pleased that the Transportation Safety Board removed three major items from the Watchlist yesterday. That is progress.We will continue our efforts to make our transportation system safer—

Mr. Speaker, we are so proud that the Right Hon. David Johnston will take on this role to ensure that all Canadians from coast to coast to coast, official language minority communities and Canadians with disabilities will have access to two debates, one in English and one in French, and to ensure all Canadians can see their leaders in a moment that is so important during elections to decide who they want to govern them. We believe His Excellency, and we know Canadians will see this as well, will be an excellent independent commissioner for debates in our country.

Mr. Speaker, we did exactly what we said we were going to do.We understand there is an impact on the farmers, and we are committed to fully and fairly supporting them to make sure they can continue to succeed.We are forming a working group with dairy processors and dairy farmers, and with poultry and egg farmers and processors. Together they will help our supply-managed farmers and processors innovate, grow and remain competitive and sustainable for future generations.We will continue to support our supply-managed sector, and every other agriculture—

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, there have been discussions among the parties, and I would like to move two motions, which hopefully will have unanimous support. First, I move: That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, the deferred recorded division on motion M-161, standing in the name of the Member for Saint John—Rothesay and on motion M-155, standing in the name of the Member for Scarborough Centre, scheduled to take place Wednesday, October 31, 2018, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), shall be deferred anew until later today, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business. And that if a recorded division is requested later today on Bill C-376, An Act to designate the month of April as Sikh Heritage Month, it be deferred until Wednesday, November 7, 2018, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business.

Mr. Speaker, I travelled to the West Bank last summer. While there, I had the opportunity to visit the UNRWA's facilities and schools and to speak with the principals, teachers and students. I also had the opportunity to talk to the Palestinian prime minister and minister of education.I also had the pleasure of announcing funding for another organization, Right To Play, which supports education and teacher training in West Bank and Gaza schools.

Mr. Speaker, as chair of the all-party women's caucus, I have heard from many individuals and groups in my riding and across the country on the importance of women's participation in our workforce and our economy. Pay equity is one way our government can move the dial toward equality and empowerment.Could the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour, who will be in my riding tomorrow, please update the House on our government's commitment to move forward with pay equity measures?

Mr. Speaker, we have been clear day in and day out, when it comes to privacy, when it comes to data protection, this is a priority for this government. With respect to Statistics Canada, it is subject to the Privacy Act, which means that it must ensure compliance with the privacy principles embedded in the act, including the protection of personal information. There is a rigorous and robust process in place. It also engages the Privacy Commissioner as well. Like I said before, we have been very clear. We will always make sure that data and privacy are respected.

Mr. Speaker, the second motion is in relation to the ethics committee, or ETHI. I move: That, in relation to its study on Breach of Personal Information Involving Cambridge Analytica and Facebook, three members of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics be authorized to travel to London, United Kingdom, in the Fall of 2018, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.

Mr. Speaker, again, the innuendo that is buried in that question is absurd.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday on the picket line with Canada Post workers I learned that the company has suspended a number of benefits, including short-term disability payments. Michael Wall, who has been employed at the company since 2004 and has a serious illness, is depending on those payments in order to make ends meet. For Canada Post to respond to the strike by attacking its most vulnerable workers is cynical and cruel. While the strike is rotating, these cuts in payments are not. Will the minister be complicit in this mistreatment of Michael and those like him or will she get on the phone today and tell Canada Post to back off?

Mr. Speaker, the minister does not seem to have read the report. The Transportation Safety Board was clear. The government is managing safety very poorly, and the oversight regime for federally regulated transportation companies falls short.In addition, the department is falling unbelievably behind on regulating companies. In short, the transportation safety problem is the department's fault. When will the Liberals stop playing with the safety of Quebeckers and Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about pension theft, not CPP. A steelworkers delegation is on Parliament Hill this week to remind the government about the need to change Canada's inadequate bankruptcy and insolvency laws. These people understand that under current bankruptcy laws, their pensions could be reduced with a stroke of a pen.How can the government explain to these steelworkers its failure to protect millions of Canadian workers from the theft of their pensions? How can it explain this betrayal?

Mr. Speaker, the Canada Revenue Agency continues to be the talk of the town for all the wrong reasons. It dawdles endlessly when it comes to the wealthy KPMG clients and other names cited in the Panama papers yet ruthlessly attacks Canadians who receive government benefits but do not have the means to defend themselves. The CRA has recouped more than $1 billion in five years from audits of 332,000 files yet it is incapable of processing the 3,000 files on Canadians implicated in the Panama papers a year ago.Why are the Liberals condoning this double standard on tax justice?

Mr. Speaker, the government has no right to snoop through the personal financial information of Canadians, yet the Liberals are demanding that credit bureaus and banks secretly hand over comprehensive personal information, bank balances, mortgage payments, online purchases, credit card statements, they want it all. When will they stop this unauthorized surveillance on Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Kildonan—St. Paul for her advocacy for Manitobans.The Harper Conservatives pretend to be the friends of our grain farmers, but for 10 long years they did not do anything. In fact, when we brought in freight rail legislation to help our farmers and shippers, the Conservatives voted against it.Our grain farmers and other producers in this country should know that this government has their backs.

Mr. Speaker, working with the Privacy Commissioner means heeding concerns about privacy for Canadians, not using his office for political cover. One expert has said that the law has never really contemplated anything on this scale. We are not talking about transactions with possible criminal links. These are regular Canadians going about their business and the Liberal government wants to know every detail of their financial lives.It is 2018, not 1984. When will the Liberals hear the privacy concerns or are they going to continue their plans for an Orwellian intrusion into the lives of Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, as we have said time and again in the House, we believe in the collective bargaining process. We know this has been a difficult process. That is why last week I took the measure to appoint a new mediator. Both parties are working closely with the new mediator, and they are still at the table collectively bargaining, as they should. We look forward to an update on those talks in the near future.

Mr. Speaker, since we took office, the Minister of National Revenue has been working hard to repair the damage the Harper Conservatives did to client service at the Canada Revenue Agency.Can the minister explain how the appointment of CRA's first chief service officer will help the agency to meet its client service objectives?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals made that appointment without any consultation with the other parties. What the Prime Minister has done is made a unilateral decision to name the debates commissioner, set the rules and spend $5.5 million to set up the officer of the commissioner, an office nobody was asking for except for the Prime Minister's Office. The Prime Minister continues to abuse our democracy for his own political gain. Will the Prime Minister abandon his attempt to manipulate and rig the upcoming election?

Mr. Speaker, I think it is time for the government to stop playing hide-and-seek in the Admiral Norman case. We are asking for assurances that the documents Admiral Norman needs for his defence have not been destroyed.Will the Prime Minister ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to appear before the committee to indicate whether the documents were destroyed, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, there have been discussions among the parties, and I would like to move two motions, which hopefully will have unanimous support. First, I move: That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, the deferred recorded division on motion M-161, standing in the name of the Member for Saint John—Rothesay and on motion M-155, standing in the name of the Member for Scarborough Centre, scheduled to take place Wednesday, October 31, 2018, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), shall be deferred anew until later today, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business. And that if a recorded division is requested later today on Bill C-376, An Act to designate the month of April as Sikh Heritage Month, it be deferred until Wednesday, November 7, 2018, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business.

Mr. Speaker, the second motion is in relation to the ethics committee, or ETHI. I move: That, in relation to its study on Breach of Personal Information Involving Cambridge Analytica and Facebook, three members of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics be authorized to travel to London, United Kingdom, in the Fall of 2018, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I absolutely apologize. It is my mistake. This actually already has been tabled. This is a response from the government. It was tabled on June 8, so it is actually in the record already that the breach of privacy has occurred tens of thousands of times in less than two years.

I want to be very clear, Mr. Speaker. The Prime Minister is telling Canadians that it is okay for their government to understand all of their financial information held by banks, all of their financial information held by credit agencies, all of their financial information held by utilities and by their mobile phones. Every single thing we use in our lives is something that the current government wants to have its hands on. This is ridiculous. Will the government tell Statistics Canada to back down from—

Mr. Speaker, StatsCanada has written Canada's nine largest financial institutions and demanded that they hand over millions and millions of financial transactions by hundreds of thousands of Canadians, and were it not for a Global News report, Canadians would never know that the government was this far into their personal information. They know now and they are appalled.Will the Prime Minister use his power and direct StatsCan to cease and desist?

Mr. Speaker, I can tell by the excitement on the other side of the House that the members have missed me dearly.I am so pleased to answer the question. Our government campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. Our plan involves putting a price on pollution, including a price on emitters. If the hon. member wants to talk about the coal industry, I would like to flag that we are actually phasing out coal by 2030. When the hon. member was actually sitting around the cabinet table under Stephen Harper's government, they did not plan to take this action until 2062. That is 32 years with cleaner air, less childhood asthma and a cleaner environment.If the hon. member wants to get serious about the environment, I will take this conversation any time.

Well, Mr. Speaker, they say a gaffe is when someone accidentally tells the truth, and yesterday the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment had such a gaffe. I asked him why his government was exempting large industrial emitters from the carbon tax. He said that if they were forced to pay a tax, we “could potentially have jobs leave and it will do nothing for emissions”, which is exactly what our side has been saying: High taxes drive jobs out of the country, global emissions up and do nothing for the environment.Now that the Liberals agree, will they exempt all Canadians from their carbon tax?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister continues to treat our democracy like his own personal game. He sets the rules and Canadians are his pawns. Canadians were told today that he had chosen a commissioner of debates for federal elections. He has done this without any discussion or consultation with Canadians. When will the Prime Minister stop acting like a dictator and start respecting our democracy?

Mr. Speaker, after having band-aid solutions by the Harper government for 10 years, our grain farmers have asked our government for a solution to get hopper cars moving and to get our grain crops to international markets so they can make a living.I know we listened and took action to address these concerns. Would the Minister of Transport please inform the Manitoba farmers and all Canadians about what he has done to fix the rail system?

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that stabilizing the Phoenix pay system remains my absolute priority. We are seeing progress but it is taking too long. Public servants deserve to be paid accurately and on time. However, we are seeing progress. We have dealt with 100,000 transactions in the backlog since January. We have 1,500 people working at the pay centre. We have paid out $1.5 billion in retroactive pay as a result of the collective agreements that were not bargained and were not completed by the previous government.We are taking every step possible to ensure that our public servants are paid.

Mr. Speaker, women have waited 42 years for the Liberals to keep their promise on pay equity. Meanwhile, the unions fought Canada Post 30 years in court, and women's organizations have worked tirelessly to get us to this point to finally have pay equity legislation in the House. They worked for decades. Women are done waiting. Do they really have to wait another four years in order to have equal pay?

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have absolutely nothing against His Excellency Mr. Johnston. I remind members that he was the moderator at the infamous 1984 debate in which Mr. Mulroney dealt a knockout blow to the Liberal prime minister with his famous quote:“We had an option; you had an option.” History repeats itself because the government had an option, consulting or imposing.Why is the government imposing a solution instead of holding consultations?

Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time the government has sought to receive private information from Canadians and not told them.In October 2017 and January 2018, Statistics Canada demanded that the TransUnion Credit Bureau hand over millions of files to the government, and these were not anonymous. It demanded social insurance numbers, names, addresses, dates of birth, detailed credit information, balances owed, balances overdue and 30 other fields of data.Will the Prime Minister tell Statistics Canada to stand down?

Mr. Speaker, the innuendo in the hon. member's question is entirely inappropriate. The hon. members opposite are not legal counsel. They are not legal agents in the outstanding prosecution. They have no standing with either the defence or the prosecution. They are not parties to the legal proceedings. All members need to allow Canada's independent court system to do its job without partisan interference.

Mr. Speaker, Google and Facebook are reputable organizations too, yet they have had data stolen. The government wants to invade Canadians' privacy.Considering all the chaos the government has caused over the past three years, how can we possibly trust it?The Liberal government is planning to access Canadians' personal and financial information without telling them. Our credit card purchases, our cash withdrawals, our bill payments and our deposits belong to us.When will the Prime Minister stop this unacceptable invasion of Canadian citizens' privacy?

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege concerning a deliberate attempt by the government to deny me information I requested through Order Paper Question No. 1316. This question read as follows: With regard to the tweet by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change on November 7, 2017, which stated that “Canada salutes Nicaragua and Syria for joining on to the Paris Agreement”: what are the titles of all individuals who approved the tweet? The answer states: We have been clear: the murderous Assad regime must end the indiscriminate violence against its own people. The people of Syria deserve a life free from violence. Canada will continue to support the Syrian people in reaching this goal and in achieving a long-term political solution. Clearly the tweet was a mistake for which the Minister of Environment and Climate Change took full responsibility both through online communications and in the House of Commons. In addition to this being a non-answer, and the subject of my question of privilege, I believe, Mr. Speaker, that you will find that the response actually breaches the Standing Orders as well, and that is a point I will get to later.I was contacted last week by Dean Beeby, of the CBC, about an access to information request he had received an answer to. It is in reference to the tweet I referenced in my question. He suggested that his ATIP had turned up the actual document that shows the names and titles of those who were involved in approving the tweet. Mr. Beeby went on to publish this article on Thursday, October 25, 2018, and the article confirms that Mr. Beeby had indeed obtained information from the government through an ATIP that I could not obtain through a legitimate proceeding of Parliament. The article says: CBC News has obtained documents under the Access to Information Act showing the minister's office gave a final thumbs-up to the tweet 51 minutes before it popped up on [the Minister of the Environment]'s official ministerial Twitter feed last Nov. 7.... The minister noted repeatedly that the social-media misstep occurred on the departmental Twitter account, rather than on her personal Twitter account, suggesting public servants were to blame. Mr. Speaker, I did suspect all along that this was true as well. Because the government held back these details from me, I could not present the evidence to the House in my role as an opposition member. The article went on to report: “The tweet in question was approved by the MO [minister's office] at 2:09 p.m. today and issued at 3:00 PM," says an assessment.... The package shows the names of at least 31 public servants involved in the ill-advised tweet. The released documents show the pre-publication vetting was carried out in advance by the department's “social media” and “home” teams, as well as by [the Minister of the Environment]'s office staff, whose names have been removed from the file. Finally, the article points out that the government also violated the timelines set out in the Access to Information Act. Now, that is not your problem, Mr. Speaker, but it does provide you with more evidence of the government's intent to avoid this issue by withholding information from me and delaying information to the media.I would make one final point. Nowhere in the Access to Information Act does it permit a minister to refuse the names of ministerial staff when providing a response to an access to information request.I do not begrudge Mr. Beeby the fact that he received an answer, but when a journalist and a member of Parliament ask the same question, one would expect the government to at least give the same respect to the member of Parliament as it gave to the journalist, or put another way, treat a proceeding in Parliament with the same respect as an ATIP. In this case, I was given debate and an argument for an answer, whereas the journalist was actually given the answer. Not only is this an affront to the House, in so committing this offence, the government also breached the standing order I mentioned earlier. It is Standing Order 39(1), which says, in part: in putting any such question or in replying to the same no argument or opinion is to be offered, nor any facts stated, except so far as may be necessary to explain the same; and in answering any such question the matter to which the same refers shall not be debated. On December 16, 1980, at page 5797 of Hansard, the Speaker ruled: While it is correct to say that the government is not required by our rules to answer written or oral questions, it would be bold to suggest that no circumstance could ever exist for a prima facie question of privilege to be made where there was a deliberate attempt to deny answers to an hon. member. Omitting the information I was seeking in the government's response to my question and providing exactly what I was seeking to Mr. Beeby demonstrates that the government deliberately withheld information from the House.On page 251 of the 24th edition of Erskin May, it described the contempt as follows: Generally speaking, any action or omission which obstructs or impedes either House of Parliament in the performance of its functions, or which obstructs or impedes any Member or officer of such House in the discharge of his duty, or which has a tendency, directly or indirectly, to produce such results, may be treated as contempt even though there is no precedence of the offence. The government keeps repeating the same offence over and over again. After numerous questions of privilege and warnings from the Chair, it continues to deny members information while providing the same or more accurate information to the media. I think it is important at this time to present to the House a few select examples of when you, Mr. Speaker, took notice of this pattern and heeded a warning. On April 16, 2016, the Speaker found a prima facie question of privilege after the Leader of the Opposition pointed out that specific and detailed information contained in Bill C-14 was given to the media ahead of this House and members of Parliament. During that discussion, Speaker Milliken was referenced, from his ruling of March 19, 2001, when he said: To deny to Members information concerning business that is about to come before the House, while at the same time providing such information to media that will likely be questioning Members about that business, is a situation that the Chair cannot condone. That is exactly the situation I was facing when Mr. Beeby approached me to comment on information he was given and I was not. While he was not impeded in the performance of his function as a journalist, clearly I was impeded in the performance of my function as a member in this place, which breaches my privileges and constitutes a contempt of this House, as outlined in our procedural authorities.

Mr. Speaker, the Harper government quietly latched on to an interpretation of sharia law to block international adoptions from Muslim majority countries in 2013. This strange rule applies in countries that do not even follow sharia law. Meanwhile, families like Sarah's are blocked. It has been six years and Sarah still cannot unite with her adopted son. The orphanage is now demanding that Sarah bring him home or give him up. Why did the Liberals take three years to just review this bizarre policy? Will the government stop using an interpretation of sharia law for adoptions?

Mr. Speaker, identity theft is not a joke. Millions of families suffer every year. The Prime Minister is putting Canadians' personal information and identity at risk. There is no way to ensure this information will be protected when earlier this year Statistics Canada lost 600 files under his watch. The government has no right to track every financial decision of every Canadian citizen. Will the Liberals cancel this unprecedented and unauthorized surveillance?

Mr. Speaker, steelworkers are on the Hill this week to put pressure on the government to end pension theft. They were blindsided when the government announced a change to creditor protection legislation without including the measures needed to protect pensions.The Liberals promised action in their last budget. The NDP has a bill ready to go. All we have to do is pass it.When will the Liberals listen to reason and protect workers' pensions?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals said during debate last night that the Minister of International Development has personally raised Canada's concerns about particularly problematic material in Palestinian textbooks with the Palestinian Prime Minister and the Minister of Education, and that she raised it as recently as this summer. If that is true, if the government is aware of and is raising the issue of anti-Semitic content in UNRWA textbooks, then why is it also funding them to the tune of $50 million?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals waited so long to pass Bill C-49 that it may not even have an effect this year. Yesterday, the Liberal government proved once again that it has absolutely no understanding of the realities faced by supply-managed farmers. How can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food justify the fact that the USMCA was signed a month ago, yet farmers are still in the dark?Yesterday, the minister had a chance to announce how much money is available and how it will be distributed, but no, he is still figuring out how to set up two working groups.Should he not have set up these working groups before he sacrificed our farmers?

Mr. Speaker, we have been clear day in and day out, when it comes to privacy, when it comes to data protection, this is a priority for this government. With respect to Statistics Canada, it is subject to the Privacy Act, which means that it must ensure compliance with the privacy principles embedded in the act, including the protection of personal information. There is a rigorous and robust process in place. It also engages the Privacy Commissioner as well. Like I said before, we have been very clear. We will always make sure that data and privacy are respected.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek unanimous consent to table a rather large document. It is actually over 800 pages, and no, it is not the Liberals' omnibus budget implementation act. In fact, it is answers from the government in regard to how many departments, agencies, Crown corporations and other government entities have breached the privacy of Canadians. It is over 800 pages' worth, in less than two years, of when privacy has been breached. I wonder if I would have unanimous consent to table this.

Mr. Speaker, our government is ensuring that the personal data of Canadians is protected. Statistics Canada will use anonymized data for statistical purposes only. No personal information will be made public.Statistics Canada is actively engaged with the Privacy Commissioner's office on this project and is working with it to ensure that Canadians' banking information remains protected and private.However, high-quality and timely data are critical to ensuring that government programs remain relevant and effective for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, for a lot of Canadians this line of questioning by the Conservatives is all too familiar. For 10 years under them in government, they chose to govern by ideology and not by facts or science. When facts got in the way, they simply stopped collecting them. They fired the chief science adviser and eliminated the long-form census. We brought back both of them. Statistics Canada is of course engaged with the Privacy Commissioner's office on this project to ensure that the information of Canadians remains protected.

Mr. Speaker, he says now the carbon tax will create business opportunities. Yesterday the parliamentary secretary was saying exactly the opposite. He said that exempting business from the carbon tax was being done because “The point is to keep jobs in Canada so that emitters do not pollute elsewhere.” We have been saying exactly that. The carbon tax will drive business out of the country to places with poorer environmental standards, killing jobs at home and driving global emissions up abroad. Now that the Liberals agree, will they not axe the tax?

Mr. Speaker, he will take the conversation any time, except for the first two questions. The CBC has written that the Liberal plan will allow 96% of Belledune's greenhouse gas emissions to pass through its giant 168-metre smoke stack for free.The Liberals say carbon taxes will save the earth. Why are they taking carbon taxes then off their coal-fired plants?

Mr. Speaker, the minister says these questions are inappropriate. In the first part of question period, there was a lot of talk about data protection. Mark Norman wants data for his legal defence. The only protection going on is the Liberals protecting their butts, both literally and figuratively, with Mr. Butts.Will the government permit the Clerk of the Privy Council to appear before the ethics committee to confirm that none of the materials related to the shipbuilding cabinet discussions have been destroyed, deleted or amended?

Mr. Speaker, Liberals should be targeting tax havens, not targeting families.The Prime Minister made a snide comment yesterday about the NDP when I asked him about the by-elections. It is not just the NDP calling for a vote. It is Canadians.Today, party leaders from across the political spectrum called on the Prime Minister to show respect to voters. Three hundred thousand Canadians are being denied the right to representation by the Prime Minister.Will he listen to parties representing 150 members of Parliament and call the vote now?

Mr. Speaker, I travelled to the West Bank last summer. While there, I had the opportunity to visit the UNRWA's facilities and schools and to speak with the principals, teachers and students. I also had the opportunity to talk to the Palestinian prime minister and minister of education.I also had the pleasure of announcing funding for another organization, Right To Play, which supports education and teacher training in West Bank and Gaza schools.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians just do not trust Liberals with their private information. However, just as importantly, Canadians want to know why the government needs to know who they pay, how much they pay, what they purchase online and what they are giving to their children through e-transfers. Canadians want to know why the government needs to know that and not even tell Canadians they are going to be told about it.This is Big Brother on steroids. It needs to stop. The Prime Minister has the ability to stop it. Why will he not stop this unauthorized surveillance of Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, the Privy Council investigation into leaks from the Liberal cabinet meetings on shipbuilding revealed that 73 people were aware of the substance of the discussions. Of the 73, most were ignored; some were offered deals; one journalist was offered a job, and only one person is facing trial. The Prime Minister speculated that Admiral Norman might face charges, and eventually those charges came. Of the 73 people, only one is facing charges. How did the Prime Minister know that only Admiral Mark Norman would be charged?

Mr. Speaker, the member is upset that our leader is talking to my premier in my province. However, he should go back to his province for a moment and take a look at the new exemption that his government is giving to the Belledune coal-fired power plant, which will receive a 96% exemption on the emissions from the smokestack on that coal-fired plant. Could he explain why he is charging more to grandmothers driving to get groceries, but almost nothing to coal-fired plants back in his province?

Mr. Speaker, our plan is clear. We are putting a price on pollution and making life more affordable for Canadians. Climate change is real. Canadians deserve to know their government has a plan to deal with it, something the Conservative Party does not have. What they do not expect is for the Leader of the Opposition to get ordered around by Premier Ford, who is pushing Stephen Harper's failed agenda of 10 years of doing nothing to deal with climate change. Canadians deserve better.

Mr. Speaker, again, in the last election, we campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment, grow the economy and help middle-class families. I am pleased to share with the hon. member that our plan to put a price on pollution applies to heavy emitters as well. Our plan is actually going to leave middle-class families better off. Stephen Harper's former director of policy said so and we have confirmed that. We have come forward with the details on how New Brunswickers and members of other provinces are going to do under our plan. I look forward to seeing the hon. member campaign in 2019 on a promise to take money from his constituents to make pollution free again.

Mr. Speaker, this is how. On this side of the House, we have confidence in the Privacy Commissioner.We always ensure that the personal data of Canadians is protected. Statistics Canada will use anonymized data for statistical purposes only. No personal information will be made public.That said, Quebeckers and all Canadians understand that high quality data is critical to ensuring that government programs remain relevant and effective for all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, once again, we are seeing that the Conservatives learned nothing from Canadians in the 2015 election. They scrapped the long-form census and we brought it back. That was the first thing we did when we took office. Quebeckers and Canadians across the country cheered because they know that pursuing policy based on data, facts and information gathered responsibly is the right way to go. They did not want to continue with the old way, Stephen Harper's way, of doing things.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have seen the egregious holes in our income tax system with the paradise papers, the Panama papers, the Isle of Man scam and offshore tax havens. Wealthy Canadians getting off the hook on paying taxes.The Liberal government has done virtually nothing to crack down on offshore tax havens, but it has targeted regular Canadians. Under the Liberal government, well over $1 billion has been clawed back from Canadians, many of whom qualify for the disability tax credit or Canada child benefits.Why are the Liberals denying benefits to families who deserve them?

Mr. Speaker, our government remains committed to ensuring that Canadians receive the credits and benefits to which they are entitled, as we recognize that they are essential for middle-class families to make ends meet.We have made significant progress in getting benefits to eligible Canadians. For example, the CRA now proactively communicates with low-income non-filers to encourage them to file so they can get the money they are owed.After 10 years of cuts under the Harper Conservatives, we will continue to invest in a new client-focused approach.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Mississauga—Erin Mills for her hard work on this issue. Yesterday I was so pleased to announce that our government was moving forward on implementing pay equity legislation. I want to thank the Minister of Status of Women and the President of the Treasury Board for their hard work on this file.Pay equity is not just the right thing to do; it is the smart thing to do. When Canadian women can count on equal pay for work of equal value, our economy grows stronger. A strong middle class depends on an economy where everyone has a real and fair chance at success. I want to thank employers, unions and advocates for the valuable input on our plan.

Mr. Speaker, we did exactly what we said we were going to do.We understand there is an impact on the farmers, and we are committed to fully and fairly supporting them to make sure they can continue to succeed.We are forming a working group with dairy processors and dairy farmers, and with poultry and egg farmers and processors. Together they will help our supply-managed farmers and processors innovate, grow and remain competitive and sustainable for future generations.We will continue to support our supply-managed sector, and every other agriculture—

Mr. Speaker, the law is clear. Under subsection 5(2) of the Privacy Act, the government cannot ask for Canadians' personal and confidential information without their permission.I want to repeat something the Prime Minister said yesterday in the House. He said he was fine with how Canadians' information is being collected without their consent. It is completely unacceptable.What is he waiting for to change tack, do the right thing and put an end to this situation immediately?

Mr. Speaker, we know that transportation safety is extremely important to all Canadians. It is important when they travel on trains or planes and it is also important when products are transported across our vast country.We take transportation safety very seriously. We are doing everything we can to improve regulations, consult when necessary, and develop regulations that will keep our transportation system safe.

Mr. Speaker, here are the facts: Statistics Canada wants to access the information of more than 500,000 Canadians without their consent. It wants to know our bank withdrawals, credit card purchases and even our social insurance numbers.The Prime Minister told the House of Commons yesterday that he supports this practice that allows the Liberal government to get the personal information of Canadian citizens without informing them. How can the Prime Minister agree to this request and allow this to happen?

Mr. Speaker, to go back to the CRA, we have made historic investments to fight against tax cheats. We fully adopted the international standard for automatic information exchange with our partners in the OECD to give the CRA useful data to help fight tax cheats even more effectively. With respect to offshore tax evasion, the CRA is currently conducting audits on over more than 1,100 taxpayers and has opened over 50 criminal investigations. As for the by-elections, we look forward to calling them soon. I look forward to campaigning against people who are so enthusiastic about the democratic process.

Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear. We understand the importance of protecting individual privacy and data. Again, I fail to understand why the members opposite continue to undermine a statistical agency that is revered by Canadians. Well over 80% of Canadians respect Statistics Canada. It is a great organization that collects relevant information, that helps communities and businesses, particularly small and medium-sized businesses, with appropriate data so they can make informed decisions. What do members have against good quality, reliable data?

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow night, Canadian children will be curious to see what gets into their Halloween bags. Unfortunately, trick or treat remains an apt metaphor for how our federal public servants are compensated under the Phoenix pay system. Tomorrow is also the two-year anniversary of the government's deadline to fix Phoenix. How many more years will it take for the government to implement a payroll system that pays its workers accurately and on time?

Mr. Speaker, it is such a pleasure for me to get up in the House and talk about democracy. Today Bill C-76 is at third reading. This means that more Canadians in 2019, if it passes through the other place, will have an opportunity to vote than they did under the previous government.The Canada Elections Act sets out a time period for elections and by-elections. Those will all be called within the time allocated. We are very proud of the upcoming by-election on December 3.

Mr. Speaker, again, listen to them: “Data has been stolen”. No data has been stolen. Information has been requested. Statistics Canada makes sure that it follows a process, which is very rigorous and very robust when it comes to making sure it protects privacy and data. It has also engaged the Privacy Commissioner. Members opposite have a fundamental problem with regards to Statistics Canada. They do not understand the importance of good quality data and of evidence-based policy-making. They have a fundamental ideological problem, and that is very unfortunate.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are breaking their promises.The Prime Minister and the Minister of Families promised to improve EI sickness benefits, but they are not doing anything. Was it all just lip service? I have to wonder.The Liberals are tabling the budget implementation act with partial reforms to EI, but it does not contain a single measure addressing sickness benefits. They have just one more chance, one more budget, before their term ends. Are they going to improve EI sickness benefits?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians across the country expect their government to take action to deal with climate change. That is exactly what our government is doing. We are ensuring a price across Canada on what we do not want, pollution, so we can get more of what we want, lower emissions, new business opportunities and more money in the pockets of Canadians. The Leader of the Opposition is at Queen's Park today getting his marching orders from Doug Ford on Stephen Harper's failed plan to deal with climate change. Canadians expect better from the leader of the Conservative Party.

Mr. Speaker, I am quoting the report of the Transportation Safety Board. It says that the slow pace of implementing recommendations perpetuates safety risks. More than 60 recommendations are still outstanding, and a third are more than 20 years old. Ottawa is asleep at the wheel.What will it take to get the Minister of Transportation to stop playing with Canadians' safety?

Mr. Speaker, after consulting with Canadians, after round tables organized by the IRPP, after the procedure and House affairs committee conducted an excellent study, and I thank it for its hard work on this, we are so proud to announce that the Right Hon. David Johnston is Canada's first independent commissioner for debates. This is so important. In 2015 that party's former leader, Mr. Harper, did not participate, did not want to have those national leader debates. This ensures that Canadians will have official debates in English and French, accessible to all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear. Our government understands the importance of protecting privacy and protecting data. That is why we have engaged in a data and digital consultation process to further build more trust with Canadians when it comes to their data.Our government understands why it is important to make sure that, in a digital economy when transactions occur online, people have an understanding about privacy, consent, data ownership and data portability. We are taking additional measures to strengthen our privacy legislation as well.

Mr. Speaker, women have been asking for pay equity legislation for decades. The act the Liberals introduced is a step in the right direction, but it includes none of the pay transparency measures advocates have called for. Will the pay equity commissioner have the resources she or he needs to do the job well? We still do not know.The Liberals have been making promises for the past three years, so why is there still so much work to do? Most importantly, why are women going to have to wait another four years for pay equity to become a reality?

Mr. Speaker, international adoptions must always protect the safety and well-being of the children, as well as comply with the laws of both countries. Harmonizing these laws can be challenging, but the Harper Conservatives did not conduct enough consultations to make sure the provinces and territories, which are responsible for adoption, were on board with the moratorium. They went ahead and cancelled all adoptions from Pakistan, without taking into consideration the generosity of Canadians who wanted to sponsor. We have asked the department to initiate a review of this policy, with the intent to institute a fairer process.

Mr. Speaker, pension security is important to our government. That is why in our last budget we committed to a solution to strengthen the pensions. In my mandate letter, I am also pleased to say I have been tasked with this. Our government has been consulting with stakeholders on this issue for the last number of years. We want to continue to get this right. We are consulting with stakeholders to ensure not that we get any solution, but that we get the right solution. This is a decades-old problem. What government is solving it? Our government is solving it. We are going to get the right solution to this problem.

Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing here is that the Conservative Party of Canada learned nothing from Canadians in the 2015 election. When we restored the long-form census as the very first thing we did when we took office in 2015, Canadians from coast to coast to coast cheered.The Conservatives attack data, science and evidence as the grounding of strong public policy. They continue to show they are still the party of Stephen Harper, that they are still the party of a war on science and facts.

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to ensuring that Canadians receive the tax credits and benefits to which they are entitled. We have made significant progress in getting benefits to eligible Canadians. For example, the CRA now proactively communicates with low-income non-filers so that they can get the money they are owed. After 10 years of Conservative cuts, we will continue to invest in a new client-focused approach.

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, our government is taking meaningful action to ensure that tax evaders and tax avoiders are forced to pay taxes. During our first years in offie, we invested nearly $1 billion to help the Canada Revenue Agency better target individuals who are trying to avoid their responsibilities. We are also in the process of making sure that benefits reach those who are entitled to them, even if they have low incomes and lack the means to apply. That is the definition of a fair system that looks after people.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for giving me a chance to remind all members of the House that employment insurance has an important role to play in helping families, especially those struggling to get by, because it is vital that they receive the high-quality services and benefits they need.I am also pleased to say that since 2015, we have reformed the five existing special benefits and added two others. All these benefits, including sickness benefits, now have added flexibility, making them more responsive to families' actual circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear, when it comes to privacy and data, that we will continue to make sure that the processes are followed to protect consent and issues of privacy. What I find very interesting is the members opposite continue to undermine and attack Statistics Canada. They have a long track record against evidence-based decision-making, against facts, against data. What is their problem with good quality data? That is why the first decision point of our government was to reinstate the mandatory long-form census. This was applauded by Canadians from coast to coast to coast, including Conservative ridings. The members opposite should talk to Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, there are obviously outstanding legal proceedings with respect to this matter. As has been explained in the House repeatedly, while those proceedings are outstanding, it is certainly inappropriate for the government to make comment on the proceedings. It is equally inappropriate for the opposition to press questions on that matter, because that has an interference with the judicial process, which members of Parliament are supposed to refrain from.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister continues to undermine democracy in our country by failing to call by-elections for three of the four vacant seats in Parliament. He is picking and choosing which Canadians get representation based upon his own political agenda.Rather than leaving over 300,000 Canadians without a voice in Parliament, when will the Prime Minister respect democracy and call these by-elections?

Mr. Speaker, that is the problem right there. They are not going to provide benefits; they are going to take them out of people's pockets.This kind of reminds me of how the Liberals promised to stop subjecting charities to gratuitous audits. It was even included in the minister's mandate letter. Furthermore, this summer, Ontario's Superior Court told them to stop.Are the Liberals going to stop? No, they are planning to appeal the decision.Are they going to stop going after Canadians who receive benefits? No, because these Canadians are too easy a target.Are they going to go after the wealthy individuals named in the Panama papers? They have not done it so far, so why would they start now?I will repeat my question. Why maintain this two-tier tax system?

Mr. Speaker, again, all the appropriate processes were followed. Statistics Canada makes routine requests. It has clear, robust provisions in place to protect privacy, to protect data, to make sure it is anonymized. It has clear processes in place.Members opposite fundamentally have an issue when it comes to data, because they do not believe in the facts. They do not believe in data. They fundamentally do not believe in making sure that we have a mandatory long-form census. This is where the disagreement occurs: We support good, quality, reliable data, they do not.

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite's very thoughtful question is on an issue that we also think is very important. We support retirement security. That is why we strengthened the CPP, the Canadian pension plan. We also expanded the wage earner protection program. As the member also highlighted, in our 2018 budget, we put a whole-of-government approach when it comes to dealing with pensions in a meaningful way. We are absolutely committed to workers and pensioners.

Mr. Speaker, we are so proud that the Right Hon. David Johnston will take on this role to ensure that all Canadians from coast to coast to coast, official language minority communities and Canadians with disabilities will have access to two debates, one in English and one in French, and to ensure all Canadians can see their leaders in a moment that is so important during elections to decide who they want to govern them. We believe His Excellency, and we know Canadians will see this as well, will be an excellent independent commissioner for debates in our country.

Mr. Speaker, there were all kinds of consultations in the past year. We consulted parliamentarians. We consulted Canadians. We consulted media across Canada, and we developed an appropriate plan.I am pleased that my colleague opposite acknowledges the importance of leaders' debates. It is so important for Canadians to have that kind of spontaneous interaction with their leaders; they are the ones making the decisions, after all. This is excellent for democracy, and I hope everyone in the House will work with the Right Hon. David Johnston to ensure that our debates are—

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to effective implementation and enforcement of proactive pay equity in federally regulated workplaces. Our pay equity plan was constructed with consultation from employers; yes, from labour; yes, from experts and advocates. That is why we are so sure that this approach is the right one to take.We are very proud of introducing this proactive pay equity legislation, the first federal government in the history of this country to take this issue seriously.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.Since 2015, we have introduced a number of initiatives to improve the CRA's services, but we recognize that we can do more. The chief service officer will be responsible for leading the transformation of CRA's service culture using a client-centred, integrated approach.My top priority is to improve the CRA's services to Canadians, including the people of Scarborough North, so that they are treated as important clients, worthy of respect.

Mr. Speaker, we have 800 pages from just the last two years of times when Canadians' information had been breached by the government. Liberals do not protect data. They lose it, they misuse it and they leak it. Canadians do not trust Liberals when it comes to their information. I would be happy to table those documents after question period.When will the Prime Minister stop this unauthorized surveillance of Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, as chair of the all-party women's caucus, I have heard from many individuals and groups in my riding and across the country on the importance of women's participation in our workforce and our economy. Pay equity is one way our government can move the dial toward equality and empowerment.Could the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour, who will be in my riding tomorrow, please update the House on our government's commitment to move forward with pay equity measures?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was proud to stand in this honourable place with my colleague, the Minister of Status of Women, and the President of the Treasury Board to announce that our government will be moving forward with proactive pay equity legislation. This is fundamental to address the wrongs of unequal pay for work of equal value. Hundreds of thousands of women will benefit from this action. I am very proud of our government that understands that equity in the workplace is good for all of us.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the chair of the Transportation Safety Board recognized that Canada has one of the safest transportation systems in the world.We think so, too. At Transport Canada, our top priority is the safety of all modes of transportation. That will continue to be our focus. We are especially pleased that the Transportation Safety Board removed three major items from the Watchlist yesterday. That is progress.We will continue our efforts to make our transportation system safer—

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the chair of the Transportation Safety Board recognized that Canada has one of the safest transportation systems in the world.We think so, too. At Transport Canada, our top priority is the safety of all modes of transportation. That will continue to be our focus. We are especially pleased that the Transportation Safety Board removed three major items from the Watchlist yesterday. That is progress.We will continue our efforts to make our transportation system safer—

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was proud to stand in this honourable place with my colleague, the Minister of Status of Women, and the President of the Treasury Board to announce that our government will be moving forward with proactive pay equity legislation. This is fundamental to address the wrongs of unequal pay for work of equal value. Hundreds of thousands of women will benefit from this action. I am very proud of our government that understands that equity in the workplace is good for all of us.

Mr. Speaker, as chair of the all-party women's caucus, I have heard from many individuals and groups in my riding and across the country on the importance of women's participation in our workforce and our economy. Pay equity is one way our government can move the dial toward equality and empowerment.Could the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour, who will be in my riding tomorrow, please update the House on our government's commitment to move forward with pay equity measures?

Mr. Speaker, we have 800 pages from just the last two years of times when Canadians' information had been breached by the government. Liberals do not protect data. They lose it, they misuse it and they leak it. Canadians do not trust Liberals when it comes to their information. I would be happy to table those documents after question period.When will the Prime Minister stop this unauthorized surveillance of Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.Since 2015, we have introduced a number of initiatives to improve the CRA's services, but we recognize that we can do more. The chief service officer will be responsible for leading the transformation of CRA's service culture using a client-centred, integrated approach.My top priority is to improve the CRA's services to Canadians, including the people of Scarborough North, so that they are treated as important clients, worthy of respect.

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to effective implementation and enforcement of proactive pay equity in federally regulated workplaces. Our pay equity plan was constructed with consultation from employers; yes, from labour; yes, from experts and advocates. That is why we are so sure that this approach is the right one to take.We are very proud of introducing this proactive pay equity legislation, the first federal government in the history of this country to take this issue seriously.

Mr. Speaker, there were all kinds of consultations in the past year. We consulted parliamentarians. We consulted Canadians. We consulted media across Canada, and we developed an appropriate plan.I am pleased that my colleague opposite acknowledges the importance of leaders' debates. It is so important for Canadians to have that kind of spontaneous interaction with their leaders; they are the ones making the decisions, after all. This is excellent for democracy, and I hope everyone in the House will work with the Right Hon. David Johnston to ensure that our debates are—

Mr. Speaker, we are so proud that the Right Hon. David Johnston will take on this role to ensure that all Canadians from coast to coast to coast, official language minority communities and Canadians with disabilities will have access to two debates, one in English and one in French, and to ensure all Canadians can see their leaders in a moment that is so important during elections to decide who they want to govern them. We believe His Excellency, and we know Canadians will see this as well, will be an excellent independent commissioner for debates in our country.

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite's very thoughtful question is on an issue that we also think is very important. We support retirement security. That is why we strengthened the CPP, the Canadian pension plan. We also expanded the wage earner protection program. As the member also highlighted, in our 2018 budget, we put a whole-of-government approach when it comes to dealing with pensions in a meaningful way. We are absolutely committed to workers and pensioners.

Mr. Speaker, again, all the appropriate processes were followed. Statistics Canada makes routine requests. It has clear, robust provisions in place to protect privacy, to protect data, to make sure it is anonymized. It has clear processes in place.Members opposite fundamentally have an issue when it comes to data, because they do not believe in the facts. They do not believe in data. They fundamentally do not believe in making sure that we have a mandatory long-form census. This is where the disagreement occurs: We support good, quality, reliable data, they do not.

Mr. Speaker, that is the problem right there. They are not going to provide benefits; they are going to take them out of people's pockets.This kind of reminds me of how the Liberals promised to stop subjecting charities to gratuitous audits. It was even included in the minister's mandate letter. Furthermore, this summer, Ontario's Superior Court told them to stop.Are the Liberals going to stop? No, they are planning to appeal the decision.Are they going to stop going after Canadians who receive benefits? No, because these Canadians are too easy a target.Are they going to go after the wealthy individuals named in the Panama papers? They have not done it so far, so why would they start now?I will repeat my question. Why maintain this two-tier tax system?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister continues to undermine democracy in our country by failing to call by-elections for three of the four vacant seats in Parliament. He is picking and choosing which Canadians get representation based upon his own political agenda.Rather than leaving over 300,000 Canadians without a voice in Parliament, when will the Prime Minister respect democracy and call these by-elections?

Mr. Speaker, there are obviously outstanding legal proceedings with respect to this matter. As has been explained in the House repeatedly, while those proceedings are outstanding, it is certainly inappropriate for the government to make comment on the proceedings. It is equally inappropriate for the opposition to press questions on that matter, because that has an interference with the judicial process, which members of Parliament are supposed to refrain from.

Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear, when it comes to privacy and data, that we will continue to make sure that the processes are followed to protect consent and issues of privacy. What I find very interesting is the members opposite continue to undermine and attack Statistics Canada. They have a long track record against evidence-based decision-making, against facts, against data. What is their problem with good quality data? That is why the first decision point of our government was to reinstate the mandatory long-form census. This was applauded by Canadians from coast to coast to coast, including Conservative ridings. The members opposite should talk to Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for giving me a chance to remind all members of the House that employment insurance has an important role to play in helping families, especially those struggling to get by, because it is vital that they receive the high-quality services and benefits they need.I am also pleased to say that since 2015, we have reformed the five existing special benefits and added two others. All these benefits, including sickness benefits, now have added flexibility, making them more responsive to families' actual circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, our government is taking meaningful action to ensure that tax evaders and tax avoiders are forced to pay taxes. During our first years in offie, we invested nearly $1 billion to help the Canada Revenue Agency better target individuals who are trying to avoid their responsibilities. We are also in the process of making sure that benefits reach those who are entitled to them, even if they have low incomes and lack the means to apply. That is the definition of a fair system that looks after people.

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to ensuring that Canadians receive the tax credits and benefits to which they are entitled. We have made significant progress in getting benefits to eligible Canadians. For example, the CRA now proactively communicates with low-income non-filers so that they can get the money they are owed. After 10 years of Conservative cuts, we will continue to invest in a new client-focused approach.

Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing here is that the Conservative Party of Canada learned nothing from Canadians in the 2015 election. When we restored the long-form census as the very first thing we did when we took office in 2015, Canadians from coast to coast to coast cheered.The Conservatives attack data, science and evidence as the grounding of strong public policy. They continue to show they are still the party of Stephen Harper, that they are still the party of a war on science and facts.

Mr. Speaker, pension security is important to our government. That is why in our last budget we committed to a solution to strengthen the pensions. In my mandate letter, I am also pleased to say I have been tasked with this. Our government has been consulting with stakeholders on this issue for the last number of years. We want to continue to get this right. We are consulting with stakeholders to ensure not that we get any solution, but that we get the right solution. This is a decades-old problem. What government is solving it? Our government is solving it. We are going to get the right solution to this problem.

Mr. Speaker, international adoptions must always protect the safety and well-being of the children, as well as comply with the laws of both countries. Harmonizing these laws can be challenging, but the Harper Conservatives did not conduct enough consultations to make sure the provinces and territories, which are responsible for adoption, were on board with the moratorium. They went ahead and cancelled all adoptions from Pakistan, without taking into consideration the generosity of Canadians who wanted to sponsor. We have asked the department to initiate a review of this policy, with the intent to institute a fairer process.

Mr. Speaker, women have been asking for pay equity legislation for decades. The act the Liberals introduced is a step in the right direction, but it includes none of the pay transparency measures advocates have called for. Will the pay equity commissioner have the resources she or he needs to do the job well? We still do not know.The Liberals have been making promises for the past three years, so why is there still so much work to do? Most importantly, why are women going to have to wait another four years for pay equity to become a reality?

Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear. Our government understands the importance of protecting privacy and protecting data. That is why we have engaged in a data and digital consultation process to further build more trust with Canadians when it comes to their data.Our government understands why it is important to make sure that, in a digital economy when transactions occur online, people have an understanding about privacy, consent, data ownership and data portability. We are taking additional measures to strengthen our privacy legislation as well.

Mr. Speaker, after consulting with Canadians, after round tables organized by the IRPP, after the procedure and House affairs committee conducted an excellent study, and I thank it for its hard work on this, we are so proud to announce that the Right Hon. David Johnston is Canada's first independent commissioner for debates. This is so important. In 2015 that party's former leader, Mr. Harper, did not participate, did not want to have those national leader debates. This ensures that Canadians will have official debates in English and French, accessible to all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I am quoting the report of the Transportation Safety Board. It says that the slow pace of implementing recommendations perpetuates safety risks. More than 60 recommendations are still outstanding, and a third are more than 20 years old. Ottawa is asleep at the wheel.What will it take to get the Minister of Transportation to stop playing with Canadians' safety?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians across the country expect their government to take action to deal with climate change. That is exactly what our government is doing. We are ensuring a price across Canada on what we do not want, pollution, so we can get more of what we want, lower emissions, new business opportunities and more money in the pockets of Canadians. The Leader of the Opposition is at Queen's Park today getting his marching orders from Doug Ford on Stephen Harper's failed plan to deal with climate change. Canadians expect better from the leader of the Conservative Party.

Mr. Speaker, again, listen to them: “Data has been stolen”. No data has been stolen. Information has been requested. Statistics Canada makes sure that it follows a process, which is very rigorous and very robust when it comes to making sure it protects privacy and data. It has also engaged the Privacy Commissioner. Members opposite have a fundamental problem with regards to Statistics Canada. They do not understand the importance of good quality data and of evidence-based policy-making. They have a fundamental ideological problem, and that is very unfortunate.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are breaking their promises.The Prime Minister and the Minister of Families promised to improve EI sickness benefits, but they are not doing anything. Was it all just lip service? I have to wonder.The Liberals are tabling the budget implementation act with partial reforms to EI, but it does not contain a single measure addressing sickness benefits. They have just one more chance, one more budget, before their term ends. Are they going to improve EI sickness benefits?

Mr. Speaker, it is such a pleasure for me to get up in the House and talk about democracy. Today Bill C-76 is at third reading. This means that more Canadians in 2019, if it passes through the other place, will have an opportunity to vote than they did under the previous government.The Canada Elections Act sets out a time period for elections and by-elections. Those will all be called within the time allocated. We are very proud of the upcoming by-election on December 3.

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow night, Canadian children will be curious to see what gets into their Halloween bags. Unfortunately, trick or treat remains an apt metaphor for how our federal public servants are compensated under the Phoenix pay system. Tomorrow is also the two-year anniversary of the government's deadline to fix Phoenix. How many more years will it take for the government to implement a payroll system that pays its workers accurately and on time?

Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear. We understand the importance of protecting individual privacy and data. Again, I fail to understand why the members opposite continue to undermine a statistical agency that is revered by Canadians. Well over 80% of Canadians respect Statistics Canada. It is a great organization that collects relevant information, that helps communities and businesses, particularly small and medium-sized businesses, with appropriate data so they can make informed decisions. What do members have against good quality, reliable data?

Mr. Speaker, to go back to the CRA, we have made historic investments to fight against tax cheats. We fully adopted the international standard for automatic information exchange with our partners in the OECD to give the CRA useful data to help fight tax cheats even more effectively. With respect to offshore tax evasion, the CRA is currently conducting audits on over more than 1,100 taxpayers and has opened over 50 criminal investigations. As for the by-elections, we look forward to calling them soon. I look forward to campaigning against people who are so enthusiastic about the democratic process.

Mr. Speaker, here are the facts: Statistics Canada wants to access the information of more than 500,000 Canadians without their consent. It wants to know our bank withdrawals, credit card purchases and even our social insurance numbers.The Prime Minister told the House of Commons yesterday that he supports this practice that allows the Liberal government to get the personal information of Canadian citizens without informing them. How can the Prime Minister agree to this request and allow this to happen?

Mr. Speaker, we know that transportation safety is extremely important to all Canadians. It is important when they travel on trains or planes and it is also important when products are transported across our vast country.We take transportation safety very seriously. We are doing everything we can to improve regulations, consult when necessary, and develop regulations that will keep our transportation system safe.

Mr. Speaker, the law is clear. Under subsection 5(2) of the Privacy Act, the government cannot ask for Canadians' personal and confidential information without their permission.I want to repeat something the Prime Minister said yesterday in the House. He said he was fine with how Canadians' information is being collected without their consent. It is completely unacceptable.What is he waiting for to change tack, do the right thing and put an end to this situation immediately?

Mr. Speaker, we did exactly what we said we were going to do.We understand there is an impact on the farmers, and we are committed to fully and fairly supporting them to make sure they can continue to succeed.We are forming a working group with dairy processors and dairy farmers, and with poultry and egg farmers and processors. Together they will help our supply-managed farmers and processors innovate, grow and remain competitive and sustainable for future generations.We will continue to support our supply-managed sector, and every other agriculture—

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Mississauga—Erin Mills for her hard work on this issue. Yesterday I was so pleased to announce that our government was moving forward on implementing pay equity legislation. I want to thank the Minister of Status of Women and the President of the Treasury Board for their hard work on this file.Pay equity is not just the right thing to do; it is the smart thing to do. When Canadian women can count on equal pay for work of equal value, our economy grows stronger. A strong middle class depends on an economy where everyone has a real and fair chance at success. I want to thank employers, unions and advocates for the valuable input on our plan.

Mr. Speaker, our government remains committed to ensuring that Canadians receive the credits and benefits to which they are entitled, as we recognize that they are essential for middle-class families to make ends meet.We have made significant progress in getting benefits to eligible Canadians. For example, the CRA now proactively communicates with low-income non-filers to encourage them to file so they can get the money they are owed.After 10 years of cuts under the Harper Conservatives, we will continue to invest in a new client-focused approach.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have seen the egregious holes in our income tax system with the paradise papers, the Panama papers, the Isle of Man scam and offshore tax havens. Wealthy Canadians getting off the hook on paying taxes.The Liberal government has done virtually nothing to crack down on offshore tax havens, but it has targeted regular Canadians. Under the Liberal government, well over $1 billion has been clawed back from Canadians, many of whom qualify for the disability tax credit or Canada child benefits.Why are the Liberals denying benefits to families who deserve them?

Mr. Speaker, once again, we are seeing that the Conservatives learned nothing from Canadians in the 2015 election. They scrapped the long-form census and we brought it back. That was the first thing we did when we took office. Quebeckers and Canadians across the country cheered because they know that pursuing policy based on data, facts and information gathered responsibly is the right way to go. They did not want to continue with the old way, Stephen Harper's way, of doing things.

Mr. Speaker, this is how. On this side of the House, we have confidence in the Privacy Commissioner.We always ensure that the personal data of Canadians is protected. Statistics Canada will use anonymized data for statistical purposes only. No personal information will be made public.That said, Quebeckers and all Canadians understand that high quality data is critical to ensuring that government programs remain relevant and effective for all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, again, in the last election, we campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment, grow the economy and help middle-class families. I am pleased to share with the hon. member that our plan to put a price on pollution applies to heavy emitters as well. Our plan is actually going to leave middle-class families better off. Stephen Harper's former director of policy said so and we have confirmed that. We have come forward with the details on how New Brunswickers and members of other provinces are going to do under our plan. I look forward to seeing the hon. member campaign in 2019 on a promise to take money from his constituents to make pollution free again.

Mr. Speaker, our plan is clear. We are putting a price on pollution and making life more affordable for Canadians. Climate change is real. Canadians deserve to know their government has a plan to deal with it, something the Conservative Party does not have. What they do not expect is for the Leader of the Opposition to get ordered around by Premier Ford, who is pushing Stephen Harper's failed agenda of 10 years of doing nothing to deal with climate change. Canadians deserve better.

Mr. Speaker, the member is upset that our leader is talking to my premier in my province. However, he should go back to his province for a moment and take a look at the new exemption that his government is giving to the Belledune coal-fired power plant, which will receive a 96% exemption on the emissions from the smokestack on that coal-fired plant. Could he explain why he is charging more to grandmothers driving to get groceries, but almost nothing to coal-fired plants back in his province?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians just do not trust Liberals with their private information. However, just as importantly, Canadians want to know why the government needs to know who they pay, how much they pay, what they purchase online and what they are giving to their children through e-transfers. Canadians want to know why the government needs to know that and not even tell Canadians they are going to be told about it.This is Big Brother on steroids. It needs to stop. The Prime Minister has the ability to stop it. Why will he not stop this unauthorized surveillance of Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, the Privy Council investigation into leaks from the Liberal cabinet meetings on shipbuilding revealed that 73 people were aware of the substance of the discussions. Of the 73, most were ignored; some were offered deals; one journalist was offered a job, and only one person is facing trial. The Prime Minister speculated that Admiral Norman might face charges, and eventually those charges came. Of the 73 people, only one is facing charges. How did the Prime Minister know that only Admiral Mark Norman would be charged?

Mr. Speaker, Liberals should be targeting tax havens, not targeting families.The Prime Minister made a snide comment yesterday about the NDP when I asked him about the by-elections. It is not just the NDP calling for a vote. It is Canadians.Today, party leaders from across the political spectrum called on the Prime Minister to show respect to voters. Three hundred thousand Canadians are being denied the right to representation by the Prime Minister.Will he listen to parties representing 150 members of Parliament and call the vote now?

Mr. Speaker, I travelled to the West Bank last summer. While there, I had the opportunity to visit the UNRWA's facilities and schools and to speak with the principals, teachers and students. I also had the opportunity to talk to the Palestinian prime minister and minister of education.I also had the pleasure of announcing funding for another organization, Right To Play, which supports education and teacher training in West Bank and Gaza schools.

Mr. Speaker, the minister says these questions are inappropriate. In the first part of question period, there was a lot of talk about data protection. Mark Norman wants data for his legal defence. The only protection going on is the Liberals protecting their butts, both literally and figuratively, with Mr. Butts.Will the government permit the Clerk of the Privy Council to appear before the ethics committee to confirm that none of the materials related to the shipbuilding cabinet discussions have been destroyed, deleted or amended?

Mr. Speaker, for a lot of Canadians this line of questioning by the Conservatives is all too familiar. For 10 years under them in government, they chose to govern by ideology and not by facts or science. When facts got in the way, they simply stopped collecting them. They fired the chief science adviser and eliminated the long-form census. We brought back both of them. Statistics Canada is of course engaged with the Privacy Commissioner's office on this project to ensure that the information of Canadians remains protected.

Mr. Speaker, he says now the carbon tax will create business opportunities. Yesterday the parliamentary secretary was saying exactly the opposite. He said that exempting business from the carbon tax was being done because “The point is to keep jobs in Canada so that emitters do not pollute elsewhere.” We have been saying exactly that. The carbon tax will drive business out of the country to places with poorer environmental standards, killing jobs at home and driving global emissions up abroad. Now that the Liberals agree, will they not axe the tax?

Mr. Speaker, he will take the conversation any time, except for the first two questions. The CBC has written that the Liberal plan will allow 96% of Belledune's greenhouse gas emissions to pass through its giant 168-metre smoke stack for free.The Liberals say carbon taxes will save the earth. Why are they taking carbon taxes then off their coal-fired plants?

Mr. Speaker, our government is ensuring that the personal data of Canadians is protected. Statistics Canada will use anonymized data for statistical purposes only. No personal information will be made public.Statistics Canada is actively engaged with the Privacy Commissioner's office on this project and is working with it to ensure that Canadians' banking information remains protected and private.However, high-quality and timely data are critical to ensuring that government programs remain relevant and effective for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek unanimous consent to table a rather large document. It is actually over 800 pages, and no, it is not the Liberals' omnibus budget implementation act. In fact, it is answers from the government in regard to how many departments, agencies, Crown corporations and other government entities have breached the privacy of Canadians. It is over 800 pages' worth, in less than two years, of when privacy has been breached. I wonder if I would have unanimous consent to table this.

Mr. Speaker, we have been clear day in and day out, when it comes to privacy, when it comes to data protection, this is a priority for this government. With respect to Statistics Canada, it is subject to the Privacy Act, which means that it must ensure compliance with the privacy principles embedded in the act, including the protection of personal information. There is a rigorous and robust process in place. It also engages the Privacy Commissioner as well. Like I said before, we have been very clear. We will always make sure that data and privacy are respected.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals waited so long to pass Bill C-49 that it may not even have an effect this year. Yesterday, the Liberal government proved once again that it has absolutely no understanding of the realities faced by supply-managed farmers. How can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food justify the fact that the USMCA was signed a month ago, yet farmers are still in the dark?Yesterday, the minister had a chance to announce how much money is available and how it will be distributed, but no, he is still figuring out how to set up two working groups.Should he not have set up these working groups before he sacrificed our farmers?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals said during debate last night that the Minister of International Development has personally raised Canada's concerns about particularly problematic material in Palestinian textbooks with the Palestinian Prime Minister and the Minister of Education, and that she raised it as recently as this summer. If that is true, if the government is aware of and is raising the issue of anti-Semitic content in UNRWA textbooks, then why is it also funding them to the tune of $50 million?

Mr. Speaker, steelworkers are on the Hill this week to put pressure on the government to end pension theft. They were blindsided when the government announced a change to creditor protection legislation without including the measures needed to protect pensions.The Liberals promised action in their last budget. The NDP has a bill ready to go. All we have to do is pass it.When will the Liberals listen to reason and protect workers' pensions?

Mr. Speaker, identity theft is not a joke. Millions of families suffer every year. The Prime Minister is putting Canadians' personal information and identity at risk. There is no way to ensure this information will be protected when earlier this year Statistics Canada lost 600 files under his watch. The government has no right to track every financial decision of every Canadian citizen. Will the Liberals cancel this unprecedented and unauthorized surveillance?

Mr. Speaker, the Harper government quietly latched on to an interpretation of sharia law to block international adoptions from Muslim majority countries in 2013. This strange rule applies in countries that do not even follow sharia law. Meanwhile, families like Sarah's are blocked. It has been six years and Sarah still cannot unite with her adopted son. The orphanage is now demanding that Sarah bring him home or give him up. Why did the Liberals take three years to just review this bizarre policy? Will the government stop using an interpretation of sharia law for adoptions?

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege concerning a deliberate attempt by the government to deny me information I requested through Order Paper Question No. 1316. This question read as follows: With regard to the tweet by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change on November 7, 2017, which stated that “Canada salutes Nicaragua and Syria for joining on to the Paris Agreement”: what are the titles of all individuals who approved the tweet? The answer states: We have been clear: the murderous Assad regime must end the indiscriminate violence against its own people. The people of Syria deserve a life free from violence. Canada will continue to support the Syrian people in reaching this goal and in achieving a long-term political solution. Clearly the tweet was a mistake for which the Minister of Environment and Climate Change took full responsibility both through online communications and in the House of Commons. In addition to this being a non-answer, and the subject of my question of privilege, I believe, Mr. Speaker, that you will find that the response actually breaches the Standing Orders as well, and that is a point I will get to later.I was contacted last week by Dean Beeby, of the CBC, about an access to information request he had received an answer to. It is in reference to the tweet I referenced in my question. He suggested that his ATIP had turned up the actual document that shows the names and titles of those who were involved in approving the tweet. Mr. Beeby went on to publish this article on Thursday, October 25, 2018, and the article confirms that Mr. Beeby had indeed obtained information from the government through an ATIP that I could not obtain through a legitimate proceeding of Parliament. The article says: CBC News has obtained documents under the Access to Information Act showing the minister's office gave a final thumbs-up to the tweet 51 minutes before it popped up on [the Minister of the Environment]'s official ministerial Twitter feed last Nov. 7.... The minister noted repeatedly that the social-media misstep occurred on the departmental Twitter account, rather than on her personal Twitter account, suggesting public servants were to blame. Mr. Speaker, I did suspect all along that this was true as well. Because the government held back these details from me, I could not present the evidence to the House in my role as an opposition member. The article went on to report: “The tweet in question was approved by the MO [minister's office] at 2:09 p.m. today and issued at 3:00 PM," says an assessment.... The package shows the names of at least 31 public servants involved in the ill-advised tweet. The released documents show the pre-publication vetting was carried out in advance by the department's “social media” and “home” teams, as well as by [the Minister of the Environment]'s office staff, whose names have been removed from the file. Finally, the article points out that the government also violated the timelines set out in the Access to Information Act. Now, that is not your problem, Mr. Speaker, but it does provide you with more evidence of the government's intent to avoid this issue by withholding information from me and delaying information to the media.I would make one final point. Nowhere in the Access to Information Act does it permit a minister to refuse the names of ministerial staff when providing a response to an access to information request.I do not begrudge Mr. Beeby the fact that he received an answer, but when a journalist and a member of Parliament ask the same question, one would expect the government to at least give the same respect to the member of Parliament as it gave to the journalist, or put another way, treat a proceeding in Parliament with the same respect as an ATIP. In this case, I was given debate and an argument for an answer, whereas the journalist was actually given the answer. Not only is this an affront to the House, in so committing this offence, the government also breached the standing order I mentioned earlier. It is Standing Order 39(1), which says, in part: in putting any such question or in replying to the same no argument or opinion is to be offered, nor any facts stated, except so far as may be necessary to explain the same; and in answering any such question the matter to which the same refers shall not be debated. On December 16, 1980, at page 5797 of Hansard, the Speaker ruled: While it is correct to say that the government is not required by our rules to answer written or oral questions, it would be bold to suggest that no circumstance could ever exist for a prima facie question of privilege to be made where there was a deliberate attempt to deny answers to an hon. member. Omitting the information I was seeking in the government's response to my question and providing exactly what I was seeking to Mr. Beeby demonstrates that the government deliberately withheld information from the House.On page 251 of the 24th edition of Erskin May, it described the contempt as follows: Generally speaking, any action or omission which obstructs or impedes either House of Parliament in the performance of its functions, or which obstructs or impedes any Member or officer of such House in the discharge of his duty, or which has a tendency, directly or indirectly, to produce such results, may be treated as contempt even though there is no precedence of the offence. The government keeps repeating the same offence over and over again. After numerous questions of privilege and warnings from the Chair, it continues to deny members information while providing the same or more accurate information to the media. I think it is important at this time to present to the House a few select examples of when you, Mr. Speaker, took notice of this pattern and heeded a warning. On April 16, 2016, the Speaker found a prima facie question of privilege after the Leader of the Opposition pointed out that specific and detailed information contained in Bill C-14 was given to the media ahead of this House and members of Parliament. During that discussion, Speaker Milliken was referenced, from his ruling of March 19, 2001, when he said: To deny to Members information concerning business that is about to come before the House, while at the same time providing such information to media that will likely be questioning Members about that business, is a situation that the Chair cannot condone. That is exactly the situation I was facing when Mr. Beeby approached me to comment on information he was given and I was not. While he was not impeded in the performance of his function as a journalist, clearly I was impeded in the performance of my function as a member in this place, which breaches my privileges and constitutes a contempt of this House, as outlined in our procedural authorities.

Mr. Speaker, Google and Facebook are reputable organizations too, yet they have had data stolen. The government wants to invade Canadians' privacy.Considering all the chaos the government has caused over the past three years, how can we possibly trust it?The Liberal government is planning to access Canadians' personal and financial information without telling them. Our credit card purchases, our cash withdrawals, our bill payments and our deposits belong to us.When will the Prime Minister stop this unacceptable invasion of Canadian citizens' privacy?

Mr. Speaker, the innuendo in the hon. member's question is entirely inappropriate. The hon. members opposite are not legal counsel. They are not legal agents in the outstanding prosecution. They have no standing with either the defence or the prosecution. They are not parties to the legal proceedings. All members need to allow Canada's independent court system to do its job without partisan interference.

Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time the government has sought to receive private information from Canadians and not told them.In October 2017 and January 2018, Statistics Canada demanded that the TransUnion Credit Bureau hand over millions of files to the government, and these were not anonymous. It demanded social insurance numbers, names, addresses, dates of birth, detailed credit information, balances owed, balances overdue and 30 other fields of data.Will the Prime Minister tell Statistics Canada to stand down?

Mr. Speaker, women have waited 42 years for the Liberals to keep their promise on pay equity. Meanwhile, the unions fought Canada Post 30 years in court, and women's organizations have worked tirelessly to get us to this point to finally have pay equity legislation in the House. They worked for decades. Women are done waiting. Do they really have to wait another four years in order to have equal pay?

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have absolutely nothing against His Excellency Mr. Johnston. I remind members that he was the moderator at the infamous 1984 debate in which Mr. Mulroney dealt a knockout blow to the Liberal prime minister with his famous quote:“We had an option; you had an option.” History repeats itself because the government had an option, consulting or imposing.Why is the government imposing a solution instead of holding consultations?

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that stabilizing the Phoenix pay system remains my absolute priority. We are seeing progress but it is taking too long. Public servants deserve to be paid accurately and on time. However, we are seeing progress. We have dealt with 100,000 transactions in the backlog since January. We have 1,500 people working at the pay centre. We have paid out $1.5 billion in retroactive pay as a result of the collective agreements that were not bargained and were not completed by the previous government.We are taking every step possible to ensure that our public servants are paid.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister continues to treat our democracy like his own personal game. He sets the rules and Canadians are his pawns. Canadians were told today that he had chosen a commissioner of debates for federal elections. He has done this without any discussion or consultation with Canadians. When will the Prime Minister stop acting like a dictator and start respecting our democracy?

Mr. Speaker, after having band-aid solutions by the Harper government for 10 years, our grain farmers have asked our government for a solution to get hopper cars moving and to get our grain crops to international markets so they can make a living.I know we listened and took action to address these concerns. Would the Minister of Transport please inform the Manitoba farmers and all Canadians about what he has done to fix the rail system?

Well, Mr. Speaker, they say a gaffe is when someone accidentally tells the truth, and yesterday the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment had such a gaffe. I asked him why his government was exempting large industrial emitters from the carbon tax. He said that if they were forced to pay a tax, we “could potentially have jobs leave and it will do nothing for emissions”, which is exactly what our side has been saying: High taxes drive jobs out of the country, global emissions up and do nothing for the environment.Now that the Liberals agree, will they exempt all Canadians from their carbon tax?

Mr. Speaker, I can tell by the excitement on the other side of the House that the members have missed me dearly.I am so pleased to answer the question. Our government campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. Our plan involves putting a price on pollution, including a price on emitters. If the hon. member wants to talk about the coal industry, I would like to flag that we are actually phasing out coal by 2030. When the hon. member was actually sitting around the cabinet table under Stephen Harper's government, they did not plan to take this action until 2062. That is 32 years with cleaner air, less childhood asthma and a cleaner environment.If the hon. member wants to get serious about the environment, I will take this conversation any time.

Mr. Speaker, StatsCanada has written Canada's nine largest financial institutions and demanded that they hand over millions and millions of financial transactions by hundreds of thousands of Canadians, and were it not for a Global News report, Canadians would never know that the government was this far into their personal information. They know now and they are appalled.Will the Prime Minister use his power and direct StatsCan to cease and desist?

I want to be very clear, Mr. Speaker. The Prime Minister is telling Canadians that it is okay for their government to understand all of their financial information held by banks, all of their financial information held by credit agencies, all of their financial information held by utilities and by their mobile phones. Every single thing we use in our lives is something that the current government wants to have its hands on. This is ridiculous. Will the government tell Statistics Canada to back down from—

Mr. Speaker, I absolutely apologize. It is my mistake. This actually already has been tabled. This is a response from the government. It was tabled on June 8, so it is actually in the record already that the breach of privacy has occurred tens of thousands of times in less than two years.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is time for the government to stop playing hide-and-seek in the Admiral Norman case. We are asking for assurances that the documents Admiral Norman needs for his defence have not been destroyed.Will the Prime Minister ask the Clerk of the Privy Council to appear before the committee to indicate whether the documents were destroyed, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, there have been discussions among the parties, and I would like to move two motions, which hopefully will have unanimous support. First, I move: That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, the deferred recorded division on motion M-161, standing in the name of the Member for Saint John—Rothesay and on motion M-155, standing in the name of the Member for Scarborough Centre, scheduled to take place Wednesday, October 31, 2018, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), shall be deferred anew until later today, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business. And that if a recorded division is requested later today on Bill C-376, An Act to designate the month of April as Sikh Heritage Month, it be deferred until Wednesday, November 7, 2018, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business.

Mr. Speaker, the second motion is in relation to the ethics committee, or ETHI. I move: That, in relation to its study on Breach of Personal Information Involving Cambridge Analytica and Facebook, three members of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics be authorized to travel to London, United Kingdom, in the Fall of 2018, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals made that appointment without any consultation with the other parties. What the Prime Minister has done is made a unilateral decision to name the debates commissioner, set the rules and spend $5.5 million to set up the officer of the commissioner, an office nobody was asking for except for the Prime Minister's Office. The Prime Minister continues to abuse our democracy for his own political gain. Will the Prime Minister abandon his attempt to manipulate and rig the upcoming election?

Mr. Speaker, since we took office, the Minister of National Revenue has been working hard to repair the damage the Harper Conservatives did to client service at the Canada Revenue Agency.Can the minister explain how the appointment of CRA's first chief service officer will help the agency to meet its client service objectives?

Mr. Speaker, as we have said time and again in the House, we believe in the collective bargaining process. We know this has been a difficult process. That is why last week I took the measure to appoint a new mediator. Both parties are working closely with the new mediator, and they are still at the table collectively bargaining, as they should. We look forward to an update on those talks in the near future.

Mr. Speaker, working with the Privacy Commissioner means heeding concerns about privacy for Canadians, not using his office for political cover. One expert has said that the law has never really contemplated anything on this scale. We are not talking about transactions with possible criminal links. These are regular Canadians going about their business and the Liberal government wants to know every detail of their financial lives.It is 2018, not 1984. When will the Liberals hear the privacy concerns or are they going to continue their plans for an Orwellian intrusion into the lives of Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Kildonan—St. Paul for her advocacy for Manitobans.The Harper Conservatives pretend to be the friends of our grain farmers, but for 10 long years they did not do anything. In fact, when we brought in freight rail legislation to help our farmers and shippers, the Conservatives voted against it.Our grain farmers and other producers in this country should know that this government has their backs.

Mr. Speaker, the government has no right to snoop through the personal financial information of Canadians, yet the Liberals are demanding that credit bureaus and banks secretly hand over comprehensive personal information, bank balances, mortgage payments, online purchases, credit card statements, they want it all. When will they stop this unauthorized surveillance on Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, the Canada Revenue Agency continues to be the talk of the town for all the wrong reasons. It dawdles endlessly when it comes to the wealthy KPMG clients and other names cited in the Panama papers yet ruthlessly attacks Canadians who receive government benefits but do not have the means to defend themselves. The CRA has recouped more than $1 billion in five years from audits of 332,000 files yet it is incapable of processing the 3,000 files on Canadians implicated in the Panama papers a year ago.Why are the Liberals condoning this double standard on tax justice?

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about pension theft, not CPP. A steelworkers delegation is on Parliament Hill this week to remind the government about the need to change Canada's inadequate bankruptcy and insolvency laws. These people understand that under current bankruptcy laws, their pensions could be reduced with a stroke of a pen.How can the government explain to these steelworkers its failure to protect millions of Canadian workers from the theft of their pensions? How can it explain this betrayal?

Mr. Speaker, the minister does not seem to have read the report. The Transportation Safety Board was clear. The government is managing safety very poorly, and the oversight regime for federally regulated transportation companies falls short.In addition, the department is falling unbelievably behind on regulating companies. In short, the transportation safety problem is the department's fault. When will the Liberals stop playing with the safety of Quebeckers and Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday on the picket line with Canada Post workers I learned that the company has suspended a number of benefits, including short-term disability payments. Michael Wall, who has been employed at the company since 2004 and has a serious illness, is depending on those payments in order to make ends meet. For Canada Post to respond to the strike by attacking its most vulnerable workers is cynical and cruel. While the strike is rotating, these cuts in payments are not. Will the minister be complicit in this mistreatment of Michael and those like him or will she get on the phone today and tell Canada Post to back off?

Mr. Speaker, again, the innuendo that is buried in that question is absurd.