Most toxic speeches
Madam Speaker, in possibly one of the worst interviews ever given, yesterday the Minister of Immigration once again angrily called his Ontario provincial counterpart several inappropriate names after she requested federal support to pay for the social welfare costs of the Prime Minister's #WelcometoCanada illegal border crossers. When pressed on what evidence he had to support the name he called her, he got even angrier and doubled-down.Will the minister apologize for his name calling and shameful disregard for all Ontario taxpayers?
Madam Speaker, this week we learned that the Liberal government would give a carbon tax exemption to New Brunswick's Belledune coal facility. Now, the Liberals have admitted that their carbon tax on large emitters will kill jobs, but the fact is that this carbon tax is already costing jobs in my community.Why does the Liberal government give exemptions to Liberal ridings while punishing hard-working Canadians?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals have been defending this for four days. What a backtrack this is. This is a personal violation of every Canadian. Canadians have no faith or trust in the current Liberal government and how it will use that data. Over the past 19 months, there have been hundreds of thousands of examples of privacy breaches by the Liberal government. Canadians are rightly cynical, and they will not stand for this intrusion into their personal lives. Why are the Liberals supporting this gross violation into the privacy of Canadians?
Madam Speaker, Liberals always put criminals ahead of victims and law-abiding Canadians. Tori Stafford's killer was transferred from jail to a healing lodge on their watch. Today, her loved ones are gathering to call for action, demanding that child killers be kept behind bars, not in healing lodges without fences. However, so far the Liberals refuse to act. Canadians are outraged about it. What is taking so long, and when will the Liberals actually do the right thing and put Tori's killer back behind bars where she belongs?
Madam Speaker, the Minister of Border Security is not aware that the number of illegal migrants in Canada is going up, which is odd considering that his officials and policy advisers have the RCMP's figures at their disposal. Even the media has confirmed the facts. For two years now, we have been saying that urgent, responsible action is needed. Either the minister is getting bad advice or he is simply incompetent. Do we need to do the minister's job for him, or is he finally going to take action?
I will take that as a no, Madam Speaker, but let me try again.I am not sure if the minister watched that interview, but he really should, because it was really a hot mess. However, this is not about his lack of media training. This is about positive federal-provincial relationships to come up with good public policy solutions.Will the minister humble himself and apologize to one of the strongest women I know, Lisa MacLeod, for his shameful, inappropriate name calling and outburst?
Madam Speaker, here are the facts. We invested $173 million to better manage the situation. Over $7 million of that money is in place to ensure that failed asylum claimants leave Canada. We are managing the situation properly. That is what Canadians expect from us, and that is exactly what we are doing.
Madam Speaker, these unjustified and illegal tariffs are hurting the American economy, American workers and American consumers of course. The national security excuse is absurd and insulting to Canadians. That is why we have imposed measured tariffs that are perfectly reciprocal. Canada must stand united against these attacks on our workers.
Madam Speaker, that was some mighty fine kowtowing. We already know that governors generals do not really do anything. Why should taxpayers have to pay for this?It is unbelievable that they can claim office expenses for the rest of their lives. It is even more unbelievable that these aristocrats do not even have to disclose where the money is spent.The Prime Minister said that he expected greater transparency.Will he open the books instead of opening his wallet for these freeloading carpetbaggers?
Madam Speaker, Canada Post's targeting of vulnerable postal workers is shameful. First it cut off short-term disability payments, then long-term disability payments. Then it went after people's maternity leave benefits. This is a morally bankrupt tactic by Canada Post and so far the government has chosen to be complicit. Cutting benefits is not good faith collective bargaining. What is the government doing to stop this brutal assault on workers' rights and encourage Canada Post to bargain in good faith?
Madam Speaker, again, part of our plan to protect the environment, which is essential for those of us in government to take seriously, is to put a price on pollution that is increasing to $50 a tonne by 2022. This is going to have the impact of putting more money into the pockets of middle-class families.I am extraordinarily disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaign in 2019 on a promise to take money from their constituents so they can make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, for the workers currently on the floor of steel mills in Hamilton or at SMEs in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean, the negotiations between the United States, Mexico, and Canada are not just some game to be won.The unfair U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum are a serious threat to jobs and my region. Workers always need to come first in trade negotiations.Will the government promise to refuse to sign the agreement as long as the tariffs have not been lifted?
Madam Speaker, again, we were elected on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. We have been transparent with our plan to put a price on pollution that will increase over time to being $50 a tonne by 2020.Again, I am curious why the Conservatives refuse to put forward a plan. Instead of actually coming forward with productive ideas in the conversation, they seem committed to adopting the approach taken by Doug Ford in Ontario, which is to do absolutely nothing.
Madam Speaker, it is news to us that this is a pilot project. Could the government tell the pilot to land the plane? This situation is ridiculous.What is worse, there could be privacy breaches. We requested information about this. In Canada, during the past 19 months there were more than 1,000 situations where personal information was disclosed.How can we have faith in this so-called pilot project?
Madam Speaker, the Minister of National Revenue keeps claiming that service is her priority, yet under her watch, service continues to get even worse, despite the budget increase. She has been picking on single parents, she has not reviewed all of the disability tax credits she took away, she has taken no meaningful action on offshore tax avoidance and evasion, wait times are getting longer and the call centre is still a disaster.Will the minister stop claiming that service is her priority and start delivering service to Canadians?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals just keep saying, Nothing to see here. Move along, folks.If there was really nothing to hide, then why did they not just tell Canadians, in the first place, that they were collecting this information? We are talking about things like Canadians' ATM withdrawals, their credit card transactions and their bill payments. The first step to fixing a problem is actually admitting that there is a problem.Will the Liberals stop trying to sweep this under the carpet and admit that trying to steal Canadians' data without their consent is a real problem?
Madam Speaker, now that the Liberals have their new agreement, millions of tonnes of American chicken, eggs and turkey are about to flood the Canadian market.Pierre-Luc Leblanc, president of Éleveurs de volailles du Québec, the provincial poultry farmers' association, says it may seem like no big deal now, but over the next five to 10 years, it will put poultry producers in a precarious position. This agreement came as a surprise and a disappointment to poultry farmers, and they are asking the government for compensation.Here is my question on their behalf for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the Prime Minister: When they will listen to farmers?
Madam Speaker, another day has gone by with the Liberals refusing to actually listen to Canadians. Putting aside the hundreds of pages of privacy breaches by the government, the state does not have the right to monitor law-abiding citizens going about their daily lives, full stop.Will the Liberals accept that people are rightfully concerned, and end this unprecedented surveillance scheme?
Madam Speaker, again, we have to take protecting the environment seriously. The only plan we put in place is the one we have been telling Canadians about for a significant period of time now, which is to have the price on pollution that we have laid out in public leading up to 2022.I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate that all the revenues generated from this are going back to the citizens who live in the provinces where it is collected and it is going to put more money into the pockets of middle-class families. One final time, I am pleased to share that I am disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaigning on a promise to take that money from their constituents to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, revelations of the staggering scale of liabilities in the hundreds of billions for the cleanup of mines and well sites has stunned Canadians. However, for those who have long called for full disclosure of the true cost of reclamation of industrial sites in advance of project approvals, this comes as no surprise. The federal government holds the power to prevent downloading of this massive liability.I call on the government to act now on Alberta's demands, amend the federal bankruptcy and creditor laws and give higher priority to environmental cleanup to end the downloading of liability to Canadians.
I am going to keep on this, Madam Speaker. I think we have them on run here.He refuses to answer the question. He said that by 2022, the Liberals will have a price of $50 a tonne, which is 11¢ a litre for a litre of gas. I have asked, given the evidence, whether they plan to increase it further if they are re-elected. He keeps dodging.Will he end the hidden agenda and confirm, yes or no, whether the tax will rise above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Madam Speaker, the situation is very clear to millions of Canadians. Statistics Canada has no business poking around in the personal bank accounts of honest Canadians. That is clear. Pilot project or not, that is a fundamental principle that we, the Conservatives, will defend.Yes, Statistics Canada has been gathering information for 100 years, but it has been doing so with Canadians' consent and permission.In this case, Statistics Canada plans to poke around in their bank accounts without their consent. That makes no sense. Why do the Liberals continue to defend the indefensible?
Madam Speaker, I would say that incompetence is cutting $400 million from border services and thinking it would not affect results.I must inform my hon. colleague that we have invested $173 million to ensure that we have the resources in place to get the job done right. In August and September, the numbers were down compared to last year's figures. We hope the same will happen in October. This clearly shows that our plan is working.
Madam Speaker, if they had not created the problem, there would be no need to reinvest the money.The situation is much worse than that. The Liberals boast about reinvesting in borders services, but the union president, Jean-Pierre Fortin, seems very surprised by what the minister is saying because, to date, not a single penny has found its way down to our border officers. The money is there. It is somewhere in the sky, in the department, but it has not made its way down to the ground.Can the Liberals give us an intelligent answer? They need to stop saying that we made cuts and tell us where their money is.
Madam Speaker, the accusations made by the member are completely inaccurate and wrong. There is not a file that is closer to my heart than this one. From the day I was elected, I have been working on this. As the daughter of a proud steelworker and a lifelong Hamiltonian, this file is extremely important. Consultations have and will continue to take place. In our 2018 budget, as well as my mandate letter, I have been tasked with this. I have consulted and I will continue to consult. The member knows this is a decades old problem and it is our government that will solve it. No matter what misinformation he gives, it will not stop me or our government.
Madam Speaker, now the Liberals are hiding behind Statistics Canada when it was their idea to invade Canadian privacy. This is why the personal violation and breach of trust becomes important. If a mom and a dad transfer $15,000 to their son and daughter-in-law to help with the purchase of their first home, should they expect a call from the government asking them why? Will the government call new Canadians after they transfer money back home to their family in the Philippines, asking what that transfer was for? The potential for abuse is real. This personal violation of privacy is wrong on every level. Why can the Liberal government not see that?
Madam Speaker, our government knows the importance of taking action to protect our species and wildlife. That is why this week we are taking unprecedented new measures to further help the recovery of B.C. southern resident killer whales. The new measures include $143 million invested in critical steps to protect this west coast icon. Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment please further explain the steps the government is taking to protect our southern resident killer whales?
Madam Speaker, Canadians are appalled to learn that Statistics Canada plans to access their detailed personal banking information. They were never consulted and did not consent. Like Apple or Facebook, the Liberal government is failing a fundamental principle of consent for privacy. Building a massive database of personal banking information without telling anyone is just wrong. This banking data breach is only the tip of the sphere of the new Liberal census Canada scheme. It is not a pilot project; it is the actual new regime the Liberals put in place.Will the government halt this data collection from running wild until it is investigated, there are consultations and consent is obtained?
Madam Speaker, veterans have fought hard for this country and deserve nothing but respect from our government. When the Liberal government allocated funds for veterans, we expected these funds to be spent. The government is doing what it said it would never do, authorize funds for veterans and fail to use them. The Liberals are not honouring their promise to respect veterans and to make sure every dime allocated is spent. This is unacceptable.When will the Liberals show veterans the respect they deserve and make sure every dollar allocated by this House is spent?
Madam Speaker, a report out this week says that over the last 25 years the earth's oceans have retained 60% more heat than scientists had thought. Also this week, a glacier in Antarctica lost a section of ice five times the size of Manhattan, but the Liberals do not seem to get the urgency of climate change. They think following Harper's targets is just fine. Our oceans are warming, our icebergs are melting. We need urgent action now.Why do the Liberals not ditch their grossly inadequate plan and come up with something consistent with the urgency of climate change?
Madam Speaker, our government has been going around the country to talk to Canadians about how much immigration matters to them and their local communities. Canadians have been asking for immigration as an important tool to address labour market shortages, as well as to bring in much-needed skills.After three years in opposition, my hon. colleague has finally discovered the importance of talking to Canadians about immigration. With all the blocking of people she has done on Twitter, I hope this will be the last way she can communicate with Canadians.
Madam Speaker, the government admits that its new carbon tax will add at least 11¢ a litre to Canadians when they gas up their cars. However, a government analysis, quietly posted online this week, shows that after the next election, the Liberals plan to increase that tax even further. How much? Well, an earlier ministerial briefing note said that it would have to go up six times as high as the government currently admits. One UN report cited today by the government says that it will have to be 100 times higher than the government is currently admitting.Will the government today confirm it will not increase the tax after the election?
Madam Speaker, if this was a pilot project, then why did the Privacy Commissioner launch a full investigation?If the Liberals are so proud of this, they certainly should have been announcing this publicly. The Prime Minister once expressed his admiration for basic dictatorship. Is this where he got the idea to start tracking every purchase that we make?
Madam Speaker, as I just said, we are very proud of our Governor General, who represents our country. We are reviewing the spending policy to ensure that it meets the degree of transparency that Canadians expect.
Madam Speaker, the Liberal government will be collecting personal financial and banking information without consent from Canadians. That includes seniors, moms and small businesses in my community of Oshawa. This is not automated information. It includes debit and credit transactions, bill payments and mortgage payments. Even trips to Tim Hortons and Oshawa Generals games will be handed over to the leaky Liberal government, line by line, without the knowledge or consent of Canadians.Will the big brother Liberal government do the right thing and respect the privacy of Canadians instead of incorporating them into the plot of 1984?
Madam Speaker, over the past four days, Canadians have been hearing about a massive Liberal overreach into their personal banking information. For four days, the Liberals have been defending it as though accessing line-by-line, transaction-by-transaction details of my mother and father's bank account without their consent is normal behaviour. If foreign governments tried this, they would be accused of hacking into my mom and dad's account. Why do the Liberals think it is okay to hack into Canadian bank accounts and take personal data without their consent?
Madam Speaker, we understand that privacy is important to Canadians. That is why we have taken measures to protect Canadians' privacy in this matter and in a number of different places.Nobody will have access to the personal nominative information that Canadians give to Statistics Canada. Indeed, Statistics Canada cannot even be compelled to give that information to a court of law. It is protected in their hands.Statistics Canada has policies and procedures in place to protect the privacy of Canadians, and we need, all Canadians need
Madam Speaker, it is hockey season and kids of all ages in DartmouthCole Harbour, in fact across the whole country, are buying new gear and hitting the ice. As a hockey dad, I know very well that parents want to make sure their kids are safe and I know that concussions are of great concern to them.Could the Minister of Science and Sport please tell us what our government is doing to make sports in Canada safer and to perhaps reduce concussions?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals are making promises to our veterans that they cannot even keep. They authorize spending but keep the money.They left $80.9 million unspent in 2016, $183 million in 2017, and $148.6 million in 2018. Without this money, veterans cannot access the services they are entitled to. Will the Liberals keep their promise or will they fail our veterans?
Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise once again to offer a response on the important issue of climate change.I am aware of the evidence that the hon. member opposite cites and take this problem very seriously. We played an integral role at the Paris conference in achieving an agreement that would meaningfully move the needle in the fight against climate change. In order to implement our plan domestically and reach our targets, we are putting a price on pollution. We are investing in clean energy. We are helping small businesses become more efficient.It is a pleasure to be part of this government that takes this threat seriously. We have to work to grow the economy at the same time.I am pleased to work with the member across the aisle to move the needle forward on both of these initiatives.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for SaanichGulf Islands for her work on this file over the past number of decades.This is a threat we need to take extraordinarily seriously. I have read through the IPCC report and know that we need to take action and take action immediately.We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment. That included putting a price on pollution, and a number of other measures. We played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris, and our government is committed to making our targets. If we need to do more after that, I would be pleased to continue to work with the hon. member to protect our environment for our kids and grandkids.
Madam Speaker, we look forward to working with the Government of New Brunswick to protect our environment and grow our economy. New Brunswickers, like all Canadians, know that we need to take action on climate change. That is something my Conservative friends have not yet realized. We will continue to work with the Government of New Brunswick and our Liberal New Brunswick caucus, which we are very proud of, to promote clean growth, to strengthen the middle class and to continue to deliver for all Canadians.
Madam Speaker, on a point of order. Earlier today in question period, I stood and asked a question on a very important issue about bankruptcy laws.The seniors minister responded to me that I was giving misinformation or false information. I take offence to that. I strongly encourage the minister to retract that statement and apologize for making that statement about my integrity and character.
Madam Speaker, climate change is real and those of us in the House who have a platform have a responsibility to do something about it. We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. Part of our plan to protect the environment includes putting a price on pollution that is going to actually see polluters pay more and make middle-class families better off. I am curious when the Conservatives are actually going to come up with their plan. So far as I can see, their only plan to date is to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, it is a bit rich for the other side to try to criticize an institution such as Statistics Canada regarding privacy concerns.It was in fact their government, under Vic Toews, that tried to have everyone tell Vic Toews what they were doing every day. Tell Vic everything.That was the Conservative government trying to do that. In this case, it is not our government; it is not any government gathering information. It is Statistics Canada. It does it reasonably and effectively, protecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, I would like to address the question of privilege raised by the hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill on October 31, 2018.This past Wednesday, I tabled the annual report on immigration, 2018. My intention was to table this report during routine proceedings, under the rubric of tabling of documents. However, given events in the House, this was not possible. Following question period that day, there were a number of questions of privilege and points of order on a multitude of issues, which in turn delayed the start of routine proceedings. The video of the House proceedings for that day shows that I rose on a point of order at 3:41 p.m. to table the report. However, I did not get the floor. At 3:59 p.m., I rose again for a second time and was allowed by the Speaker to duly table the report in the House. All this added to the confusion. Unfortunately, an item contained in the said report was provided to a member of the media before the report was officially tabled in the House of Commons.Madam Speaker, I assure you and all hon. colleagues that I take this matter very seriously. There was absolutely no ill will and no intention to attack the dignity of this House. I assume full responsibility for this unfortunate incident, and I can assure the House that I have taken steps to ensure that the appropriate safeguards are in place to prevent such an occurrence in the future. Out of respect for the House, and to each and every member of Parliament who sits in this chamber, I offer my unreserved apology.
Madam Speaker, Vancouver Aquarium research just warned that climate change threatens our coast even more than before. Climate plans fall well short of what is needed. Oceans are warming and sea levels are rising much faster than anticipated. Alarm bells are ringing for our coast, but the government just bought a leaky old pipeline. The government just called this an existential crisis. Is the government not embarrassed to still be using Harper's discredited climate change targets?
Madam Speaker, my colleague opposite is comparing apples and oranges. Fighting tax evasion, especially abroad, is a priority for our government, as is service to Canadians. The Conservatives are in no position to lecture this side of the House considering the cuts made to the Canada Revenue Agency when they were in power.We are working on it. People will receive the credits and benefits to which they are entitled.
Madam Speaker, we have defended our supply management system against the Americans' aggressive attempts to dismantle it.Market access is similar to the changes the Conservatives negotiated in the TPP. On Monday, the minister announced the creation of working groups comprised of dairy, egg and poultry farmers, and we are committed to fully and fairly supporting them to ensure their success.
Madam Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. The government will not have access to this information. The first thing Statistics Canada does is to scrub all of the personal information from the data so it becomes anonymous. Then it repackages that data for a variety of different Canadians to use in a variety of different ways. It is not a question of surveillance. Statistics Canada has an exemplary reputation in Canada. It is seen as a leader around the world in statistical gathering and statistical methods. It will continue to do this to the highest standard and to the highest standard of privacy.
Madam Speaker, it is still only 2% of the contract.We learned this week that after governors general have completed their mandates, during which they are grossly overpaid to eat canapés on the taxpayers' dime, their office expenses are paid for life.Adrienne Clarkson alone is still costing us over $100,000 a year, even a decade after her retirement.Will the government give a detailed account of all the expenses reimbursed to all governors general, especially before Michaëlle Jean gets wind of this scheme?
Madam Speaker, the Liberal plan does make pollution free for large polluters. They do not pay the tax.However, I go back to the question. The government admits that it will increase taxes on gas per litre by 11¢, but a document released this week says that in 2022, after the election is over, it plans to increase it further. One ministerial briefing note says that it will have to go up six times what the government promises. That is 60¢ a litre. A UN report cited by the government says that it will have to go up 100 times more than the government admits, $10 a litre in new taxes.Will the government confirm whether it will increase the tax further?
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I would like to note that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has ruled in instances when the government has very clearly provided information to the media ahead of members of Parliament.I guess my question for the Chair is this. At what point will the Chair consider a member's privilege to be breached when there is a clear instance? There have been many times when the Chair has essentially given the government a slap on the wrist for the same instance. When the Chair says he or she is deeply concerned, but the behaviour keeps repeating itself, one actually wonders if any change will occur or if a precedent has been set by the Chair, now that there have been so many rulings when the Chair has been deeply concerned, that it is okay for the member's privilege to be violated.I am just wondering, for clarification, given the number of times in this particular Parliament that this particular Speaker has said she is concerned about the government's actions in this regard but has not referred it to PROC or perhaps any other study for review, if the Chair has now ruled that this is now an acceptable precedent.That is something for all members in this place to understand. Where does the Chair draw the line? I strongly believe that my privilege was violated, and I strongly believe that the Chair has already said that we should be concerned that the government is doing this. However, at what point is there censure? At what point does the behaviour change? I would argue that this is the role of the Chair. The role of the Chair is to maintain order and to uphold the privilege of members in this place. There seems to be a pattern where the behaviour is occurring but there is no censure. I am wondering now if a precedent has formally been set that it is okay for the government to provide information to the media prior to this House having a chance to review it.
Madam Speaker, it sounds like he has confirmed that the President of the Treasury Board is part of the court action. The President of the Treasury Board claims that he interfered with the Davie ship deal as part of his job to oversee spending. At committee yesterday, he was not able to name one other contract that he thought was part of his job to review, not even the failed Phoenix pay system.Why did he only interfere with the Davie deal, and what is he trying to hide?
Madam Speaker, I do not know how many times we need to stand in the House to make the government understand that our workers' pensions are vulnerable under bankruptcy laws. Steelworkers are disappointed to see the lack of will from the seniors minister to take action. She has not taken their livelihood or their years of hard work seriously. They deserve better. Now that three years have passed, could she tell us what she is waiting for? When will the minister get to work to change the bankruptcy laws and stand up for workers and retirees? This is the right thing to do.
Madam Speaker, I have some big news. Yesterday, the government announced that Davie will not get to build a single ship. Instead, starting in 2021, it is getting just one maintenance contract worth less than 2% of the shipbuilding strategy. Thanks to delays at Irving and Seaspan, the Asterix is the only ship the government has received. Davie, the best shipyard in America, delivered that ship on time and on budget. However, despite the success of the Asterix, the government has been slow to award it the Obelix contract, yet it can offer risk-free guarantees to the wealthy Irving corporation.Could the minister explain why he is so intent on undermining Davie? Why the fixation?
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for FleetwoodPort Kells for raising this important issue and his advocacy to protect this iconic species.We take our role to protect the southern resident killer whale very seriously, and that is why I was incredibly proud to stand beside the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans this week to announce new measures to protect this species. These measures include an investment of $61.5 million, which includes funding to support marine habitat restoration. Importantly, we will also be strengthening controls on five harmful contaminants that we know have an impact on this species when their food resource is scarce and interfere with their reproduction.We are going to continue to protect nature and wildlife that these species depend upon.
Madam Speaker and friends, a month from today, the climate negotiations will begin in full at COP24. The agenda will be the IPCC report on 1.5° and a review of every government's actions and whether we are on track. We know that some countries have done a huge amount, but collectively, we are off course. We are headed for the risk of global extinction. This is not a joke. We are running out of time. We have one chance, and one chance only. Can Canada show leadership and go, accepting the target of 45% by 2030, or do we give up on our children?
Madam Speaker, for the record, I would like my question of privilege to stand for the following reason. As I read into the record when I made the additional information and submission on the question of privilege, the conversation my staff member had with the reporter stated that the information was provided so they could get a story under the wire. What this means, of course, is that I was going to be asked for comment on a 43-page document at the end of a news cycle with no time to be able to respond to it, nor any other members in this place if they wanted to do the same. While the minister can stand and apologize, it is still incumbent upon the Speaker to ensure that this does not happen. As I have stated, there have seen many instances in this Parliament when the government has been repeatedly found to have done the exact same thing. My problem is that it is all well and good for the minister to stand up here because he was caught, but the reality is that I was still in a position where I was being asked for comment by a journalist who had been given information prior to the House being able to consider it. That is wrong. It is not right. Frankly, I do not think the amount of time spent on points of order or whatnot in the House should be given any consideration in terms of the fact that I still did not have the ability to comment on that particular piece of business that was put before the House that day. At some point in time, and with the deepest respect, the office of the Speaker has to rule consistently on the fact that the rights of members need to be put before the rights of any other person in the public in terms of being able to review information or matters before the House. This is in alignment with several of the decisions, previous rulings or comments that have been made by the Speaker in this Parliament and in previous Parliaments. This should not be happening across any flavour of government at any time. The rights of the members here should be sovereign. Madam Speaker, I ask you to consider that particular principle above the minister's contrition today.
Madam Speaker, here is the deal. We have Canadians who are having their bank accounts snooped through by the government. We are talking about transaction records. We are talking about bill payments. We are talking about bank balances. We are talking about social insurance numbers. Now the parliamentary secretary is saying, Don't worry, Canadians. We're not keeping it. We're sharing it. We're repackaging it. We're giving it away as a gift, so don't worry, Canadians. It's okay that we're collecting your personal data. In what world is that okay?
Madam Speaker, again, I presume the hon. gentleman's question relates to the issues presently before the courts. There is an outstanding legal proceeding before the courts and between the prosecution and Vice-Admiral Norman. The parties to that proceeding will seek disclosure of documents. That is routine. If any of those relevant documents are in the possession of the government, the government will provide them to the court, but it is up to the court to decide and not the House of Commons. The court will determine how to apply any rules with respect to privilege or confidence.
Madam Speaker, as a government, we rely on data. Other Canadians rely on data, the Bank of Canada, small businesses, other levels of Canadian government and municipal governments.For 100 years, Statistics Canada has done that job of collecting the data of Canadians and of making it available for Canadians to use to make better decisions. This is not a surveillance exercise. This is an exercise in providing Canadians with the information they need to run their lives.
Madam Speaker, let me once again correct the narrative.This was a pilot project that is still in the process of being designed. From the beginning, Statistics Canada has been open to working with the Privacy Commissioner and has in fact had privacy concerns protected from the get-go. It invited the Privacy Commissioner to take a look at what it was doing. Statistics Canada is going to move ahead with the Privacy Commissioner in order to ensure that the privacy of Canadians is protected. Those are the facts. We take the privacy of Canadians seriously.
Madam Speaker, the President of the Treasury Board has tried to downplay his ties to Irving, claiming that he was only copied on one letter. According to the lobbyist registry, he has met with Irving 16 times in the past two and a half years.Does the President of the Treasury Board still want to claim that he has had little contact with Irving, or perhaps his meetings with the Irvings were just part of a pilot project?
Madam Speaker, we understand absolutely the impact the work disruption is having on employees and their families. That is why our government has been encouraging both sides to reach a fair agreement as soon as possible. Unfortunately, when a strike occurs, the expiry of the collective agreement affects some of the benefits of Canada Post employees, but not all. I will give an example. Prescription drugs will continue for employees. I can assure the House that employees will maintain full access to their EI benefits, which include maternity and parental benefits. Canada Post has put in place a request for a compassionate grounds exception to this. It is taking those requests seriously and addressing them very quickly.
Madam Speaker, no government and no Canadian will have access to the personal information of Canadians. It will end with Statistics Canada, which will keep it in a secure fashion. What governments do get, what other institutions will get, what other Canadians will get, are Statistics Canada reports, which are relied on by Canadians, by members of Parliament and by other governments across Canada and have been for 100 years.Statistics Canada has worked with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go. It will continue to do so in respect of the privacy of Canadians. Canadians do not need to be worried about their information.
Madam Speaker, our government takes Canadians' privacy very seriously. Let us be clear. This is a pilot project that is still in the design stages. No data have been collected to date.Statistics Canada's job is to provide the reliable data needed to meet the needs of Canadians, businesses and communities. Statistics Canada has worked and collaborated with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go, and it will continue to do so.
Madam Speaker, I have asked twice now whether the 11¢-a-litre tax the government promised is the final price. Twice the member has refused to answer. That suggests the government has a hidden agenda to increase the tax even more than it already has admitted. This document released this week does not even talk about increased rebates, just increased taxes.Will the parliamentary secretary confirm if the tax will ever go above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Mr. Speaker, let me correct something the hon. member is saying. The government is not accessing the nominative data of Canadians; Statistics Canada is for all Canadians to be able to use.The personal information gets protected. Once the information is processed by Statistics Canada, it is available for the use of municipal governments, provincial governments, the federal government, small businesses, individual Canadians, the Bank of Canada, other institutions and other individuals who have to make economic decisions in their lives based on the best available information.It is
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Vimy for her hard work on behalf of those Sears workers. It was great. We can all agree here in the House that Canadians benefit when there is growth in the economy. Where we differ here from the Conservative opposition is that we do not believe any growth should take place on the backs of workers. We want workers to get a fair shake in this country, and that is why we announced yesterday the doubling of benefits in the wage earner protection program. That will benefit her Sears workers. I am proud to be part of a government that takes action for Canadian workers.
Madam Speaker, all members of the House share the deep angst of the families who have tragically lost children to crime. That is why I asked for a thorough review by the corrections commissioner to ensure that long-standing policy in these matters has been followed, and to reassess the appropriateness of those policies to determine that they are, in fact, the right ones. The report was made available late yesterday. I am reviewing it at the moment. We all want this system to be as good as it can possibly be for the protection of the public.
Madam Speaker, speaking about privacy, we are talking about millions of records that could potentially impact millions of Canadians, and the Privacy Commissioner is concerned.Speaking about the Privacy Commissioner, yesterday he said that privacy is not a right to be traded off in exchange for innovation. He also said that the current law allows the government to seek this information without anyone's consent. The information in Canadians' bank accounts belongs to them, not to the Liberals.Will the government finally listen to Canadians and end this Orwellian program?
Madam Speaker, again, the tactic being employed by the opposition is to drive by with smears and innuendoes. That is the very reason we have the sub judice rule in the House of Commons that members of Parliament should not ask questions and ministers should not answer questions that could somehow impinge upon an outstanding court proceeding. The court will determine what documents are relevant. The court will determine what rules of privilege and confidence apply. The court has the jurisdiction in this matter.
Madam Speaker, Canadians can be proud to be represented by such inspiring, dynamic governors general. They provide a great service to Canada, and that is why they continue to be supported throughout the years after they have left. Clearly, Canadians expect transparency and accountability when public money is spent. We will carefully examine the support arrangements to ensure that best practices are being followed and that Canadians' expectations are being met.
Madam Speaker, our government takes sport-related concussions very seriously. Far too many youths and athletes experience concussions during sport and recreation activities. That is why we have released the new Canadian guideline on concussion in sport and are working to harmonize an approach on concussion awareness, prevention, detection, management and surveillance. We are pleased that Parliament's health committee has created a subcommittee to study concussions. We look forward to its work and its report.
Madam Speaker, our government takes the privacy of Canadians very seriously, but I need to correct a few things in the hon. member's discourse.First, this is a pilot project currently in the design stage. No data has been collected to date. It is Statistics Canada that would be gathering the data, not the government. Statistics Canada's job is precisely to provide good data that is reliable and necessary to meet the needs of all Canadians, all Canadian levels of government, including municipal governments, the federal government and provincial governments. It has done this for 100 years.
Madam Speaker, it is critical for Canada's resources to be developed in a sustainable way so that economic growth and environmental protections go hand in hand.Provinces manage their own environmental liabilities. They are responsible for having the tools to mitigate potential risks associated with upstream oil and gas development. Our government works with provinces and territories to support their regulatory regimes and share best practices.In budget 2017, we made a $30 million investment in support of Alberta's efforts to advance the reclamation of orphan wells. While this important task remains with the province, we have been able to show our support.
Madam Speaker, our benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 veterans or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. They are based on estimates, and they provide us some guarantees. Whether a veteran comes forward this year or the next year or the year after, we will always have the resources available for veterans. When we took office, we immediately increased financial supports by putting more money in veterans' pockets, increasing mental health supports, delivering on the promises we made to veterans and their families.
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada has been collecting data about Canadians for 100 years in an exemplary manner. Reliable, good quality information is vital to making decisions that actually reflect the needs of Canadians.Unlike the Conservatives, we believe that facts, not ideology, are a very good starting point for public policy. I know that the Conservatives like to make their decisions based on ideology. However, as a government, we like to base our decisions on the facts.
Madam Speaker, benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. We estimate the number of people who will claim benefits to ensure that the resources are there for these veterans, no matter which year they file their claim.
Madam Speaker, it is important to note that immigration continues to be a tool for Canadians to address labour market shortages. We rely on immigration to make sure we continue to be a leader in the G7 in terms of ensuring that investment follows talent. We have attracted a huge number of skilled labour through the global skills strategy and the changes we have made to the express entry system.The announcements that we made yesterday about our new multi-year plan will ensure that Canada continues to prosper through immigration, a lesson that the party opposite should learn.
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada as an institution has an exemplary record of gathering the personal information of Canadians. It has been doing it for 100 years, in a safe and secure fashion, and will continue to do so. The reports that Statistics Canada puts out are important to Canadians in all walks of life in terms of how they plan their personal lives. For municipal governments, provincial governments and the federal government to create good policy, and for institutions such as the Bank of Canada, Statistics Canada performs a necessary role. We will continue to defend its ability to do so. It is respecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his concern for a great challenge of our time, and that is the challenge we face in respect of climate change.The results of the recent IPCC report are not lost on me nor on our government. I was very proud when our government and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris that led us to set forth a plan that is going to allow us to make a meaningful difference to reduce our emissions.We know that after this plan is implemented, we may have to do more after that. I look forward to working with members from all parties to continue to fight this existential challenge.
Madam Speaker, just to clarify the question I asked, the question was whether the Chair has now set a precedent. Given that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has, in fact, said that there was a clear instance of the government providing information to the media and that she was deeply concerned, but she decided not to provide censure, I am wondering not about future actions but about what precedent has been set.Is it now okay? Is the Chair now saying, given her, once again, looking over the actions of the government, that she has formally set a precedent and that it is okay for the government to give information to the media prior to members in this House being able to review it? That is deeply concerning.
Madam Speaker, of course we recognize Davie's excellent work. Yesterday, we announced that part of a contract worth $7 billion would go to Davie. This summer, we committed $610 million for the construction of three icebreakers. We are continuing to work with Davie. The Department of National Defence has determined that there is no operational need for a second ship. We are continuing to work on shipbuilding in Canada.
Madam Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour announced changes to the Canada Labour Code. We have all heard the stories of Sears workers. In my riding, Vimy, the layoffs also affected our community. Middle-class workers in Vimy felt they were not well served by Conservative policies, which only benefited the wealthy.Could the parliamentary secretary tell the House what these announcements mean for middle-class Canadians in my riding?
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his work on the INDU committee. I share the hon. member's concern with the privacy of Canadians. Some of the information that Statistics Canada will gather is interesting to that side of the House. For example, in 2017, Statistics Canada reported that Canadians were spending more than 30% of their income on housing. That led us to develop a social housing policy in Canada that would address the issue.It is those kinds of statistics and data that will help Canadians of all stripes.
Madam Speaker, in possibly one of the worst interviews ever given, yesterday the Minister of Immigration once again angrily called his Ontario provincial counterpart several inappropriate names after she requested federal support to pay for the social welfare costs of the Prime Minister's #WelcometoCanada illegal border crossers. When pressed on what evidence he had to support the name he called her, he got even angrier and doubled-down.Will the minister apologize for his name calling and shameful disregard for all Ontario taxpayers?
Madam Speaker, this week we learned that the Liberal government would give a carbon tax exemption to New Brunswick's Belledune coal facility. Now, the Liberals have admitted that their carbon tax on large emitters will kill jobs, but the fact is that this carbon tax is already costing jobs in my community.Why does the Liberal government give exemptions to Liberal ridings while punishing hard-working Canadians?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals have been defending this for four days. What a backtrack this is. This is a personal violation of every Canadian. Canadians have no faith or trust in the current Liberal government and how it will use that data. Over the past 19 months, there have been hundreds of thousands of examples of privacy breaches by the Liberal government. Canadians are rightly cynical, and they will not stand for this intrusion into their personal lives. Why are the Liberals supporting this gross violation into the privacy of Canadians?
Madam Speaker, Liberals always put criminals ahead of victims and law-abiding Canadians. Tori Stafford's killer was transferred from jail to a healing lodge on their watch. Today, her loved ones are gathering to call for action, demanding that child killers be kept behind bars, not in healing lodges without fences. However, so far the Liberals refuse to act. Canadians are outraged about it. What is taking so long, and when will the Liberals actually do the right thing and put Tori's killer back behind bars where she belongs?
Madam Speaker, the Minister of Border Security is not aware that the number of illegal migrants in Canada is going up, which is odd considering that his officials and policy advisers have the RCMP's figures at their disposal. Even the media has confirmed the facts. For two years now, we have been saying that urgent, responsible action is needed. Either the minister is getting bad advice or he is simply incompetent. Do we need to do the minister's job for him, or is he finally going to take action?
I will take that as a no, Madam Speaker, but let me try again.I am not sure if the minister watched that interview, but he really should, because it was really a hot mess. However, this is not about his lack of media training. This is about positive federal-provincial relationships to come up with good public policy solutions.Will the minister humble himself and apologize to one of the strongest women I know, Lisa MacLeod, for his shameful, inappropriate name calling and outburst?
Madam Speaker, here are the facts. We invested $173 million to better manage the situation. Over $7 million of that money is in place to ensure that failed asylum claimants leave Canada. We are managing the situation properly. That is what Canadians expect from us, and that is exactly what we are doing.
Madam Speaker, these unjustified and illegal tariffs are hurting the American economy, American workers and American consumers of course. The national security excuse is absurd and insulting to Canadians. That is why we have imposed measured tariffs that are perfectly reciprocal. Canada must stand united against these attacks on our workers.
Madam Speaker, that was some mighty fine kowtowing. We already know that governors generals do not really do anything. Why should taxpayers have to pay for this?It is unbelievable that they can claim office expenses for the rest of their lives. It is even more unbelievable that these aristocrats do not even have to disclose where the money is spent.The Prime Minister said that he expected greater transparency.Will he open the books instead of opening his wallet for these freeloading carpetbaggers?
Madam Speaker, Canada Post's targeting of vulnerable postal workers is shameful. First it cut off short-term disability payments, then long-term disability payments. Then it went after people's maternity leave benefits. This is a morally bankrupt tactic by Canada Post and so far the government has chosen to be complicit. Cutting benefits is not good faith collective bargaining. What is the government doing to stop this brutal assault on workers' rights and encourage Canada Post to bargain in good faith?
Madam Speaker, again, part of our plan to protect the environment, which is essential for those of us in government to take seriously, is to put a price on pollution that is increasing to $50 a tonne by 2022. This is going to have the impact of putting more money into the pockets of middle-class families.I am extraordinarily disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaign in 2019 on a promise to take money from their constituents so they can make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, for the workers currently on the floor of steel mills in Hamilton or at SMEs in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean, the negotiations between the United States, Mexico, and Canada are not just some game to be won.The unfair U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum are a serious threat to jobs and my region. Workers always need to come first in trade negotiations.Will the government promise to refuse to sign the agreement as long as the tariffs have not been lifted?
Madam Speaker, again, we were elected on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. We have been transparent with our plan to put a price on pollution that will increase over time to being $50 a tonne by 2020.Again, I am curious why the Conservatives refuse to put forward a plan. Instead of actually coming forward with productive ideas in the conversation, they seem committed to adopting the approach taken by Doug Ford in Ontario, which is to do absolutely nothing.
Madam Speaker, it is news to us that this is a pilot project. Could the government tell the pilot to land the plane? This situation is ridiculous.What is worse, there could be privacy breaches. We requested information about this. In Canada, during the past 19 months there were more than 1,000 situations where personal information was disclosed.How can we have faith in this so-called pilot project?
Madam Speaker, the Minister of National Revenue keeps claiming that service is her priority, yet under her watch, service continues to get even worse, despite the budget increase. She has been picking on single parents, she has not reviewed all of the disability tax credits she took away, she has taken no meaningful action on offshore tax avoidance and evasion, wait times are getting longer and the call centre is still a disaster.Will the minister stop claiming that service is her priority and start delivering service to Canadians?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals just keep saying, Nothing to see here. Move along, folks.If there was really nothing to hide, then why did they not just tell Canadians, in the first place, that they were collecting this information? We are talking about things like Canadians' ATM withdrawals, their credit card transactions and their bill payments. The first step to fixing a problem is actually admitting that there is a problem.Will the Liberals stop trying to sweep this under the carpet and admit that trying to steal Canadians' data without their consent is a real problem?
Madam Speaker, now that the Liberals have their new agreement, millions of tonnes of American chicken, eggs and turkey are about to flood the Canadian market.Pierre-Luc Leblanc, president of Éleveurs de volailles du Québec, the provincial poultry farmers' association, says it may seem like no big deal now, but over the next five to 10 years, it will put poultry producers in a precarious position. This agreement came as a surprise and a disappointment to poultry farmers, and they are asking the government for compensation.Here is my question on their behalf for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the Prime Minister: When they will listen to farmers?
Madam Speaker, another day has gone by with the Liberals refusing to actually listen to Canadians. Putting aside the hundreds of pages of privacy breaches by the government, the state does not have the right to monitor law-abiding citizens going about their daily lives, full stop.Will the Liberals accept that people are rightfully concerned, and end this unprecedented surveillance scheme?
Madam Speaker, again, we have to take protecting the environment seriously. The only plan we put in place is the one we have been telling Canadians about for a significant period of time now, which is to have the price on pollution that we have laid out in public leading up to 2022.I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate that all the revenues generated from this are going back to the citizens who live in the provinces where it is collected and it is going to put more money into the pockets of middle-class families. One final time, I am pleased to share that I am disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaigning on a promise to take that money from their constituents to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, revelations of the staggering scale of liabilities in the hundreds of billions for the cleanup of mines and well sites has stunned Canadians. However, for those who have long called for full disclosure of the true cost of reclamation of industrial sites in advance of project approvals, this comes as no surprise. The federal government holds the power to prevent downloading of this massive liability.I call on the government to act now on Alberta's demands, amend the federal bankruptcy and creditor laws and give higher priority to environmental cleanup to end the downloading of liability to Canadians.
I am going to keep on this, Madam Speaker. I think we have them on run here.He refuses to answer the question. He said that by 2022, the Liberals will have a price of $50 a tonne, which is 11¢ a litre for a litre of gas. I have asked, given the evidence, whether they plan to increase it further if they are re-elected. He keeps dodging.Will he end the hidden agenda and confirm, yes or no, whether the tax will rise above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Madam Speaker, the situation is very clear to millions of Canadians. Statistics Canada has no business poking around in the personal bank accounts of honest Canadians. That is clear. Pilot project or not, that is a fundamental principle that we, the Conservatives, will defend.Yes, Statistics Canada has been gathering information for 100 years, but it has been doing so with Canadians' consent and permission.In this case, Statistics Canada plans to poke around in their bank accounts without their consent. That makes no sense. Why do the Liberals continue to defend the indefensible?
Madam Speaker, I would say that incompetence is cutting $400 million from border services and thinking it would not affect results.I must inform my hon. colleague that we have invested $173 million to ensure that we have the resources in place to get the job done right. In August and September, the numbers were down compared to last year's figures. We hope the same will happen in October. This clearly shows that our plan is working.
Madam Speaker, if they had not created the problem, there would be no need to reinvest the money.The situation is much worse than that. The Liberals boast about reinvesting in borders services, but the union president, Jean-Pierre Fortin, seems very surprised by what the minister is saying because, to date, not a single penny has found its way down to our border officers. The money is there. It is somewhere in the sky, in the department, but it has not made its way down to the ground.Can the Liberals give us an intelligent answer? They need to stop saying that we made cuts and tell us where their money is.
Madam Speaker, the accusations made by the member are completely inaccurate and wrong. There is not a file that is closer to my heart than this one. From the day I was elected, I have been working on this. As the daughter of a proud steelworker and a lifelong Hamiltonian, this file is extremely important. Consultations have and will continue to take place. In our 2018 budget, as well as my mandate letter, I have been tasked with this. I have consulted and I will continue to consult. The member knows this is a decades old problem and it is our government that will solve it. No matter what misinformation he gives, it will not stop me or our government.
Madam Speaker, now the Liberals are hiding behind Statistics Canada when it was their idea to invade Canadian privacy. This is why the personal violation and breach of trust becomes important. If a mom and a dad transfer $15,000 to their son and daughter-in-law to help with the purchase of their first home, should they expect a call from the government asking them why? Will the government call new Canadians after they transfer money back home to their family in the Philippines, asking what that transfer was for? The potential for abuse is real. This personal violation of privacy is wrong on every level. Why can the Liberal government not see that?
Madam Speaker, our government knows the importance of taking action to protect our species and wildlife. That is why this week we are taking unprecedented new measures to further help the recovery of B.C. southern resident killer whales. The new measures include $143 million invested in critical steps to protect this west coast icon. Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment please further explain the steps the government is taking to protect our southern resident killer whales?
Madam Speaker, Canadians are appalled to learn that Statistics Canada plans to access their detailed personal banking information. They were never consulted and did not consent. Like Apple or Facebook, the Liberal government is failing a fundamental principle of consent for privacy. Building a massive database of personal banking information without telling anyone is just wrong. This banking data breach is only the tip of the sphere of the new Liberal census Canada scheme. It is not a pilot project; it is the actual new regime the Liberals put in place.Will the government halt this data collection from running wild until it is investigated, there are consultations and consent is obtained?
Madam Speaker, veterans have fought hard for this country and deserve nothing but respect from our government. When the Liberal government allocated funds for veterans, we expected these funds to be spent. The government is doing what it said it would never do, authorize funds for veterans and fail to use them. The Liberals are not honouring their promise to respect veterans and to make sure every dime allocated is spent. This is unacceptable.When will the Liberals show veterans the respect they deserve and make sure every dollar allocated by this House is spent?
Madam Speaker, a report out this week says that over the last 25 years the earth's oceans have retained 60% more heat than scientists had thought. Also this week, a glacier in Antarctica lost a section of ice five times the size of Manhattan, but the Liberals do not seem to get the urgency of climate change. They think following Harper's targets is just fine. Our oceans are warming, our icebergs are melting. We need urgent action now.Why do the Liberals not ditch their grossly inadequate plan and come up with something consistent with the urgency of climate change?
Madam Speaker, our government has been going around the country to talk to Canadians about how much immigration matters to them and their local communities. Canadians have been asking for immigration as an important tool to address labour market shortages, as well as to bring in much-needed skills.After three years in opposition, my hon. colleague has finally discovered the importance of talking to Canadians about immigration. With all the blocking of people she has done on Twitter, I hope this will be the last way she can communicate with Canadians.
Madam Speaker, the government admits that its new carbon tax will add at least 11¢ a litre to Canadians when they gas up their cars. However, a government analysis, quietly posted online this week, shows that after the next election, the Liberals plan to increase that tax even further. How much? Well, an earlier ministerial briefing note said that it would have to go up six times as high as the government currently admits. One UN report cited today by the government says that it will have to be 100 times higher than the government is currently admitting.Will the government today confirm it will not increase the tax after the election?
Madam Speaker, if this was a pilot project, then why did the Privacy Commissioner launch a full investigation?If the Liberals are so proud of this, they certainly should have been announcing this publicly. The Prime Minister once expressed his admiration for basic dictatorship. Is this where he got the idea to start tracking every purchase that we make?
Madam Speaker, as I just said, we are very proud of our Governor General, who represents our country. We are reviewing the spending policy to ensure that it meets the degree of transparency that Canadians expect.
Madam Speaker, the Liberal government will be collecting personal financial and banking information without consent from Canadians. That includes seniors, moms and small businesses in my community of Oshawa. This is not automated information. It includes debit and credit transactions, bill payments and mortgage payments. Even trips to Tim Hortons and Oshawa Generals games will be handed over to the leaky Liberal government, line by line, without the knowledge or consent of Canadians.Will the big brother Liberal government do the right thing and respect the privacy of Canadians instead of incorporating them into the plot of 1984?
Madam Speaker, over the past four days, Canadians have been hearing about a massive Liberal overreach into their personal banking information. For four days, the Liberals have been defending it as though accessing line-by-line, transaction-by-transaction details of my mother and father's bank account without their consent is normal behaviour. If foreign governments tried this, they would be accused of hacking into my mom and dad's account. Why do the Liberals think it is okay to hack into Canadian bank accounts and take personal data without their consent?
Madam Speaker, we understand that privacy is important to Canadians. That is why we have taken measures to protect Canadians' privacy in this matter and in a number of different places.Nobody will have access to the personal nominative information that Canadians give to Statistics Canada. Indeed, Statistics Canada cannot even be compelled to give that information to a court of law. It is protected in their hands.Statistics Canada has policies and procedures in place to protect the privacy of Canadians, and we need, all Canadians need
Madam Speaker, it is hockey season and kids of all ages in DartmouthCole Harbour, in fact across the whole country, are buying new gear and hitting the ice. As a hockey dad, I know very well that parents want to make sure their kids are safe and I know that concussions are of great concern to them.Could the Minister of Science and Sport please tell us what our government is doing to make sports in Canada safer and to perhaps reduce concussions?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals are making promises to our veterans that they cannot even keep. They authorize spending but keep the money.They left $80.9 million unspent in 2016, $183 million in 2017, and $148.6 million in 2018. Without this money, veterans cannot access the services they are entitled to. Will the Liberals keep their promise or will they fail our veterans?
Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise once again to offer a response on the important issue of climate change.I am aware of the evidence that the hon. member opposite cites and take this problem very seriously. We played an integral role at the Paris conference in achieving an agreement that would meaningfully move the needle in the fight against climate change. In order to implement our plan domestically and reach our targets, we are putting a price on pollution. We are investing in clean energy. We are helping small businesses become more efficient.It is a pleasure to be part of this government that takes this threat seriously. We have to work to grow the economy at the same time.I am pleased to work with the member across the aisle to move the needle forward on both of these initiatives.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for SaanichGulf Islands for her work on this file over the past number of decades.This is a threat we need to take extraordinarily seriously. I have read through the IPCC report and know that we need to take action and take action immediately.We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment. That included putting a price on pollution, and a number of other measures. We played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris, and our government is committed to making our targets. If we need to do more after that, I would be pleased to continue to work with the hon. member to protect our environment for our kids and grandkids.
Madam Speaker, we look forward to working with the Government of New Brunswick to protect our environment and grow our economy. New Brunswickers, like all Canadians, know that we need to take action on climate change. That is something my Conservative friends have not yet realized. We will continue to work with the Government of New Brunswick and our Liberal New Brunswick caucus, which we are very proud of, to promote clean growth, to strengthen the middle class and to continue to deliver for all Canadians.
Madam Speaker, on a point of order. Earlier today in question period, I stood and asked a question on a very important issue about bankruptcy laws.The seniors minister responded to me that I was giving misinformation or false information. I take offence to that. I strongly encourage the minister to retract that statement and apologize for making that statement about my integrity and character.
Madam Speaker, climate change is real and those of us in the House who have a platform have a responsibility to do something about it. We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. Part of our plan to protect the environment includes putting a price on pollution that is going to actually see polluters pay more and make middle-class families better off. I am curious when the Conservatives are actually going to come up with their plan. So far as I can see, their only plan to date is to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, it is a bit rich for the other side to try to criticize an institution such as Statistics Canada regarding privacy concerns.It was in fact their government, under Vic Toews, that tried to have everyone tell Vic Toews what they were doing every day. Tell Vic everything.That was the Conservative government trying to do that. In this case, it is not our government; it is not any government gathering information. It is Statistics Canada. It does it reasonably and effectively, protecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, I would like to address the question of privilege raised by the hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill on October 31, 2018.This past Wednesday, I tabled the annual report on immigration, 2018. My intention was to table this report during routine proceedings, under the rubric of tabling of documents. However, given events in the House, this was not possible. Following question period that day, there were a number of questions of privilege and points of order on a multitude of issues, which in turn delayed the start of routine proceedings. The video of the House proceedings for that day shows that I rose on a point of order at 3:41 p.m. to table the report. However, I did not get the floor. At 3:59 p.m., I rose again for a second time and was allowed by the Speaker to duly table the report in the House. All this added to the confusion. Unfortunately, an item contained in the said report was provided to a member of the media before the report was officially tabled in the House of Commons.Madam Speaker, I assure you and all hon. colleagues that I take this matter very seriously. There was absolutely no ill will and no intention to attack the dignity of this House. I assume full responsibility for this unfortunate incident, and I can assure the House that I have taken steps to ensure that the appropriate safeguards are in place to prevent such an occurrence in the future. Out of respect for the House, and to each and every member of Parliament who sits in this chamber, I offer my unreserved apology.
Madam Speaker, Vancouver Aquarium research just warned that climate change threatens our coast even more than before. Climate plans fall well short of what is needed. Oceans are warming and sea levels are rising much faster than anticipated. Alarm bells are ringing for our coast, but the government just bought a leaky old pipeline. The government just called this an existential crisis. Is the government not embarrassed to still be using Harper's discredited climate change targets?
Madam Speaker, my colleague opposite is comparing apples and oranges. Fighting tax evasion, especially abroad, is a priority for our government, as is service to Canadians. The Conservatives are in no position to lecture this side of the House considering the cuts made to the Canada Revenue Agency when they were in power.We are working on it. People will receive the credits and benefits to which they are entitled.
Madam Speaker, we have defended our supply management system against the Americans' aggressive attempts to dismantle it.Market access is similar to the changes the Conservatives negotiated in the TPP. On Monday, the minister announced the creation of working groups comprised of dairy, egg and poultry farmers, and we are committed to fully and fairly supporting them to ensure their success.
Madam Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. The government will not have access to this information. The first thing Statistics Canada does is to scrub all of the personal information from the data so it becomes anonymous. Then it repackages that data for a variety of different Canadians to use in a variety of different ways. It is not a question of surveillance. Statistics Canada has an exemplary reputation in Canada. It is seen as a leader around the world in statistical gathering and statistical methods. It will continue to do this to the highest standard and to the highest standard of privacy.
Madam Speaker, it is still only 2% of the contract.We learned this week that after governors general have completed their mandates, during which they are grossly overpaid to eat canapés on the taxpayers' dime, their office expenses are paid for life.Adrienne Clarkson alone is still costing us over $100,000 a year, even a decade after her retirement.Will the government give a detailed account of all the expenses reimbursed to all governors general, especially before Michaëlle Jean gets wind of this scheme?
Madam Speaker, the Liberal plan does make pollution free for large polluters. They do not pay the tax.However, I go back to the question. The government admits that it will increase taxes on gas per litre by 11¢, but a document released this week says that in 2022, after the election is over, it plans to increase it further. One ministerial briefing note says that it will have to go up six times what the government promises. That is 60¢ a litre. A UN report cited by the government says that it will have to go up 100 times more than the government admits, $10 a litre in new taxes.Will the government confirm whether it will increase the tax further?
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I would like to note that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has ruled in instances when the government has very clearly provided information to the media ahead of members of Parliament.I guess my question for the Chair is this. At what point will the Chair consider a member's privilege to be breached when there is a clear instance? There have been many times when the Chair has essentially given the government a slap on the wrist for the same instance. When the Chair says he or she is deeply concerned, but the behaviour keeps repeating itself, one actually wonders if any change will occur or if a precedent has been set by the Chair, now that there have been so many rulings when the Chair has been deeply concerned, that it is okay for the member's privilege to be violated.I am just wondering, for clarification, given the number of times in this particular Parliament that this particular Speaker has said she is concerned about the government's actions in this regard but has not referred it to PROC or perhaps any other study for review, if the Chair has now ruled that this is now an acceptable precedent.That is something for all members in this place to understand. Where does the Chair draw the line? I strongly believe that my privilege was violated, and I strongly believe that the Chair has already said that we should be concerned that the government is doing this. However, at what point is there censure? At what point does the behaviour change? I would argue that this is the role of the Chair. The role of the Chair is to maintain order and to uphold the privilege of members in this place. There seems to be a pattern where the behaviour is occurring but there is no censure. I am wondering now if a precedent has formally been set that it is okay for the government to provide information to the media prior to this House having a chance to review it.
Madam Speaker, it sounds like he has confirmed that the President of the Treasury Board is part of the court action. The President of the Treasury Board claims that he interfered with the Davie ship deal as part of his job to oversee spending. At committee yesterday, he was not able to name one other contract that he thought was part of his job to review, not even the failed Phoenix pay system.Why did he only interfere with the Davie deal, and what is he trying to hide?
Madam Speaker, I do not know how many times we need to stand in the House to make the government understand that our workers' pensions are vulnerable under bankruptcy laws. Steelworkers are disappointed to see the lack of will from the seniors minister to take action. She has not taken their livelihood or their years of hard work seriously. They deserve better. Now that three years have passed, could she tell us what she is waiting for? When will the minister get to work to change the bankruptcy laws and stand up for workers and retirees? This is the right thing to do.
Madam Speaker, I have some big news. Yesterday, the government announced that Davie will not get to build a single ship. Instead, starting in 2021, it is getting just one maintenance contract worth less than 2% of the shipbuilding strategy. Thanks to delays at Irving and Seaspan, the Asterix is the only ship the government has received. Davie, the best shipyard in America, delivered that ship on time and on budget. However, despite the success of the Asterix, the government has been slow to award it the Obelix contract, yet it can offer risk-free guarantees to the wealthy Irving corporation.Could the minister explain why he is so intent on undermining Davie? Why the fixation?
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for FleetwoodPort Kells for raising this important issue and his advocacy to protect this iconic species.We take our role to protect the southern resident killer whale very seriously, and that is why I was incredibly proud to stand beside the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans this week to announce new measures to protect this species. These measures include an investment of $61.5 million, which includes funding to support marine habitat restoration. Importantly, we will also be strengthening controls on five harmful contaminants that we know have an impact on this species when their food resource is scarce and interfere with their reproduction.We are going to continue to protect nature and wildlife that these species depend upon.
Madam Speaker and friends, a month from today, the climate negotiations will begin in full at COP24. The agenda will be the IPCC report on 1.5° and a review of every government's actions and whether we are on track. We know that some countries have done a huge amount, but collectively, we are off course. We are headed for the risk of global extinction. This is not a joke. We are running out of time. We have one chance, and one chance only. Can Canada show leadership and go, accepting the target of 45% by 2030, or do we give up on our children?
Madam Speaker, for the record, I would like my question of privilege to stand for the following reason. As I read into the record when I made the additional information and submission on the question of privilege, the conversation my staff member had with the reporter stated that the information was provided so they could get a story under the wire. What this means, of course, is that I was going to be asked for comment on a 43-page document at the end of a news cycle with no time to be able to respond to it, nor any other members in this place if they wanted to do the same. While the minister can stand and apologize, it is still incumbent upon the Speaker to ensure that this does not happen. As I have stated, there have seen many instances in this Parliament when the government has been repeatedly found to have done the exact same thing. My problem is that it is all well and good for the minister to stand up here because he was caught, but the reality is that I was still in a position where I was being asked for comment by a journalist who had been given information prior to the House being able to consider it. That is wrong. It is not right. Frankly, I do not think the amount of time spent on points of order or whatnot in the House should be given any consideration in terms of the fact that I still did not have the ability to comment on that particular piece of business that was put before the House that day. At some point in time, and with the deepest respect, the office of the Speaker has to rule consistently on the fact that the rights of members need to be put before the rights of any other person in the public in terms of being able to review information or matters before the House. This is in alignment with several of the decisions, previous rulings or comments that have been made by the Speaker in this Parliament and in previous Parliaments. This should not be happening across any flavour of government at any time. The rights of the members here should be sovereign. Madam Speaker, I ask you to consider that particular principle above the minister's contrition today.
Madam Speaker, here is the deal. We have Canadians who are having their bank accounts snooped through by the government. We are talking about transaction records. We are talking about bill payments. We are talking about bank balances. We are talking about social insurance numbers. Now the parliamentary secretary is saying, Don't worry, Canadians. We're not keeping it. We're sharing it. We're repackaging it. We're giving it away as a gift, so don't worry, Canadians. It's okay that we're collecting your personal data. In what world is that okay?
Madam Speaker, again, I presume the hon. gentleman's question relates to the issues presently before the courts. There is an outstanding legal proceeding before the courts and between the prosecution and Vice-Admiral Norman. The parties to that proceeding will seek disclosure of documents. That is routine. If any of those relevant documents are in the possession of the government, the government will provide them to the court, but it is up to the court to decide and not the House of Commons. The court will determine how to apply any rules with respect to privilege or confidence.
Madam Speaker, as a government, we rely on data. Other Canadians rely on data, the Bank of Canada, small businesses, other levels of Canadian government and municipal governments.For 100 years, Statistics Canada has done that job of collecting the data of Canadians and of making it available for Canadians to use to make better decisions. This is not a surveillance exercise. This is an exercise in providing Canadians with the information they need to run their lives.
Madam Speaker, let me once again correct the narrative.This was a pilot project that is still in the process of being designed. From the beginning, Statistics Canada has been open to working with the Privacy Commissioner and has in fact had privacy concerns protected from the get-go. It invited the Privacy Commissioner to take a look at what it was doing. Statistics Canada is going to move ahead with the Privacy Commissioner in order to ensure that the privacy of Canadians is protected. Those are the facts. We take the privacy of Canadians seriously.
Madam Speaker, the President of the Treasury Board has tried to downplay his ties to Irving, claiming that he was only copied on one letter. According to the lobbyist registry, he has met with Irving 16 times in the past two and a half years.Does the President of the Treasury Board still want to claim that he has had little contact with Irving, or perhaps his meetings with the Irvings were just part of a pilot project?
Madam Speaker, we understand absolutely the impact the work disruption is having on employees and their families. That is why our government has been encouraging both sides to reach a fair agreement as soon as possible. Unfortunately, when a strike occurs, the expiry of the collective agreement affects some of the benefits of Canada Post employees, but not all. I will give an example. Prescription drugs will continue for employees. I can assure the House that employees will maintain full access to their EI benefits, which include maternity and parental benefits. Canada Post has put in place a request for a compassionate grounds exception to this. It is taking those requests seriously and addressing them very quickly.
Madam Speaker, no government and no Canadian will have access to the personal information of Canadians. It will end with Statistics Canada, which will keep it in a secure fashion. What governments do get, what other institutions will get, what other Canadians will get, are Statistics Canada reports, which are relied on by Canadians, by members of Parliament and by other governments across Canada and have been for 100 years.Statistics Canada has worked with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go. It will continue to do so in respect of the privacy of Canadians. Canadians do not need to be worried about their information.
Madam Speaker, our government takes Canadians' privacy very seriously. Let us be clear. This is a pilot project that is still in the design stages. No data have been collected to date.Statistics Canada's job is to provide the reliable data needed to meet the needs of Canadians, businesses and communities. Statistics Canada has worked and collaborated with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go, and it will continue to do so.
Madam Speaker, I have asked twice now whether the 11¢-a-litre tax the government promised is the final price. Twice the member has refused to answer. That suggests the government has a hidden agenda to increase the tax even more than it already has admitted. This document released this week does not even talk about increased rebates, just increased taxes.Will the parliamentary secretary confirm if the tax will ever go above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Mr. Speaker, let me correct something the hon. member is saying. The government is not accessing the nominative data of Canadians; Statistics Canada is for all Canadians to be able to use.The personal information gets protected. Once the information is processed by Statistics Canada, it is available for the use of municipal governments, provincial governments, the federal government, small businesses, individual Canadians, the Bank of Canada, other institutions and other individuals who have to make economic decisions in their lives based on the best available information.It is
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Vimy for her hard work on behalf of those Sears workers. It was great. We can all agree here in the House that Canadians benefit when there is growth in the economy. Where we differ here from the Conservative opposition is that we do not believe any growth should take place on the backs of workers. We want workers to get a fair shake in this country, and that is why we announced yesterday the doubling of benefits in the wage earner protection program. That will benefit her Sears workers. I am proud to be part of a government that takes action for Canadian workers.
Madam Speaker, all members of the House share the deep angst of the families who have tragically lost children to crime. That is why I asked for a thorough review by the corrections commissioner to ensure that long-standing policy in these matters has been followed, and to reassess the appropriateness of those policies to determine that they are, in fact, the right ones. The report was made available late yesterday. I am reviewing it at the moment. We all want this system to be as good as it can possibly be for the protection of the public.
Madam Speaker, speaking about privacy, we are talking about millions of records that could potentially impact millions of Canadians, and the Privacy Commissioner is concerned.Speaking about the Privacy Commissioner, yesterday he said that privacy is not a right to be traded off in exchange for innovation. He also said that the current law allows the government to seek this information without anyone's consent. The information in Canadians' bank accounts belongs to them, not to the Liberals.Will the government finally listen to Canadians and end this Orwellian program?
Madam Speaker, again, the tactic being employed by the opposition is to drive by with smears and innuendoes. That is the very reason we have the sub judice rule in the House of Commons that members of Parliament should not ask questions and ministers should not answer questions that could somehow impinge upon an outstanding court proceeding. The court will determine what documents are relevant. The court will determine what rules of privilege and confidence apply. The court has the jurisdiction in this matter.
Madam Speaker, Canadians can be proud to be represented by such inspiring, dynamic governors general. They provide a great service to Canada, and that is why they continue to be supported throughout the years after they have left. Clearly, Canadians expect transparency and accountability when public money is spent. We will carefully examine the support arrangements to ensure that best practices are being followed and that Canadians' expectations are being met.
Madam Speaker, our government takes sport-related concussions very seriously. Far too many youths and athletes experience concussions during sport and recreation activities. That is why we have released the new Canadian guideline on concussion in sport and are working to harmonize an approach on concussion awareness, prevention, detection, management and surveillance. We are pleased that Parliament's health committee has created a subcommittee to study concussions. We look forward to its work and its report.
Madam Speaker, our government takes the privacy of Canadians very seriously, but I need to correct a few things in the hon. member's discourse.First, this is a pilot project currently in the design stage. No data has been collected to date. It is Statistics Canada that would be gathering the data, not the government. Statistics Canada's job is precisely to provide good data that is reliable and necessary to meet the needs of all Canadians, all Canadian levels of government, including municipal governments, the federal government and provincial governments. It has done this for 100 years.
Madam Speaker, it is critical for Canada's resources to be developed in a sustainable way so that economic growth and environmental protections go hand in hand.Provinces manage their own environmental liabilities. They are responsible for having the tools to mitigate potential risks associated with upstream oil and gas development. Our government works with provinces and territories to support their regulatory regimes and share best practices.In budget 2017, we made a $30 million investment in support of Alberta's efforts to advance the reclamation of orphan wells. While this important task remains with the province, we have been able to show our support.
Madam Speaker, our benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 veterans or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. They are based on estimates, and they provide us some guarantees. Whether a veteran comes forward this year or the next year or the year after, we will always have the resources available for veterans. When we took office, we immediately increased financial supports by putting more money in veterans' pockets, increasing mental health supports, delivering on the promises we made to veterans and their families.
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada has been collecting data about Canadians for 100 years in an exemplary manner. Reliable, good quality information is vital to making decisions that actually reflect the needs of Canadians.Unlike the Conservatives, we believe that facts, not ideology, are a very good starting point for public policy. I know that the Conservatives like to make their decisions based on ideology. However, as a government, we like to base our decisions on the facts.
Madam Speaker, benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. We estimate the number of people who will claim benefits to ensure that the resources are there for these veterans, no matter which year they file their claim.
Madam Speaker, it is important to note that immigration continues to be a tool for Canadians to address labour market shortages. We rely on immigration to make sure we continue to be a leader in the G7 in terms of ensuring that investment follows talent. We have attracted a huge number of skilled labour through the global skills strategy and the changes we have made to the express entry system.The announcements that we made yesterday about our new multi-year plan will ensure that Canada continues to prosper through immigration, a lesson that the party opposite should learn.
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada as an institution has an exemplary record of gathering the personal information of Canadians. It has been doing it for 100 years, in a safe and secure fashion, and will continue to do so. The reports that Statistics Canada puts out are important to Canadians in all walks of life in terms of how they plan their personal lives. For municipal governments, provincial governments and the federal government to create good policy, and for institutions such as the Bank of Canada, Statistics Canada performs a necessary role. We will continue to defend its ability to do so. It is respecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his concern for a great challenge of our time, and that is the challenge we face in respect of climate change.The results of the recent IPCC report are not lost on me nor on our government. I was very proud when our government and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris that led us to set forth a plan that is going to allow us to make a meaningful difference to reduce our emissions.We know that after this plan is implemented, we may have to do more after that. I look forward to working with members from all parties to continue to fight this existential challenge.
Madam Speaker, just to clarify the question I asked, the question was whether the Chair has now set a precedent. Given that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has, in fact, said that there was a clear instance of the government providing information to the media and that she was deeply concerned, but she decided not to provide censure, I am wondering not about future actions but about what precedent has been set.Is it now okay? Is the Chair now saying, given her, once again, looking over the actions of the government, that she has formally set a precedent and that it is okay for the government to give information to the media prior to members in this House being able to review it? That is deeply concerning.
Madam Speaker, of course we recognize Davie's excellent work. Yesterday, we announced that part of a contract worth $7 billion would go to Davie. This summer, we committed $610 million for the construction of three icebreakers. We are continuing to work with Davie. The Department of National Defence has determined that there is no operational need for a second ship. We are continuing to work on shipbuilding in Canada.
Madam Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour announced changes to the Canada Labour Code. We have all heard the stories of Sears workers. In my riding, Vimy, the layoffs also affected our community. Middle-class workers in Vimy felt they were not well served by Conservative policies, which only benefited the wealthy.Could the parliamentary secretary tell the House what these announcements mean for middle-class Canadians in my riding?
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his work on the INDU committee. I share the hon. member's concern with the privacy of Canadians. Some of the information that Statistics Canada will gather is interesting to that side of the House. For example, in 2017, Statistics Canada reported that Canadians were spending more than 30% of their income on housing. That led us to develop a social housing policy in Canada that would address the issue.It is those kinds of statistics and data that will help Canadians of all stripes.
Most negative speeches
Madam Speaker, in possibly one of the worst interviews ever given, yesterday the Minister of Immigration once again angrily called his Ontario provincial counterpart several inappropriate names after she requested federal support to pay for the social welfare costs of the Prime Minister's #WelcometoCanada illegal border crossers. When pressed on what evidence he had to support the name he called her, he got even angrier and doubled-down.Will the minister apologize for his name calling and shameful disregard for all Ontario taxpayers?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals are making promises to our veterans that they cannot even keep. They authorize spending but keep the money.They left $80.9 million unspent in 2016, $183 million in 2017, and $148.6 million in 2018. Without this money, veterans cannot access the services they are entitled to. Will the Liberals keep their promise or will they fail our veterans?
Madam Speaker, now that the Liberals have their new agreement, millions of tonnes of American chicken, eggs and turkey are about to flood the Canadian market.Pierre-Luc Leblanc, president of Éleveurs de volailles du Québec, the provincial poultry farmers' association, says it may seem like no big deal now, but over the next five to 10 years, it will put poultry producers in a precarious position. This agreement came as a surprise and a disappointment to poultry farmers, and they are asking the government for compensation.Here is my question on their behalf for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the Prime Minister: When they will listen to farmers?
Madam Speaker, for the workers currently on the floor of steel mills in Hamilton or at SMEs in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean, the negotiations between the United States, Mexico, and Canada are not just some game to be won.The unfair U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum are a serious threat to jobs and my region. Workers always need to come first in trade negotiations.Will the government promise to refuse to sign the agreement as long as the tariffs have not been lifted?
Madam Speaker, our government takes Canadians' privacy very seriously. Let us be clear. This is a pilot project that is still in the design stages. No data have been collected to date.Statistics Canada's job is to provide the reliable data needed to meet the needs of Canadians, businesses and communities. Statistics Canada has worked and collaborated with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go, and it will continue to do so.
Madam Speaker, let me once again correct the narrative.This was a pilot project that is still in the process of being designed. From the beginning, Statistics Canada has been open to working with the Privacy Commissioner and has in fact had privacy concerns protected from the get-go. It invited the Privacy Commissioner to take a look at what it was doing. Statistics Canada is going to move ahead with the Privacy Commissioner in order to ensure that the privacy of Canadians is protected. Those are the facts. We take the privacy of Canadians seriously.
Madam Speaker, Canada Post's targeting of vulnerable postal workers is shameful. First it cut off short-term disability payments, then long-term disability payments. Then it went after people's maternity leave benefits. This is a morally bankrupt tactic by Canada Post and so far the government has chosen to be complicit. Cutting benefits is not good faith collective bargaining. What is the government doing to stop this brutal assault on workers' rights and encourage Canada Post to bargain in good faith?
Madam Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour announced changes to the Canada Labour Code. We have all heard the stories of Sears workers. In my riding, Vimy, the layoffs also affected our community. Middle-class workers in Vimy felt they were not well served by Conservative policies, which only benefited the wealthy.Could the parliamentary secretary tell the House what these announcements mean for middle-class Canadians in my riding?
Madam Speaker, the Minister of National Revenue keeps claiming that service is her priority, yet under her watch, service continues to get even worse, despite the budget increase. She has been picking on single parents, she has not reviewed all of the disability tax credits she took away, she has taken no meaningful action on offshore tax avoidance and evasion, wait times are getting longer and the call centre is still a disaster.Will the minister stop claiming that service is her priority and start delivering service to Canadians?
Madam Speaker, the President of the Treasury Board has tried to downplay his ties to Irving, claiming that he was only copied on one letter. According to the lobbyist registry, he has met with Irving 16 times in the past two and a half years.Does the President of the Treasury Board still want to claim that he has had little contact with Irving, or perhaps his meetings with the Irvings were just part of a pilot project?
Madam Speaker, these unjustified and illegal tariffs are hurting the American economy, American workers and American consumers of course. The national security excuse is absurd and insulting to Canadians. That is why we have imposed measured tariffs that are perfectly reciprocal. Canada must stand united against these attacks on our workers.
Madam Speaker, the Minister of Border Security is not aware that the number of illegal migrants in Canada is going up, which is odd considering that his officials and policy advisers have the RCMP's figures at their disposal. Even the media has confirmed the facts. For two years now, we have been saying that urgent, responsible action is needed. Either the minister is getting bad advice or he is simply incompetent. Do we need to do the minister's job for him, or is he finally going to take action?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals have been defending this for four days. What a backtrack this is. This is a personal violation of every Canadian. Canadians have no faith or trust in the current Liberal government and how it will use that data. Over the past 19 months, there have been hundreds of thousands of examples of privacy breaches by the Liberal government. Canadians are rightly cynical, and they will not stand for this intrusion into their personal lives. Why are the Liberals supporting this gross violation into the privacy of Canadians?
Madam Speaker, it sounds like he has confirmed that the President of the Treasury Board is part of the court action. The President of the Treasury Board claims that he interfered with the Davie ship deal as part of his job to oversee spending. At committee yesterday, he was not able to name one other contract that he thought was part of his job to review, not even the failed Phoenix pay system.Why did he only interfere with the Davie deal, and what is he trying to hide?
Madam Speaker, I would say that incompetence is cutting $400 million from border services and thinking it would not affect results.I must inform my hon. colleague that we have invested $173 million to ensure that we have the resources in place to get the job done right. In August and September, the numbers were down compared to last year's figures. We hope the same will happen in October. This clearly shows that our plan is working.
Madam Speaker, I do not know how many times we need to stand in the House to make the government understand that our workers' pensions are vulnerable under bankruptcy laws. Steelworkers are disappointed to see the lack of will from the seniors minister to take action. She has not taken their livelihood or their years of hard work seriously. They deserve better. Now that three years have passed, could she tell us what she is waiting for? When will the minister get to work to change the bankruptcy laws and stand up for workers and retirees? This is the right thing to do.
Madam Speaker, Liberals always put criminals ahead of victims and law-abiding Canadians. Tori Stafford's killer was transferred from jail to a healing lodge on their watch. Today, her loved ones are gathering to call for action, demanding that child killers be kept behind bars, not in healing lodges without fences. However, so far the Liberals refuse to act. Canadians are outraged about it. What is taking so long, and when will the Liberals actually do the right thing and put Tori's killer back behind bars where she belongs?
I am going to keep on this, Madam Speaker. I think we have them on run here.He refuses to answer the question. He said that by 2022, the Liberals will have a price of $50 a tonne, which is 11¢ a litre for a litre of gas. I have asked, given the evidence, whether they plan to increase it further if they are re-elected. He keeps dodging.Will he end the hidden agenda and confirm, yes or no, whether the tax will rise above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Madam Speaker, Canadians are appalled to learn that Statistics Canada plans to access their detailed personal banking information. They were never consulted and did not consent. Like Apple or Facebook, the Liberal government is failing a fundamental principle of consent for privacy. Building a massive database of personal banking information without telling anyone is just wrong. This banking data breach is only the tip of the sphere of the new Liberal census Canada scheme. It is not a pilot project; it is the actual new regime the Liberals put in place.Will the government halt this data collection from running wild until it is investigated, there are consultations and consent is obtained?
Madam Speaker, it is news to us that this is a pilot project. Could the government tell the pilot to land the plane? This situation is ridiculous.What is worse, there could be privacy breaches. We requested information about this. In Canada, during the past 19 months there were more than 1,000 situations where personal information was disclosed.How can we have faith in this so-called pilot project?
Madam Speaker, again, part of our plan to protect the environment, which is essential for those of us in government to take seriously, is to put a price on pollution that is increasing to $50 a tonne by 2022. This is going to have the impact of putting more money into the pockets of middle-class families.I am extraordinarily disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaign in 2019 on a promise to take money from their constituents so they can make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, speaking about privacy, we are talking about millions of records that could potentially impact millions of Canadians, and the Privacy Commissioner is concerned.Speaking about the Privacy Commissioner, yesterday he said that privacy is not a right to be traded off in exchange for innovation. He also said that the current law allows the government to seek this information without anyone's consent. The information in Canadians' bank accounts belongs to them, not to the Liberals.Will the government finally listen to Canadians and end this Orwellian program?
Madam Speaker, veterans have fought hard for this country and deserve nothing but respect from our government. When the Liberal government allocated funds for veterans, we expected these funds to be spent. The government is doing what it said it would never do, authorize funds for veterans and fail to use them. The Liberals are not honouring their promise to respect veterans and to make sure every dime allocated is spent. This is unacceptable.When will the Liberals show veterans the respect they deserve and make sure every dollar allocated by this House is spent?
Madam Speaker, benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. We estimate the number of people who will claim benefits to ensure that the resources are there for these veterans, no matter which year they file their claim.
Madam Speaker, my colleague opposite is comparing apples and oranges. Fighting tax evasion, especially abroad, is a priority for our government, as is service to Canadians. The Conservatives are in no position to lecture this side of the House considering the cuts made to the Canada Revenue Agency when they were in power.We are working on it. People will receive the credits and benefits to which they are entitled.
Madam Speaker, no government and no Canadian will have access to the personal information of Canadians. It will end with Statistics Canada, which will keep it in a secure fashion. What governments do get, what other institutions will get, what other Canadians will get, are Statistics Canada reports, which are relied on by Canadians, by members of Parliament and by other governments across Canada and have been for 100 years.Statistics Canada has worked with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go. It will continue to do so in respect of the privacy of Canadians. Canadians do not need to be worried about their information.
Madam Speaker, the Liberal government will be collecting personal financial and banking information without consent from Canadians. That includes seniors, moms and small businesses in my community of Oshawa. This is not automated information. It includes debit and credit transactions, bill payments and mortgage payments. Even trips to Tim Hortons and Oshawa Generals games will be handed over to the leaky Liberal government, line by line, without the knowledge or consent of Canadians.Will the big brother Liberal government do the right thing and respect the privacy of Canadians instead of incorporating them into the plot of 1984?
Madam Speaker, now the Liberals are hiding behind Statistics Canada when it was their idea to invade Canadian privacy. This is why the personal violation and breach of trust becomes important. If a mom and a dad transfer $15,000 to their son and daughter-in-law to help with the purchase of their first home, should they expect a call from the government asking them why? Will the government call new Canadians after they transfer money back home to their family in the Philippines, asking what that transfer was for? The potential for abuse is real. This personal violation of privacy is wrong on every level. Why can the Liberal government not see that?
Madam Speaker, again, we were elected on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. We have been transparent with our plan to put a price on pollution that will increase over time to being $50 a tonne by 2020.Again, I am curious why the Conservatives refuse to put forward a plan. Instead of actually coming forward with productive ideas in the conversation, they seem committed to adopting the approach taken by Doug Ford in Ontario, which is to do absolutely nothing.
Madam Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. The government will not have access to this information. The first thing Statistics Canada does is to scrub all of the personal information from the data so it becomes anonymous. Then it repackages that data for a variety of different Canadians to use in a variety of different ways. It is not a question of surveillance. Statistics Canada has an exemplary reputation in Canada. It is seen as a leader around the world in statistical gathering and statistical methods. It will continue to do this to the highest standard and to the highest standard of privacy.
Madam Speaker, over the past four days, Canadians have been hearing about a massive Liberal overreach into their personal banking information. For four days, the Liberals have been defending it as though accessing line-by-line, transaction-by-transaction details of my mother and father's bank account without their consent is normal behaviour. If foreign governments tried this, they would be accused of hacking into my mom and dad's account. Why do the Liberals think it is okay to hack into Canadian bank accounts and take personal data without their consent?
Madam Speaker, the government admits that its new carbon tax will add at least 11¢ a litre to Canadians when they gas up their cars. However, a government analysis, quietly posted online this week, shows that after the next election, the Liberals plan to increase that tax even further. How much? Well, an earlier ministerial briefing note said that it would have to go up six times as high as the government currently admits. One UN report cited today by the government says that it will have to be 100 times higher than the government is currently admitting.Will the government today confirm it will not increase the tax after the election?
Madam Speaker, if they had not created the problem, there would be no need to reinvest the money.The situation is much worse than that. The Liberals boast about reinvesting in borders services, but the union president, Jean-Pierre Fortin, seems very surprised by what the minister is saying because, to date, not a single penny has found its way down to our border officers. The money is there. It is somewhere in the sky, in the department, but it has not made its way down to the ground.Can the Liberals give us an intelligent answer? They need to stop saying that we made cuts and tell us where their money is.
Madam Speaker, I would like to address the question of privilege raised by the hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill on October 31, 2018.This past Wednesday, I tabled the annual report on immigration, 2018. My intention was to table this report during routine proceedings, under the rubric of tabling of documents. However, given events in the House, this was not possible. Following question period that day, there were a number of questions of privilege and points of order on a multitude of issues, which in turn delayed the start of routine proceedings. The video of the House proceedings for that day shows that I rose on a point of order at 3:41 p.m. to table the report. However, I did not get the floor. At 3:59 p.m., I rose again for a second time and was allowed by the Speaker to duly table the report in the House. All this added to the confusion. Unfortunately, an item contained in the said report was provided to a member of the media before the report was officially tabled in the House of Commons.Madam Speaker, I assure you and all hon. colleagues that I take this matter very seriously. There was absolutely no ill will and no intention to attack the dignity of this House. I assume full responsibility for this unfortunate incident, and I can assure the House that I have taken steps to ensure that the appropriate safeguards are in place to prevent such an occurrence in the future. Out of respect for the House, and to each and every member of Parliament who sits in this chamber, I offer my unreserved apology.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for SaanichGulf Islands for her work on this file over the past number of decades.This is a threat we need to take extraordinarily seriously. I have read through the IPCC report and know that we need to take action and take action immediately.We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment. That included putting a price on pollution, and a number of other measures. We played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris, and our government is committed to making our targets. If we need to do more after that, I would be pleased to continue to work with the hon. member to protect our environment for our kids and grandkids.
Madam Speaker, here are the facts. We invested $173 million to better manage the situation. Over $7 million of that money is in place to ensure that failed asylum claimants leave Canada. We are managing the situation properly. That is what Canadians expect from us, and that is exactly what we are doing.
Madam Speaker, again, we have to take protecting the environment seriously. The only plan we put in place is the one we have been telling Canadians about for a significant period of time now, which is to have the price on pollution that we have laid out in public leading up to 2022.I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate that all the revenues generated from this are going back to the citizens who live in the provinces where it is collected and it is going to put more money into the pockets of middle-class families. One final time, I am pleased to share that I am disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaigning on a promise to take that money from their constituents to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, our government takes the privacy of Canadians very seriously, but I need to correct a few things in the hon. member's discourse.First, this is a pilot project currently in the design stage. No data has been collected to date. It is Statistics Canada that would be gathering the data, not the government. Statistics Canada's job is precisely to provide good data that is reliable and necessary to meet the needs of all Canadians, all Canadian levels of government, including municipal governments, the federal government and provincial governments. It has done this for 100 years.
Madam Speaker, as a government, we rely on data. Other Canadians rely on data, the Bank of Canada, small businesses, other levels of Canadian government and municipal governments.For 100 years, Statistics Canada has done that job of collecting the data of Canadians and of making it available for Canadians to use to make better decisions. This is not a surveillance exercise. This is an exercise in providing Canadians with the information they need to run their lives.
Madam Speaker, I have asked twice now whether the 11¢-a-litre tax the government promised is the final price. Twice the member has refused to answer. That suggests the government has a hidden agenda to increase the tax even more than it already has admitted. This document released this week does not even talk about increased rebates, just increased taxes.Will the parliamentary secretary confirm if the tax will ever go above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Madam Speaker, it is still only 2% of the contract.We learned this week that after governors general have completed their mandates, during which they are grossly overpaid to eat canapés on the taxpayers' dime, their office expenses are paid for life.Adrienne Clarkson alone is still costing us over $100,000 a year, even a decade after her retirement.Will the government give a detailed account of all the expenses reimbursed to all governors general, especially before Michaëlle Jean gets wind of this scheme?
I will take that as a no, Madam Speaker, but let me try again.I am not sure if the minister watched that interview, but he really should, because it was really a hot mess. However, this is not about his lack of media training. This is about positive federal-provincial relationships to come up with good public policy solutions.Will the minister humble himself and apologize to one of the strongest women I know, Lisa MacLeod, for his shameful, inappropriate name calling and outburst?
Madam Speaker, for the record, I would like my question of privilege to stand for the following reason. As I read into the record when I made the additional information and submission on the question of privilege, the conversation my staff member had with the reporter stated that the information was provided so they could get a story under the wire. What this means, of course, is that I was going to be asked for comment on a 43-page document at the end of a news cycle with no time to be able to respond to it, nor any other members in this place if they wanted to do the same. While the minister can stand and apologize, it is still incumbent upon the Speaker to ensure that this does not happen. As I have stated, there have seen many instances in this Parliament when the government has been repeatedly found to have done the exact same thing. My problem is that it is all well and good for the minister to stand up here because he was caught, but the reality is that I was still in a position where I was being asked for comment by a journalist who had been given information prior to the House being able to consider it. That is wrong. It is not right. Frankly, I do not think the amount of time spent on points of order or whatnot in the House should be given any consideration in terms of the fact that I still did not have the ability to comment on that particular piece of business that was put before the House that day. At some point in time, and with the deepest respect, the office of the Speaker has to rule consistently on the fact that the rights of members need to be put before the rights of any other person in the public in terms of being able to review information or matters before the House. This is in alignment with several of the decisions, previous rulings or comments that have been made by the Speaker in this Parliament and in previous Parliaments. This should not be happening across any flavour of government at any time. The rights of the members here should be sovereign. Madam Speaker, I ask you to consider that particular principle above the minister's contrition today.
Madam Speaker, our government knows the importance of taking action to protect our species and wildlife. That is why this week we are taking unprecedented new measures to further help the recovery of B.C. southern resident killer whales. The new measures include $143 million invested in critical steps to protect this west coast icon. Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment please further explain the steps the government is taking to protect our southern resident killer whales?
Madam Speaker, our government has been going around the country to talk to Canadians about how much immigration matters to them and their local communities. Canadians have been asking for immigration as an important tool to address labour market shortages, as well as to bring in much-needed skills.After three years in opposition, my hon. colleague has finally discovered the importance of talking to Canadians about immigration. With all the blocking of people she has done on Twitter, I hope this will be the last way she can communicate with Canadians.
Madam Speaker, we understand absolutely the impact the work disruption is having on employees and their families. That is why our government has been encouraging both sides to reach a fair agreement as soon as possible. Unfortunately, when a strike occurs, the expiry of the collective agreement affects some of the benefits of Canada Post employees, but not all. I will give an example. Prescription drugs will continue for employees. I can assure the House that employees will maintain full access to their EI benefits, which include maternity and parental benefits. Canada Post has put in place a request for a compassionate grounds exception to this. It is taking those requests seriously and addressing them very quickly.
Madam Speaker, that was some mighty fine kowtowing. We already know that governors generals do not really do anything. Why should taxpayers have to pay for this?It is unbelievable that they can claim office expenses for the rest of their lives. It is even more unbelievable that these aristocrats do not even have to disclose where the money is spent.The Prime Minister said that he expected greater transparency.Will he open the books instead of opening his wallet for these freeloading carpetbaggers?
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada has been collecting data about Canadians for 100 years in an exemplary manner. Reliable, good quality information is vital to making decisions that actually reflect the needs of Canadians.Unlike the Conservatives, we believe that facts, not ideology, are a very good starting point for public policy. I know that the Conservatives like to make their decisions based on ideology. However, as a government, we like to base our decisions on the facts.
Madam Speaker, our benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 veterans or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. They are based on estimates, and they provide us some guarantees. Whether a veteran comes forward this year or the next year or the year after, we will always have the resources available for veterans. When we took office, we immediately increased financial supports by putting more money in veterans' pockets, increasing mental health supports, delivering on the promises we made to veterans and their families.
Madam Speaker, we understand that privacy is important to Canadians. That is why we have taken measures to protect Canadians' privacy in this matter and in a number of different places.Nobody will have access to the personal nominative information that Canadians give to Statistics Canada. Indeed, Statistics Canada cannot even be compelled to give that information to a court of law. It is protected in their hands.Statistics Canada has policies and procedures in place to protect the privacy of Canadians, and we need, all Canadians need
Madam Speaker, the accusations made by the member are completely inaccurate and wrong. There is not a file that is closer to my heart than this one. From the day I was elected, I have been working on this. As the daughter of a proud steelworker and a lifelong Hamiltonian, this file is extremely important. Consultations have and will continue to take place. In our 2018 budget, as well as my mandate letter, I have been tasked with this. I have consulted and I will continue to consult. The member knows this is a decades old problem and it is our government that will solve it. No matter what misinformation he gives, it will not stop me or our government.
Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise once again to offer a response on the important issue of climate change.I am aware of the evidence that the hon. member opposite cites and take this problem very seriously. We played an integral role at the Paris conference in achieving an agreement that would meaningfully move the needle in the fight against climate change. In order to implement our plan domestically and reach our targets, we are putting a price on pollution. We are investing in clean energy. We are helping small businesses become more efficient.It is a pleasure to be part of this government that takes this threat seriously. We have to work to grow the economy at the same time.I am pleased to work with the member across the aisle to move the needle forward on both of these initiatives.
Madam Speaker, on a point of order. Earlier today in question period, I stood and asked a question on a very important issue about bankruptcy laws.The seniors minister responded to me that I was giving misinformation or false information. I take offence to that. I strongly encourage the minister to retract that statement and apologize for making that statement about my integrity and character.
Madam Speaker, all members of the House share the deep angst of the families who have tragically lost children to crime. That is why I asked for a thorough review by the corrections commissioner to ensure that long-standing policy in these matters has been followed, and to reassess the appropriateness of those policies to determine that they are, in fact, the right ones. The report was made available late yesterday. I am reviewing it at the moment. We all want this system to be as good as it can possibly be for the protection of the public.
Madam Speaker, climate change is real and those of us in the House who have a platform have a responsibility to do something about it. We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. Part of our plan to protect the environment includes putting a price on pollution that is going to actually see polluters pay more and make middle-class families better off. I am curious when the Conservatives are actually going to come up with their plan. So far as I can see, their only plan to date is to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, this week we learned that the Liberal government would give a carbon tax exemption to New Brunswick's Belledune coal facility. Now, the Liberals have admitted that their carbon tax on large emitters will kill jobs, but the fact is that this carbon tax is already costing jobs in my community.Why does the Liberal government give exemptions to Liberal ridings while punishing hard-working Canadians?
Madam Speaker, just to clarify the question I asked, the question was whether the Chair has now set a precedent. Given that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has, in fact, said that there was a clear instance of the government providing information to the media and that she was deeply concerned, but she decided not to provide censure, I am wondering not about future actions but about what precedent has been set.Is it now okay? Is the Chair now saying, given her, once again, looking over the actions of the government, that she has formally set a precedent and that it is okay for the government to give information to the media prior to members in this House being able to review it? That is deeply concerning.
Madam Speaker, the Liberal plan does make pollution free for large polluters. They do not pay the tax.However, I go back to the question. The government admits that it will increase taxes on gas per litre by 11¢, but a document released this week says that in 2022, after the election is over, it plans to increase it further. One ministerial briefing note says that it will have to go up six times what the government promises. That is 60¢ a litre. A UN report cited by the government says that it will have to go up 100 times more than the government admits, $10 a litre in new taxes.Will the government confirm whether it will increase the tax further?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals just keep saying, Nothing to see here. Move along, folks.If there was really nothing to hide, then why did they not just tell Canadians, in the first place, that they were collecting this information? We are talking about things like Canadians' ATM withdrawals, their credit card transactions and their bill payments. The first step to fixing a problem is actually admitting that there is a problem.Will the Liberals stop trying to sweep this under the carpet and admit that trying to steal Canadians' data without their consent is a real problem?
Madam Speaker, revelations of the staggering scale of liabilities in the hundreds of billions for the cleanup of mines and well sites has stunned Canadians. However, for those who have long called for full disclosure of the true cost of reclamation of industrial sites in advance of project approvals, this comes as no surprise. The federal government holds the power to prevent downloading of this massive liability.I call on the government to act now on Alberta's demands, amend the federal bankruptcy and creditor laws and give higher priority to environmental cleanup to end the downloading of liability to Canadians.
Madam Speaker, I have some big news. Yesterday, the government announced that Davie will not get to build a single ship. Instead, starting in 2021, it is getting just one maintenance contract worth less than 2% of the shipbuilding strategy. Thanks to delays at Irving and Seaspan, the Asterix is the only ship the government has received. Davie, the best shipyard in America, delivered that ship on time and on budget. However, despite the success of the Asterix, the government has been slow to award it the Obelix contract, yet it can offer risk-free guarantees to the wealthy Irving corporation.Could the minister explain why he is so intent on undermining Davie? Why the fixation?
Madam Speaker, a report out this week says that over the last 25 years the earth's oceans have retained 60% more heat than scientists had thought. Also this week, a glacier in Antarctica lost a section of ice five times the size of Manhattan, but the Liberals do not seem to get the urgency of climate change. They think following Harper's targets is just fine. Our oceans are warming, our icebergs are melting. We need urgent action now.Why do the Liberals not ditch their grossly inadequate plan and come up with something consistent with the urgency of climate change?
Madam Speaker, we have defended our supply management system against the Americans' aggressive attempts to dismantle it.Market access is similar to the changes the Conservatives negotiated in the TPP. On Monday, the minister announced the creation of working groups comprised of dairy, egg and poultry farmers, and we are committed to fully and fairly supporting them to ensure their success.
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I would like to note that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has ruled in instances when the government has very clearly provided information to the media ahead of members of Parliament.I guess my question for the Chair is this. At what point will the Chair consider a member's privilege to be breached when there is a clear instance? There have been many times when the Chair has essentially given the government a slap on the wrist for the same instance. When the Chair says he or she is deeply concerned, but the behaviour keeps repeating itself, one actually wonders if any change will occur or if a precedent has been set by the Chair, now that there have been so many rulings when the Chair has been deeply concerned, that it is okay for the member's privilege to be violated.I am just wondering, for clarification, given the number of times in this particular Parliament that this particular Speaker has said she is concerned about the government's actions in this regard but has not referred it to PROC or perhaps any other study for review, if the Chair has now ruled that this is now an acceptable precedent.That is something for all members in this place to understand. Where does the Chair draw the line? I strongly believe that my privilege was violated, and I strongly believe that the Chair has already said that we should be concerned that the government is doing this. However, at what point is there censure? At what point does the behaviour change? I would argue that this is the role of the Chair. The role of the Chair is to maintain order and to uphold the privilege of members in this place. There seems to be a pattern where the behaviour is occurring but there is no censure. I am wondering now if a precedent has formally been set that it is okay for the government to provide information to the media prior to this House having a chance to review it.
Madam Speaker and friends, a month from today, the climate negotiations will begin in full at COP24. The agenda will be the IPCC report on 1.5° and a review of every government's actions and whether we are on track. We know that some countries have done a huge amount, but collectively, we are off course. We are headed for the risk of global extinction. This is not a joke. We are running out of time. We have one chance, and one chance only. Can Canada show leadership and go, accepting the target of 45% by 2030, or do we give up on our children?
Mr. Speaker, let me correct something the hon. member is saying. The government is not accessing the nominative data of Canadians; Statistics Canada is for all Canadians to be able to use.The personal information gets protected. Once the information is processed by Statistics Canada, it is available for the use of municipal governments, provincial governments, the federal government, small businesses, individual Canadians, the Bank of Canada, other institutions and other individuals who have to make economic decisions in their lives based on the best available information.It is
Madam Speaker, Vancouver Aquarium research just warned that climate change threatens our coast even more than before. Climate plans fall well short of what is needed. Oceans are warming and sea levels are rising much faster than anticipated. Alarm bells are ringing for our coast, but the government just bought a leaky old pipeline. The government just called this an existential crisis. Is the government not embarrassed to still be using Harper's discredited climate change targets?
Madam Speaker, the situation is very clear to millions of Canadians. Statistics Canada has no business poking around in the personal bank accounts of honest Canadians. That is clear. Pilot project or not, that is a fundamental principle that we, the Conservatives, will defend.Yes, Statistics Canada has been gathering information for 100 years, but it has been doing so with Canadians' consent and permission.In this case, Statistics Canada plans to poke around in their bank accounts without their consent. That makes no sense. Why do the Liberals continue to defend the indefensible?
Madam Speaker, it is a bit rich for the other side to try to criticize an institution such as Statistics Canada regarding privacy concerns.It was in fact their government, under Vic Toews, that tried to have everyone tell Vic Toews what they were doing every day. Tell Vic everything.That was the Conservative government trying to do that. In this case, it is not our government; it is not any government gathering information. It is Statistics Canada. It does it reasonably and effectively, protecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, another day has gone by with the Liberals refusing to actually listen to Canadians. Putting aside the hundreds of pages of privacy breaches by the government, the state does not have the right to monitor law-abiding citizens going about their daily lives, full stop.Will the Liberals accept that people are rightfully concerned, and end this unprecedented surveillance scheme?
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada as an institution has an exemplary record of gathering the personal information of Canadians. It has been doing it for 100 years, in a safe and secure fashion, and will continue to do so. The reports that Statistics Canada puts out are important to Canadians in all walks of life in terms of how they plan their personal lives. For municipal governments, provincial governments and the federal government to create good policy, and for institutions such as the Bank of Canada, Statistics Canada performs a necessary role. We will continue to defend its ability to do so. It is respecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, we look forward to working with the Government of New Brunswick to protect our environment and grow our economy. New Brunswickers, like all Canadians, know that we need to take action on climate change. That is something my Conservative friends have not yet realized. We will continue to work with the Government of New Brunswick and our Liberal New Brunswick caucus, which we are very proud of, to promote clean growth, to strengthen the middle class and to continue to deliver for all Canadians.
Madam Speaker, Canadians can be proud to be represented by such inspiring, dynamic governors general. They provide a great service to Canada, and that is why they continue to be supported throughout the years after they have left. Clearly, Canadians expect transparency and accountability when public money is spent. We will carefully examine the support arrangements to ensure that best practices are being followed and that Canadians' expectations are being met.
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for FleetwoodPort Kells for raising this important issue and his advocacy to protect this iconic species.We take our role to protect the southern resident killer whale very seriously, and that is why I was incredibly proud to stand beside the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans this week to announce new measures to protect this species. These measures include an investment of $61.5 million, which includes funding to support marine habitat restoration. Importantly, we will also be strengthening controls on five harmful contaminants that we know have an impact on this species when their food resource is scarce and interfere with their reproduction.We are going to continue to protect nature and wildlife that these species depend upon.
Madam Speaker, here is the deal. We have Canadians who are having their bank accounts snooped through by the government. We are talking about transaction records. We are talking about bill payments. We are talking about bank balances. We are talking about social insurance numbers. Now the parliamentary secretary is saying, Don't worry, Canadians. We're not keeping it. We're sharing it. We're repackaging it. We're giving it away as a gift, so don't worry, Canadians. It's okay that we're collecting your personal data. In what world is that okay?
Madam Speaker, if this was a pilot project, then why did the Privacy Commissioner launch a full investigation?If the Liberals are so proud of this, they certainly should have been announcing this publicly. The Prime Minister once expressed his admiration for basic dictatorship. Is this where he got the idea to start tracking every purchase that we make?
Madam Speaker, again, I presume the hon. gentleman's question relates to the issues presently before the courts. There is an outstanding legal proceeding before the courts and between the prosecution and Vice-Admiral Norman. The parties to that proceeding will seek disclosure of documents. That is routine. If any of those relevant documents are in the possession of the government, the government will provide them to the court, but it is up to the court to decide and not the House of Commons. The court will determine how to apply any rules with respect to privilege or confidence.
Madam Speaker, it is important to note that immigration continues to be a tool for Canadians to address labour market shortages. We rely on immigration to make sure we continue to be a leader in the G7 in terms of ensuring that investment follows talent. We have attracted a huge number of skilled labour through the global skills strategy and the changes we have made to the express entry system.The announcements that we made yesterday about our new multi-year plan will ensure that Canada continues to prosper through immigration, a lesson that the party opposite should learn.
Madam Speaker, our government takes sport-related concussions very seriously. Far too many youths and athletes experience concussions during sport and recreation activities. That is why we have released the new Canadian guideline on concussion in sport and are working to harmonize an approach on concussion awareness, prevention, detection, management and surveillance. We are pleased that Parliament's health committee has created a subcommittee to study concussions. We look forward to its work and its report.
Madam Speaker, it is critical for Canada's resources to be developed in a sustainable way so that economic growth and environmental protections go hand in hand.Provinces manage their own environmental liabilities. They are responsible for having the tools to mitigate potential risks associated with upstream oil and gas development. Our government works with provinces and territories to support their regulatory regimes and share best practices.In budget 2017, we made a $30 million investment in support of Alberta's efforts to advance the reclamation of orphan wells. While this important task remains with the province, we have been able to show our support.
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his work on the INDU committee. I share the hon. member's concern with the privacy of Canadians. Some of the information that Statistics Canada will gather is interesting to that side of the House. For example, in 2017, Statistics Canada reported that Canadians were spending more than 30% of their income on housing. That led us to develop a social housing policy in Canada that would address the issue.It is those kinds of statistics and data that will help Canadians of all stripes.
Madam Speaker, again, the tactic being employed by the opposition is to drive by with smears and innuendoes. That is the very reason we have the sub judice rule in the House of Commons that members of Parliament should not ask questions and ministers should not answer questions that could somehow impinge upon an outstanding court proceeding. The court will determine what documents are relevant. The court will determine what rules of privilege and confidence apply. The court has the jurisdiction in this matter.
Madam Speaker, it is hockey season and kids of all ages in DartmouthCole Harbour, in fact across the whole country, are buying new gear and hitting the ice. As a hockey dad, I know very well that parents want to make sure their kids are safe and I know that concussions are of great concern to them.Could the Minister of Science and Sport please tell us what our government is doing to make sports in Canada safer and to perhaps reduce concussions?
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Vimy for her hard work on behalf of those Sears workers. It was great. We can all agree here in the House that Canadians benefit when there is growth in the economy. Where we differ here from the Conservative opposition is that we do not believe any growth should take place on the backs of workers. We want workers to get a fair shake in this country, and that is why we announced yesterday the doubling of benefits in the wage earner protection program. That will benefit her Sears workers. I am proud to be part of a government that takes action for Canadian workers.
Madam Speaker, of course we recognize Davie's excellent work. Yesterday, we announced that part of a contract worth $7 billion would go to Davie. This summer, we committed $610 million for the construction of three icebreakers. We are continuing to work with Davie. The Department of National Defence has determined that there is no operational need for a second ship. We are continuing to work on shipbuilding in Canada.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his concern for a great challenge of our time, and that is the challenge we face in respect of climate change.The results of the recent IPCC report are not lost on me nor on our government. I was very proud when our government and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris that led us to set forth a plan that is going to allow us to make a meaningful difference to reduce our emissions.We know that after this plan is implemented, we may have to do more after that. I look forward to working with members from all parties to continue to fight this existential challenge.
Madam Speaker, as I just said, we are very proud of our Governor General, who represents our country. We are reviewing the spending policy to ensure that it meets the degree of transparency that Canadians expect.
Madam Speaker, in possibly one of the worst interviews ever given, yesterday the Minister of Immigration once again angrily called his Ontario provincial counterpart several inappropriate names after she requested federal support to pay for the social welfare costs of the Prime Minister's #WelcometoCanada illegal border crossers. When pressed on what evidence he had to support the name he called her, he got even angrier and doubled-down.Will the minister apologize for his name calling and shameful disregard for all Ontario taxpayers?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals are making promises to our veterans that they cannot even keep. They authorize spending but keep the money.They left $80.9 million unspent in 2016, $183 million in 2017, and $148.6 million in 2018. Without this money, veterans cannot access the services they are entitled to. Will the Liberals keep their promise or will they fail our veterans?
Madam Speaker, now that the Liberals have their new agreement, millions of tonnes of American chicken, eggs and turkey are about to flood the Canadian market.Pierre-Luc Leblanc, president of Éleveurs de volailles du Québec, the provincial poultry farmers' association, says it may seem like no big deal now, but over the next five to 10 years, it will put poultry producers in a precarious position. This agreement came as a surprise and a disappointment to poultry farmers, and they are asking the government for compensation.Here is my question on their behalf for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the Prime Minister: When they will listen to farmers?
Madam Speaker, for the workers currently on the floor of steel mills in Hamilton or at SMEs in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean, the negotiations between the United States, Mexico, and Canada are not just some game to be won.The unfair U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum are a serious threat to jobs and my region. Workers always need to come first in trade negotiations.Will the government promise to refuse to sign the agreement as long as the tariffs have not been lifted?
Madam Speaker, our government takes Canadians' privacy very seriously. Let us be clear. This is a pilot project that is still in the design stages. No data have been collected to date.Statistics Canada's job is to provide the reliable data needed to meet the needs of Canadians, businesses and communities. Statistics Canada has worked and collaborated with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go, and it will continue to do so.
Madam Speaker, let me once again correct the narrative.This was a pilot project that is still in the process of being designed. From the beginning, Statistics Canada has been open to working with the Privacy Commissioner and has in fact had privacy concerns protected from the get-go. It invited the Privacy Commissioner to take a look at what it was doing. Statistics Canada is going to move ahead with the Privacy Commissioner in order to ensure that the privacy of Canadians is protected. Those are the facts. We take the privacy of Canadians seriously.
Madam Speaker, Canada Post's targeting of vulnerable postal workers is shameful. First it cut off short-term disability payments, then long-term disability payments. Then it went after people's maternity leave benefits. This is a morally bankrupt tactic by Canada Post and so far the government has chosen to be complicit. Cutting benefits is not good faith collective bargaining. What is the government doing to stop this brutal assault on workers' rights and encourage Canada Post to bargain in good faith?
Madam Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour announced changes to the Canada Labour Code. We have all heard the stories of Sears workers. In my riding, Vimy, the layoffs also affected our community. Middle-class workers in Vimy felt they were not well served by Conservative policies, which only benefited the wealthy.Could the parliamentary secretary tell the House what these announcements mean for middle-class Canadians in my riding?
Madam Speaker, the Minister of National Revenue keeps claiming that service is her priority, yet under her watch, service continues to get even worse, despite the budget increase. She has been picking on single parents, she has not reviewed all of the disability tax credits she took away, she has taken no meaningful action on offshore tax avoidance and evasion, wait times are getting longer and the call centre is still a disaster.Will the minister stop claiming that service is her priority and start delivering service to Canadians?
Madam Speaker, the President of the Treasury Board has tried to downplay his ties to Irving, claiming that he was only copied on one letter. According to the lobbyist registry, he has met with Irving 16 times in the past two and a half years.Does the President of the Treasury Board still want to claim that he has had little contact with Irving, or perhaps his meetings with the Irvings were just part of a pilot project?
Madam Speaker, these unjustified and illegal tariffs are hurting the American economy, American workers and American consumers of course. The national security excuse is absurd and insulting to Canadians. That is why we have imposed measured tariffs that are perfectly reciprocal. Canada must stand united against these attacks on our workers.
Madam Speaker, the Minister of Border Security is not aware that the number of illegal migrants in Canada is going up, which is odd considering that his officials and policy advisers have the RCMP's figures at their disposal. Even the media has confirmed the facts. For two years now, we have been saying that urgent, responsible action is needed. Either the minister is getting bad advice or he is simply incompetent. Do we need to do the minister's job for him, or is he finally going to take action?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals have been defending this for four days. What a backtrack this is. This is a personal violation of every Canadian. Canadians have no faith or trust in the current Liberal government and how it will use that data. Over the past 19 months, there have been hundreds of thousands of examples of privacy breaches by the Liberal government. Canadians are rightly cynical, and they will not stand for this intrusion into their personal lives. Why are the Liberals supporting this gross violation into the privacy of Canadians?
Madam Speaker, it sounds like he has confirmed that the President of the Treasury Board is part of the court action. The President of the Treasury Board claims that he interfered with the Davie ship deal as part of his job to oversee spending. At committee yesterday, he was not able to name one other contract that he thought was part of his job to review, not even the failed Phoenix pay system.Why did he only interfere with the Davie deal, and what is he trying to hide?
Madam Speaker, I would say that incompetence is cutting $400 million from border services and thinking it would not affect results.I must inform my hon. colleague that we have invested $173 million to ensure that we have the resources in place to get the job done right. In August and September, the numbers were down compared to last year's figures. We hope the same will happen in October. This clearly shows that our plan is working.
Madam Speaker, I do not know how many times we need to stand in the House to make the government understand that our workers' pensions are vulnerable under bankruptcy laws. Steelworkers are disappointed to see the lack of will from the seniors minister to take action. She has not taken their livelihood or their years of hard work seriously. They deserve better. Now that three years have passed, could she tell us what she is waiting for? When will the minister get to work to change the bankruptcy laws and stand up for workers and retirees? This is the right thing to do.
Madam Speaker, Liberals always put criminals ahead of victims and law-abiding Canadians. Tori Stafford's killer was transferred from jail to a healing lodge on their watch. Today, her loved ones are gathering to call for action, demanding that child killers be kept behind bars, not in healing lodges without fences. However, so far the Liberals refuse to act. Canadians are outraged about it. What is taking so long, and when will the Liberals actually do the right thing and put Tori's killer back behind bars where she belongs?
I am going to keep on this, Madam Speaker. I think we have them on run here.He refuses to answer the question. He said that by 2022, the Liberals will have a price of $50 a tonne, which is 11¢ a litre for a litre of gas. I have asked, given the evidence, whether they plan to increase it further if they are re-elected. He keeps dodging.Will he end the hidden agenda and confirm, yes or no, whether the tax will rise above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Madam Speaker, Canadians are appalled to learn that Statistics Canada plans to access their detailed personal banking information. They were never consulted and did not consent. Like Apple or Facebook, the Liberal government is failing a fundamental principle of consent for privacy. Building a massive database of personal banking information without telling anyone is just wrong. This banking data breach is only the tip of the sphere of the new Liberal census Canada scheme. It is not a pilot project; it is the actual new regime the Liberals put in place.Will the government halt this data collection from running wild until it is investigated, there are consultations and consent is obtained?
Madam Speaker, it is news to us that this is a pilot project. Could the government tell the pilot to land the plane? This situation is ridiculous.What is worse, there could be privacy breaches. We requested information about this. In Canada, during the past 19 months there were more than 1,000 situations where personal information was disclosed.How can we have faith in this so-called pilot project?
Madam Speaker, again, part of our plan to protect the environment, which is essential for those of us in government to take seriously, is to put a price on pollution that is increasing to $50 a tonne by 2022. This is going to have the impact of putting more money into the pockets of middle-class families.I am extraordinarily disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaign in 2019 on a promise to take money from their constituents so they can make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, speaking about privacy, we are talking about millions of records that could potentially impact millions of Canadians, and the Privacy Commissioner is concerned.Speaking about the Privacy Commissioner, yesterday he said that privacy is not a right to be traded off in exchange for innovation. He also said that the current law allows the government to seek this information without anyone's consent. The information in Canadians' bank accounts belongs to them, not to the Liberals.Will the government finally listen to Canadians and end this Orwellian program?
Madam Speaker, veterans have fought hard for this country and deserve nothing but respect from our government. When the Liberal government allocated funds for veterans, we expected these funds to be spent. The government is doing what it said it would never do, authorize funds for veterans and fail to use them. The Liberals are not honouring their promise to respect veterans and to make sure every dime allocated is spent. This is unacceptable.When will the Liberals show veterans the respect they deserve and make sure every dollar allocated by this House is spent?
Madam Speaker, benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. We estimate the number of people who will claim benefits to ensure that the resources are there for these veterans, no matter which year they file their claim.
Madam Speaker, my colleague opposite is comparing apples and oranges. Fighting tax evasion, especially abroad, is a priority for our government, as is service to Canadians. The Conservatives are in no position to lecture this side of the House considering the cuts made to the Canada Revenue Agency when they were in power.We are working on it. People will receive the credits and benefits to which they are entitled.
Madam Speaker, no government and no Canadian will have access to the personal information of Canadians. It will end with Statistics Canada, which will keep it in a secure fashion. What governments do get, what other institutions will get, what other Canadians will get, are Statistics Canada reports, which are relied on by Canadians, by members of Parliament and by other governments across Canada and have been for 100 years.Statistics Canada has worked with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go. It will continue to do so in respect of the privacy of Canadians. Canadians do not need to be worried about their information.
Madam Speaker, the Liberal government will be collecting personal financial and banking information without consent from Canadians. That includes seniors, moms and small businesses in my community of Oshawa. This is not automated information. It includes debit and credit transactions, bill payments and mortgage payments. Even trips to Tim Hortons and Oshawa Generals games will be handed over to the leaky Liberal government, line by line, without the knowledge or consent of Canadians.Will the big brother Liberal government do the right thing and respect the privacy of Canadians instead of incorporating them into the plot of 1984?
Madam Speaker, now the Liberals are hiding behind Statistics Canada when it was their idea to invade Canadian privacy. This is why the personal violation and breach of trust becomes important. If a mom and a dad transfer $15,000 to their son and daughter-in-law to help with the purchase of their first home, should they expect a call from the government asking them why? Will the government call new Canadians after they transfer money back home to their family in the Philippines, asking what that transfer was for? The potential for abuse is real. This personal violation of privacy is wrong on every level. Why can the Liberal government not see that?
Madam Speaker, again, we were elected on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. We have been transparent with our plan to put a price on pollution that will increase over time to being $50 a tonne by 2020.Again, I am curious why the Conservatives refuse to put forward a plan. Instead of actually coming forward with productive ideas in the conversation, they seem committed to adopting the approach taken by Doug Ford in Ontario, which is to do absolutely nothing.
Madam Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. The government will not have access to this information. The first thing Statistics Canada does is to scrub all of the personal information from the data so it becomes anonymous. Then it repackages that data for a variety of different Canadians to use in a variety of different ways. It is not a question of surveillance. Statistics Canada has an exemplary reputation in Canada. It is seen as a leader around the world in statistical gathering and statistical methods. It will continue to do this to the highest standard and to the highest standard of privacy.
Madam Speaker, over the past four days, Canadians have been hearing about a massive Liberal overreach into their personal banking information. For four days, the Liberals have been defending it as though accessing line-by-line, transaction-by-transaction details of my mother and father's bank account without their consent is normal behaviour. If foreign governments tried this, they would be accused of hacking into my mom and dad's account. Why do the Liberals think it is okay to hack into Canadian bank accounts and take personal data without their consent?
Madam Speaker, the government admits that its new carbon tax will add at least 11¢ a litre to Canadians when they gas up their cars. However, a government analysis, quietly posted online this week, shows that after the next election, the Liberals plan to increase that tax even further. How much? Well, an earlier ministerial briefing note said that it would have to go up six times as high as the government currently admits. One UN report cited today by the government says that it will have to be 100 times higher than the government is currently admitting.Will the government today confirm it will not increase the tax after the election?
Madam Speaker, if they had not created the problem, there would be no need to reinvest the money.The situation is much worse than that. The Liberals boast about reinvesting in borders services, but the union president, Jean-Pierre Fortin, seems very surprised by what the minister is saying because, to date, not a single penny has found its way down to our border officers. The money is there. It is somewhere in the sky, in the department, but it has not made its way down to the ground.Can the Liberals give us an intelligent answer? They need to stop saying that we made cuts and tell us where their money is.
Madam Speaker, I would like to address the question of privilege raised by the hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill on October 31, 2018.This past Wednesday, I tabled the annual report on immigration, 2018. My intention was to table this report during routine proceedings, under the rubric of tabling of documents. However, given events in the House, this was not possible. Following question period that day, there were a number of questions of privilege and points of order on a multitude of issues, which in turn delayed the start of routine proceedings. The video of the House proceedings for that day shows that I rose on a point of order at 3:41 p.m. to table the report. However, I did not get the floor. At 3:59 p.m., I rose again for a second time and was allowed by the Speaker to duly table the report in the House. All this added to the confusion. Unfortunately, an item contained in the said report was provided to a member of the media before the report was officially tabled in the House of Commons.Madam Speaker, I assure you and all hon. colleagues that I take this matter very seriously. There was absolutely no ill will and no intention to attack the dignity of this House. I assume full responsibility for this unfortunate incident, and I can assure the House that I have taken steps to ensure that the appropriate safeguards are in place to prevent such an occurrence in the future. Out of respect for the House, and to each and every member of Parliament who sits in this chamber, I offer my unreserved apology.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for SaanichGulf Islands for her work on this file over the past number of decades.This is a threat we need to take extraordinarily seriously. I have read through the IPCC report and know that we need to take action and take action immediately.We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment. That included putting a price on pollution, and a number of other measures. We played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris, and our government is committed to making our targets. If we need to do more after that, I would be pleased to continue to work with the hon. member to protect our environment for our kids and grandkids.
Madam Speaker, here are the facts. We invested $173 million to better manage the situation. Over $7 million of that money is in place to ensure that failed asylum claimants leave Canada. We are managing the situation properly. That is what Canadians expect from us, and that is exactly what we are doing.
Madam Speaker, again, we have to take protecting the environment seriously. The only plan we put in place is the one we have been telling Canadians about for a significant period of time now, which is to have the price on pollution that we have laid out in public leading up to 2022.I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate that all the revenues generated from this are going back to the citizens who live in the provinces where it is collected and it is going to put more money into the pockets of middle-class families. One final time, I am pleased to share that I am disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaigning on a promise to take that money from their constituents to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, our government takes the privacy of Canadians very seriously, but I need to correct a few things in the hon. member's discourse.First, this is a pilot project currently in the design stage. No data has been collected to date. It is Statistics Canada that would be gathering the data, not the government. Statistics Canada's job is precisely to provide good data that is reliable and necessary to meet the needs of all Canadians, all Canadian levels of government, including municipal governments, the federal government and provincial governments. It has done this for 100 years.
Madam Speaker, as a government, we rely on data. Other Canadians rely on data, the Bank of Canada, small businesses, other levels of Canadian government and municipal governments.For 100 years, Statistics Canada has done that job of collecting the data of Canadians and of making it available for Canadians to use to make better decisions. This is not a surveillance exercise. This is an exercise in providing Canadians with the information they need to run their lives.
Madam Speaker, I have asked twice now whether the 11¢-a-litre tax the government promised is the final price. Twice the member has refused to answer. That suggests the government has a hidden agenda to increase the tax even more than it already has admitted. This document released this week does not even talk about increased rebates, just increased taxes.Will the parliamentary secretary confirm if the tax will ever go above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Madam Speaker, it is still only 2% of the contract.We learned this week that after governors general have completed their mandates, during which they are grossly overpaid to eat canapés on the taxpayers' dime, their office expenses are paid for life.Adrienne Clarkson alone is still costing us over $100,000 a year, even a decade after her retirement.Will the government give a detailed account of all the expenses reimbursed to all governors general, especially before Michaëlle Jean gets wind of this scheme?
I will take that as a no, Madam Speaker, but let me try again.I am not sure if the minister watched that interview, but he really should, because it was really a hot mess. However, this is not about his lack of media training. This is about positive federal-provincial relationships to come up with good public policy solutions.Will the minister humble himself and apologize to one of the strongest women I know, Lisa MacLeod, for his shameful, inappropriate name calling and outburst?
Madam Speaker, for the record, I would like my question of privilege to stand for the following reason. As I read into the record when I made the additional information and submission on the question of privilege, the conversation my staff member had with the reporter stated that the information was provided so they could get a story under the wire. What this means, of course, is that I was going to be asked for comment on a 43-page document at the end of a news cycle with no time to be able to respond to it, nor any other members in this place if they wanted to do the same. While the minister can stand and apologize, it is still incumbent upon the Speaker to ensure that this does not happen. As I have stated, there have seen many instances in this Parliament when the government has been repeatedly found to have done the exact same thing. My problem is that it is all well and good for the minister to stand up here because he was caught, but the reality is that I was still in a position where I was being asked for comment by a journalist who had been given information prior to the House being able to consider it. That is wrong. It is not right. Frankly, I do not think the amount of time spent on points of order or whatnot in the House should be given any consideration in terms of the fact that I still did not have the ability to comment on that particular piece of business that was put before the House that day. At some point in time, and with the deepest respect, the office of the Speaker has to rule consistently on the fact that the rights of members need to be put before the rights of any other person in the public in terms of being able to review information or matters before the House. This is in alignment with several of the decisions, previous rulings or comments that have been made by the Speaker in this Parliament and in previous Parliaments. This should not be happening across any flavour of government at any time. The rights of the members here should be sovereign. Madam Speaker, I ask you to consider that particular principle above the minister's contrition today.
Madam Speaker, our government knows the importance of taking action to protect our species and wildlife. That is why this week we are taking unprecedented new measures to further help the recovery of B.C. southern resident killer whales. The new measures include $143 million invested in critical steps to protect this west coast icon. Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment please further explain the steps the government is taking to protect our southern resident killer whales?
Madam Speaker, our government has been going around the country to talk to Canadians about how much immigration matters to them and their local communities. Canadians have been asking for immigration as an important tool to address labour market shortages, as well as to bring in much-needed skills.After three years in opposition, my hon. colleague has finally discovered the importance of talking to Canadians about immigration. With all the blocking of people she has done on Twitter, I hope this will be the last way she can communicate with Canadians.
Madam Speaker, we understand absolutely the impact the work disruption is having on employees and their families. That is why our government has been encouraging both sides to reach a fair agreement as soon as possible. Unfortunately, when a strike occurs, the expiry of the collective agreement affects some of the benefits of Canada Post employees, but not all. I will give an example. Prescription drugs will continue for employees. I can assure the House that employees will maintain full access to their EI benefits, which include maternity and parental benefits. Canada Post has put in place a request for a compassionate grounds exception to this. It is taking those requests seriously and addressing them very quickly.
Madam Speaker, that was some mighty fine kowtowing. We already know that governors generals do not really do anything. Why should taxpayers have to pay for this?It is unbelievable that they can claim office expenses for the rest of their lives. It is even more unbelievable that these aristocrats do not even have to disclose where the money is spent.The Prime Minister said that he expected greater transparency.Will he open the books instead of opening his wallet for these freeloading carpetbaggers?
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada has been collecting data about Canadians for 100 years in an exemplary manner. Reliable, good quality information is vital to making decisions that actually reflect the needs of Canadians.Unlike the Conservatives, we believe that facts, not ideology, are a very good starting point for public policy. I know that the Conservatives like to make their decisions based on ideology. However, as a government, we like to base our decisions on the facts.
Madam Speaker, our benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 veterans or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. They are based on estimates, and they provide us some guarantees. Whether a veteran comes forward this year or the next year or the year after, we will always have the resources available for veterans. When we took office, we immediately increased financial supports by putting more money in veterans' pockets, increasing mental health supports, delivering on the promises we made to veterans and their families.
Madam Speaker, we understand that privacy is important to Canadians. That is why we have taken measures to protect Canadians' privacy in this matter and in a number of different places.Nobody will have access to the personal nominative information that Canadians give to Statistics Canada. Indeed, Statistics Canada cannot even be compelled to give that information to a court of law. It is protected in their hands.Statistics Canada has policies and procedures in place to protect the privacy of Canadians, and we need, all Canadians need
Madam Speaker, the accusations made by the member are completely inaccurate and wrong. There is not a file that is closer to my heart than this one. From the day I was elected, I have been working on this. As the daughter of a proud steelworker and a lifelong Hamiltonian, this file is extremely important. Consultations have and will continue to take place. In our 2018 budget, as well as my mandate letter, I have been tasked with this. I have consulted and I will continue to consult. The member knows this is a decades old problem and it is our government that will solve it. No matter what misinformation he gives, it will not stop me or our government.
Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise once again to offer a response on the important issue of climate change.I am aware of the evidence that the hon. member opposite cites and take this problem very seriously. We played an integral role at the Paris conference in achieving an agreement that would meaningfully move the needle in the fight against climate change. In order to implement our plan domestically and reach our targets, we are putting a price on pollution. We are investing in clean energy. We are helping small businesses become more efficient.It is a pleasure to be part of this government that takes this threat seriously. We have to work to grow the economy at the same time.I am pleased to work with the member across the aisle to move the needle forward on both of these initiatives.
Madam Speaker, on a point of order. Earlier today in question period, I stood and asked a question on a very important issue about bankruptcy laws.The seniors minister responded to me that I was giving misinformation or false information. I take offence to that. I strongly encourage the minister to retract that statement and apologize for making that statement about my integrity and character.
Madam Speaker, all members of the House share the deep angst of the families who have tragically lost children to crime. That is why I asked for a thorough review by the corrections commissioner to ensure that long-standing policy in these matters has been followed, and to reassess the appropriateness of those policies to determine that they are, in fact, the right ones. The report was made available late yesterday. I am reviewing it at the moment. We all want this system to be as good as it can possibly be for the protection of the public.
Madam Speaker, climate change is real and those of us in the House who have a platform have a responsibility to do something about it. We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. Part of our plan to protect the environment includes putting a price on pollution that is going to actually see polluters pay more and make middle-class families better off. I am curious when the Conservatives are actually going to come up with their plan. So far as I can see, their only plan to date is to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, this week we learned that the Liberal government would give a carbon tax exemption to New Brunswick's Belledune coal facility. Now, the Liberals have admitted that their carbon tax on large emitters will kill jobs, but the fact is that this carbon tax is already costing jobs in my community.Why does the Liberal government give exemptions to Liberal ridings while punishing hard-working Canadians?
Madam Speaker, just to clarify the question I asked, the question was whether the Chair has now set a precedent. Given that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has, in fact, said that there was a clear instance of the government providing information to the media and that she was deeply concerned, but she decided not to provide censure, I am wondering not about future actions but about what precedent has been set.Is it now okay? Is the Chair now saying, given her, once again, looking over the actions of the government, that she has formally set a precedent and that it is okay for the government to give information to the media prior to members in this House being able to review it? That is deeply concerning.
Madam Speaker, the Liberal plan does make pollution free for large polluters. They do not pay the tax.However, I go back to the question. The government admits that it will increase taxes on gas per litre by 11¢, but a document released this week says that in 2022, after the election is over, it plans to increase it further. One ministerial briefing note says that it will have to go up six times what the government promises. That is 60¢ a litre. A UN report cited by the government says that it will have to go up 100 times more than the government admits, $10 a litre in new taxes.Will the government confirm whether it will increase the tax further?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals just keep saying, Nothing to see here. Move along, folks.If there was really nothing to hide, then why did they not just tell Canadians, in the first place, that they were collecting this information? We are talking about things like Canadians' ATM withdrawals, their credit card transactions and their bill payments. The first step to fixing a problem is actually admitting that there is a problem.Will the Liberals stop trying to sweep this under the carpet and admit that trying to steal Canadians' data without their consent is a real problem?
Madam Speaker, revelations of the staggering scale of liabilities in the hundreds of billions for the cleanup of mines and well sites has stunned Canadians. However, for those who have long called for full disclosure of the true cost of reclamation of industrial sites in advance of project approvals, this comes as no surprise. The federal government holds the power to prevent downloading of this massive liability.I call on the government to act now on Alberta's demands, amend the federal bankruptcy and creditor laws and give higher priority to environmental cleanup to end the downloading of liability to Canadians.
Madam Speaker, I have some big news. Yesterday, the government announced that Davie will not get to build a single ship. Instead, starting in 2021, it is getting just one maintenance contract worth less than 2% of the shipbuilding strategy. Thanks to delays at Irving and Seaspan, the Asterix is the only ship the government has received. Davie, the best shipyard in America, delivered that ship on time and on budget. However, despite the success of the Asterix, the government has been slow to award it the Obelix contract, yet it can offer risk-free guarantees to the wealthy Irving corporation.Could the minister explain why he is so intent on undermining Davie? Why the fixation?
Madam Speaker, a report out this week says that over the last 25 years the earth's oceans have retained 60% more heat than scientists had thought. Also this week, a glacier in Antarctica lost a section of ice five times the size of Manhattan, but the Liberals do not seem to get the urgency of climate change. They think following Harper's targets is just fine. Our oceans are warming, our icebergs are melting. We need urgent action now.Why do the Liberals not ditch their grossly inadequate plan and come up with something consistent with the urgency of climate change?
Madam Speaker, we have defended our supply management system against the Americans' aggressive attempts to dismantle it.Market access is similar to the changes the Conservatives negotiated in the TPP. On Monday, the minister announced the creation of working groups comprised of dairy, egg and poultry farmers, and we are committed to fully and fairly supporting them to ensure their success.
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I would like to note that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has ruled in instances when the government has very clearly provided information to the media ahead of members of Parliament.I guess my question for the Chair is this. At what point will the Chair consider a member's privilege to be breached when there is a clear instance? There have been many times when the Chair has essentially given the government a slap on the wrist for the same instance. When the Chair says he or she is deeply concerned, but the behaviour keeps repeating itself, one actually wonders if any change will occur or if a precedent has been set by the Chair, now that there have been so many rulings when the Chair has been deeply concerned, that it is okay for the member's privilege to be violated.I am just wondering, for clarification, given the number of times in this particular Parliament that this particular Speaker has said she is concerned about the government's actions in this regard but has not referred it to PROC or perhaps any other study for review, if the Chair has now ruled that this is now an acceptable precedent.That is something for all members in this place to understand. Where does the Chair draw the line? I strongly believe that my privilege was violated, and I strongly believe that the Chair has already said that we should be concerned that the government is doing this. However, at what point is there censure? At what point does the behaviour change? I would argue that this is the role of the Chair. The role of the Chair is to maintain order and to uphold the privilege of members in this place. There seems to be a pattern where the behaviour is occurring but there is no censure. I am wondering now if a precedent has formally been set that it is okay for the government to provide information to the media prior to this House having a chance to review it.
Madam Speaker and friends, a month from today, the climate negotiations will begin in full at COP24. The agenda will be the IPCC report on 1.5° and a review of every government's actions and whether we are on track. We know that some countries have done a huge amount, but collectively, we are off course. We are headed for the risk of global extinction. This is not a joke. We are running out of time. We have one chance, and one chance only. Can Canada show leadership and go, accepting the target of 45% by 2030, or do we give up on our children?
Mr. Speaker, let me correct something the hon. member is saying. The government is not accessing the nominative data of Canadians; Statistics Canada is for all Canadians to be able to use.The personal information gets protected. Once the information is processed by Statistics Canada, it is available for the use of municipal governments, provincial governments, the federal government, small businesses, individual Canadians, the Bank of Canada, other institutions and other individuals who have to make economic decisions in their lives based on the best available information.It is
Madam Speaker, Vancouver Aquarium research just warned that climate change threatens our coast even more than before. Climate plans fall well short of what is needed. Oceans are warming and sea levels are rising much faster than anticipated. Alarm bells are ringing for our coast, but the government just bought a leaky old pipeline. The government just called this an existential crisis. Is the government not embarrassed to still be using Harper's discredited climate change targets?
Madam Speaker, the situation is very clear to millions of Canadians. Statistics Canada has no business poking around in the personal bank accounts of honest Canadians. That is clear. Pilot project or not, that is a fundamental principle that we, the Conservatives, will defend.Yes, Statistics Canada has been gathering information for 100 years, but it has been doing so with Canadians' consent and permission.In this case, Statistics Canada plans to poke around in their bank accounts without their consent. That makes no sense. Why do the Liberals continue to defend the indefensible?
Madam Speaker, it is a bit rich for the other side to try to criticize an institution such as Statistics Canada regarding privacy concerns.It was in fact their government, under Vic Toews, that tried to have everyone tell Vic Toews what they were doing every day. Tell Vic everything.That was the Conservative government trying to do that. In this case, it is not our government; it is not any government gathering information. It is Statistics Canada. It does it reasonably and effectively, protecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, another day has gone by with the Liberals refusing to actually listen to Canadians. Putting aside the hundreds of pages of privacy breaches by the government, the state does not have the right to monitor law-abiding citizens going about their daily lives, full stop.Will the Liberals accept that people are rightfully concerned, and end this unprecedented surveillance scheme?
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada as an institution has an exemplary record of gathering the personal information of Canadians. It has been doing it for 100 years, in a safe and secure fashion, and will continue to do so. The reports that Statistics Canada puts out are important to Canadians in all walks of life in terms of how they plan their personal lives. For municipal governments, provincial governments and the federal government to create good policy, and for institutions such as the Bank of Canada, Statistics Canada performs a necessary role. We will continue to defend its ability to do so. It is respecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, we look forward to working with the Government of New Brunswick to protect our environment and grow our economy. New Brunswickers, like all Canadians, know that we need to take action on climate change. That is something my Conservative friends have not yet realized. We will continue to work with the Government of New Brunswick and our Liberal New Brunswick caucus, which we are very proud of, to promote clean growth, to strengthen the middle class and to continue to deliver for all Canadians.
Madam Speaker, Canadians can be proud to be represented by such inspiring, dynamic governors general. They provide a great service to Canada, and that is why they continue to be supported throughout the years after they have left. Clearly, Canadians expect transparency and accountability when public money is spent. We will carefully examine the support arrangements to ensure that best practices are being followed and that Canadians' expectations are being met.
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for FleetwoodPort Kells for raising this important issue and his advocacy to protect this iconic species.We take our role to protect the southern resident killer whale very seriously, and that is why I was incredibly proud to stand beside the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans this week to announce new measures to protect this species. These measures include an investment of $61.5 million, which includes funding to support marine habitat restoration. Importantly, we will also be strengthening controls on five harmful contaminants that we know have an impact on this species when their food resource is scarce and interfere with their reproduction.We are going to continue to protect nature and wildlife that these species depend upon.
Madam Speaker, here is the deal. We have Canadians who are having their bank accounts snooped through by the government. We are talking about transaction records. We are talking about bill payments. We are talking about bank balances. We are talking about social insurance numbers. Now the parliamentary secretary is saying, Don't worry, Canadians. We're not keeping it. We're sharing it. We're repackaging it. We're giving it away as a gift, so don't worry, Canadians. It's okay that we're collecting your personal data. In what world is that okay?
Madam Speaker, if this was a pilot project, then why did the Privacy Commissioner launch a full investigation?If the Liberals are so proud of this, they certainly should have been announcing this publicly. The Prime Minister once expressed his admiration for basic dictatorship. Is this where he got the idea to start tracking every purchase that we make?
Madam Speaker, again, I presume the hon. gentleman's question relates to the issues presently before the courts. There is an outstanding legal proceeding before the courts and between the prosecution and Vice-Admiral Norman. The parties to that proceeding will seek disclosure of documents. That is routine. If any of those relevant documents are in the possession of the government, the government will provide them to the court, but it is up to the court to decide and not the House of Commons. The court will determine how to apply any rules with respect to privilege or confidence.
Madam Speaker, it is important to note that immigration continues to be a tool for Canadians to address labour market shortages. We rely on immigration to make sure we continue to be a leader in the G7 in terms of ensuring that investment follows talent. We have attracted a huge number of skilled labour through the global skills strategy and the changes we have made to the express entry system.The announcements that we made yesterday about our new multi-year plan will ensure that Canada continues to prosper through immigration, a lesson that the party opposite should learn.
Madam Speaker, our government takes sport-related concussions very seriously. Far too many youths and athletes experience concussions during sport and recreation activities. That is why we have released the new Canadian guideline on concussion in sport and are working to harmonize an approach on concussion awareness, prevention, detection, management and surveillance. We are pleased that Parliament's health committee has created a subcommittee to study concussions. We look forward to its work and its report.
Madam Speaker, it is critical for Canada's resources to be developed in a sustainable way so that economic growth and environmental protections go hand in hand.Provinces manage their own environmental liabilities. They are responsible for having the tools to mitigate potential risks associated with upstream oil and gas development. Our government works with provinces and territories to support their regulatory regimes and share best practices.In budget 2017, we made a $30 million investment in support of Alberta's efforts to advance the reclamation of orphan wells. While this important task remains with the province, we have been able to show our support.
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his work on the INDU committee. I share the hon. member's concern with the privacy of Canadians. Some of the information that Statistics Canada will gather is interesting to that side of the House. For example, in 2017, Statistics Canada reported that Canadians were spending more than 30% of their income on housing. That led us to develop a social housing policy in Canada that would address the issue.It is those kinds of statistics and data that will help Canadians of all stripes.
Madam Speaker, again, the tactic being employed by the opposition is to drive by with smears and innuendoes. That is the very reason we have the sub judice rule in the House of Commons that members of Parliament should not ask questions and ministers should not answer questions that could somehow impinge upon an outstanding court proceeding. The court will determine what documents are relevant. The court will determine what rules of privilege and confidence apply. The court has the jurisdiction in this matter.
Madam Speaker, it is hockey season and kids of all ages in DartmouthCole Harbour, in fact across the whole country, are buying new gear and hitting the ice. As a hockey dad, I know very well that parents want to make sure their kids are safe and I know that concussions are of great concern to them.Could the Minister of Science and Sport please tell us what our government is doing to make sports in Canada safer and to perhaps reduce concussions?
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Vimy for her hard work on behalf of those Sears workers. It was great. We can all agree here in the House that Canadians benefit when there is growth in the economy. Where we differ here from the Conservative opposition is that we do not believe any growth should take place on the backs of workers. We want workers to get a fair shake in this country, and that is why we announced yesterday the doubling of benefits in the wage earner protection program. That will benefit her Sears workers. I am proud to be part of a government that takes action for Canadian workers.
Madam Speaker, of course we recognize Davie's excellent work. Yesterday, we announced that part of a contract worth $7 billion would go to Davie. This summer, we committed $610 million for the construction of three icebreakers. We are continuing to work with Davie. The Department of National Defence has determined that there is no operational need for a second ship. We are continuing to work on shipbuilding in Canada.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his concern for a great challenge of our time, and that is the challenge we face in respect of climate change.The results of the recent IPCC report are not lost on me nor on our government. I was very proud when our government and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris that led us to set forth a plan that is going to allow us to make a meaningful difference to reduce our emissions.We know that after this plan is implemented, we may have to do more after that. I look forward to working with members from all parties to continue to fight this existential challenge.
Madam Speaker, as I just said, we are very proud of our Governor General, who represents our country. We are reviewing the spending policy to ensure that it meets the degree of transparency that Canadians expect.
Most positive speeches
Madam Speaker, as I just said, we are very proud of our Governor General, who represents our country. We are reviewing the spending policy to ensure that it meets the degree of transparency that Canadians expect.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his concern for a great challenge of our time, and that is the challenge we face in respect of climate change.The results of the recent IPCC report are not lost on me nor on our government. I was very proud when our government and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris that led us to set forth a plan that is going to allow us to make a meaningful difference to reduce our emissions.We know that after this plan is implemented, we may have to do more after that. I look forward to working with members from all parties to continue to fight this existential challenge.
Madam Speaker, of course we recognize Davie's excellent work. Yesterday, we announced that part of a contract worth $7 billion would go to Davie. This summer, we committed $610 million for the construction of three icebreakers. We are continuing to work with Davie. The Department of National Defence has determined that there is no operational need for a second ship. We are continuing to work on shipbuilding in Canada.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Vimy for her hard work on behalf of those Sears workers. It was great. We can all agree here in the House that Canadians benefit when there is growth in the economy. Where we differ here from the Conservative opposition is that we do not believe any growth should take place on the backs of workers. We want workers to get a fair shake in this country, and that is why we announced yesterday the doubling of benefits in the wage earner protection program. That will benefit her Sears workers. I am proud to be part of a government that takes action for Canadian workers.
Madam Speaker, it is hockey season and kids of all ages in DartmouthCole Harbour, in fact across the whole country, are buying new gear and hitting the ice. As a hockey dad, I know very well that parents want to make sure their kids are safe and I know that concussions are of great concern to them.Could the Minister of Science and Sport please tell us what our government is doing to make sports in Canada safer and to perhaps reduce concussions?
Madam Speaker, again, the tactic being employed by the opposition is to drive by with smears and innuendoes. That is the very reason we have the sub judice rule in the House of Commons that members of Parliament should not ask questions and ministers should not answer questions that could somehow impinge upon an outstanding court proceeding. The court will determine what documents are relevant. The court will determine what rules of privilege and confidence apply. The court has the jurisdiction in this matter.
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his work on the INDU committee. I share the hon. member's concern with the privacy of Canadians. Some of the information that Statistics Canada will gather is interesting to that side of the House. For example, in 2017, Statistics Canada reported that Canadians were spending more than 30% of their income on housing. That led us to develop a social housing policy in Canada that would address the issue.It is those kinds of statistics and data that will help Canadians of all stripes.
Madam Speaker, it is critical for Canada's resources to be developed in a sustainable way so that economic growth and environmental protections go hand in hand.Provinces manage their own environmental liabilities. They are responsible for having the tools to mitigate potential risks associated with upstream oil and gas development. Our government works with provinces and territories to support their regulatory regimes and share best practices.In budget 2017, we made a $30 million investment in support of Alberta's efforts to advance the reclamation of orphan wells. While this important task remains with the province, we have been able to show our support.
Madam Speaker, our government takes sport-related concussions very seriously. Far too many youths and athletes experience concussions during sport and recreation activities. That is why we have released the new Canadian guideline on concussion in sport and are working to harmonize an approach on concussion awareness, prevention, detection, management and surveillance. We are pleased that Parliament's health committee has created a subcommittee to study concussions. We look forward to its work and its report.
Madam Speaker, it is important to note that immigration continues to be a tool for Canadians to address labour market shortages. We rely on immigration to make sure we continue to be a leader in the G7 in terms of ensuring that investment follows talent. We have attracted a huge number of skilled labour through the global skills strategy and the changes we have made to the express entry system.The announcements that we made yesterday about our new multi-year plan will ensure that Canada continues to prosper through immigration, a lesson that the party opposite should learn.
Madam Speaker, again, I presume the hon. gentleman's question relates to the issues presently before the courts. There is an outstanding legal proceeding before the courts and between the prosecution and Vice-Admiral Norman. The parties to that proceeding will seek disclosure of documents. That is routine. If any of those relevant documents are in the possession of the government, the government will provide them to the court, but it is up to the court to decide and not the House of Commons. The court will determine how to apply any rules with respect to privilege or confidence.
Madam Speaker, if this was a pilot project, then why did the Privacy Commissioner launch a full investigation?If the Liberals are so proud of this, they certainly should have been announcing this publicly. The Prime Minister once expressed his admiration for basic dictatorship. Is this where he got the idea to start tracking every purchase that we make?
Madam Speaker, here is the deal. We have Canadians who are having their bank accounts snooped through by the government. We are talking about transaction records. We are talking about bill payments. We are talking about bank balances. We are talking about social insurance numbers. Now the parliamentary secretary is saying, Don't worry, Canadians. We're not keeping it. We're sharing it. We're repackaging it. We're giving it away as a gift, so don't worry, Canadians. It's okay that we're collecting your personal data. In what world is that okay?
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for FleetwoodPort Kells for raising this important issue and his advocacy to protect this iconic species.We take our role to protect the southern resident killer whale very seriously, and that is why I was incredibly proud to stand beside the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans this week to announce new measures to protect this species. These measures include an investment of $61.5 million, which includes funding to support marine habitat restoration. Importantly, we will also be strengthening controls on five harmful contaminants that we know have an impact on this species when their food resource is scarce and interfere with their reproduction.We are going to continue to protect nature and wildlife that these species depend upon.
Madam Speaker, Canadians can be proud to be represented by such inspiring, dynamic governors general. They provide a great service to Canada, and that is why they continue to be supported throughout the years after they have left. Clearly, Canadians expect transparency and accountability when public money is spent. We will carefully examine the support arrangements to ensure that best practices are being followed and that Canadians' expectations are being met.
Madam Speaker, we look forward to working with the Government of New Brunswick to protect our environment and grow our economy. New Brunswickers, like all Canadians, know that we need to take action on climate change. That is something my Conservative friends have not yet realized. We will continue to work with the Government of New Brunswick and our Liberal New Brunswick caucus, which we are very proud of, to promote clean growth, to strengthen the middle class and to continue to deliver for all Canadians.
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada as an institution has an exemplary record of gathering the personal information of Canadians. It has been doing it for 100 years, in a safe and secure fashion, and will continue to do so. The reports that Statistics Canada puts out are important to Canadians in all walks of life in terms of how they plan their personal lives. For municipal governments, provincial governments and the federal government to create good policy, and for institutions such as the Bank of Canada, Statistics Canada performs a necessary role. We will continue to defend its ability to do so. It is respecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, another day has gone by with the Liberals refusing to actually listen to Canadians. Putting aside the hundreds of pages of privacy breaches by the government, the state does not have the right to monitor law-abiding citizens going about their daily lives, full stop.Will the Liberals accept that people are rightfully concerned, and end this unprecedented surveillance scheme?
Madam Speaker, it is a bit rich for the other side to try to criticize an institution such as Statistics Canada regarding privacy concerns.It was in fact their government, under Vic Toews, that tried to have everyone tell Vic Toews what they were doing every day. Tell Vic everything.That was the Conservative government trying to do that. In this case, it is not our government; it is not any government gathering information. It is Statistics Canada. It does it reasonably and effectively, protecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, the situation is very clear to millions of Canadians. Statistics Canada has no business poking around in the personal bank accounts of honest Canadians. That is clear. Pilot project or not, that is a fundamental principle that we, the Conservatives, will defend.Yes, Statistics Canada has been gathering information for 100 years, but it has been doing so with Canadians' consent and permission.In this case, Statistics Canada plans to poke around in their bank accounts without their consent. That makes no sense. Why do the Liberals continue to defend the indefensible?
Mr. Speaker, let me correct something the hon. member is saying. The government is not accessing the nominative data of Canadians; Statistics Canada is for all Canadians to be able to use.The personal information gets protected. Once the information is processed by Statistics Canada, it is available for the use of municipal governments, provincial governments, the federal government, small businesses, individual Canadians, the Bank of Canada, other institutions and other individuals who have to make economic decisions in their lives based on the best available information.It is
Madam Speaker, Vancouver Aquarium research just warned that climate change threatens our coast even more than before. Climate plans fall well short of what is needed. Oceans are warming and sea levels are rising much faster than anticipated. Alarm bells are ringing for our coast, but the government just bought a leaky old pipeline. The government just called this an existential crisis. Is the government not embarrassed to still be using Harper's discredited climate change targets?
Madam Speaker and friends, a month from today, the climate negotiations will begin in full at COP24. The agenda will be the IPCC report on 1.5° and a review of every government's actions and whether we are on track. We know that some countries have done a huge amount, but collectively, we are off course. We are headed for the risk of global extinction. This is not a joke. We are running out of time. We have one chance, and one chance only. Can Canada show leadership and go, accepting the target of 45% by 2030, or do we give up on our children?
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I would like to note that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has ruled in instances when the government has very clearly provided information to the media ahead of members of Parliament.I guess my question for the Chair is this. At what point will the Chair consider a member's privilege to be breached when there is a clear instance? There have been many times when the Chair has essentially given the government a slap on the wrist for the same instance. When the Chair says he or she is deeply concerned, but the behaviour keeps repeating itself, one actually wonders if any change will occur or if a precedent has been set by the Chair, now that there have been so many rulings when the Chair has been deeply concerned, that it is okay for the member's privilege to be violated.I am just wondering, for clarification, given the number of times in this particular Parliament that this particular Speaker has said she is concerned about the government's actions in this regard but has not referred it to PROC or perhaps any other study for review, if the Chair has now ruled that this is now an acceptable precedent.That is something for all members in this place to understand. Where does the Chair draw the line? I strongly believe that my privilege was violated, and I strongly believe that the Chair has already said that we should be concerned that the government is doing this. However, at what point is there censure? At what point does the behaviour change? I would argue that this is the role of the Chair. The role of the Chair is to maintain order and to uphold the privilege of members in this place. There seems to be a pattern where the behaviour is occurring but there is no censure. I am wondering now if a precedent has formally been set that it is okay for the government to provide information to the media prior to this House having a chance to review it.
Madam Speaker, we have defended our supply management system against the Americans' aggressive attempts to dismantle it.Market access is similar to the changes the Conservatives negotiated in the TPP. On Monday, the minister announced the creation of working groups comprised of dairy, egg and poultry farmers, and we are committed to fully and fairly supporting them to ensure their success.
Madam Speaker, a report out this week says that over the last 25 years the earth's oceans have retained 60% more heat than scientists had thought. Also this week, a glacier in Antarctica lost a section of ice five times the size of Manhattan, but the Liberals do not seem to get the urgency of climate change. They think following Harper's targets is just fine. Our oceans are warming, our icebergs are melting. We need urgent action now.Why do the Liberals not ditch their grossly inadequate plan and come up with something consistent with the urgency of climate change?
Madam Speaker, I have some big news. Yesterday, the government announced that Davie will not get to build a single ship. Instead, starting in 2021, it is getting just one maintenance contract worth less than 2% of the shipbuilding strategy. Thanks to delays at Irving and Seaspan, the Asterix is the only ship the government has received. Davie, the best shipyard in America, delivered that ship on time and on budget. However, despite the success of the Asterix, the government has been slow to award it the Obelix contract, yet it can offer risk-free guarantees to the wealthy Irving corporation.Could the minister explain why he is so intent on undermining Davie? Why the fixation?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals just keep saying, Nothing to see here. Move along, folks.If there was really nothing to hide, then why did they not just tell Canadians, in the first place, that they were collecting this information? We are talking about things like Canadians' ATM withdrawals, their credit card transactions and their bill payments. The first step to fixing a problem is actually admitting that there is a problem.Will the Liberals stop trying to sweep this under the carpet and admit that trying to steal Canadians' data without their consent is a real problem?
Madam Speaker, revelations of the staggering scale of liabilities in the hundreds of billions for the cleanup of mines and well sites has stunned Canadians. However, for those who have long called for full disclosure of the true cost of reclamation of industrial sites in advance of project approvals, this comes as no surprise. The federal government holds the power to prevent downloading of this massive liability.I call on the government to act now on Alberta's demands, amend the federal bankruptcy and creditor laws and give higher priority to environmental cleanup to end the downloading of liability to Canadians.
Madam Speaker, the Liberal plan does make pollution free for large polluters. They do not pay the tax.However, I go back to the question. The government admits that it will increase taxes on gas per litre by 11¢, but a document released this week says that in 2022, after the election is over, it plans to increase it further. One ministerial briefing note says that it will have to go up six times what the government promises. That is 60¢ a litre. A UN report cited by the government says that it will have to go up 100 times more than the government admits, $10 a litre in new taxes.Will the government confirm whether it will increase the tax further?
Madam Speaker, just to clarify the question I asked, the question was whether the Chair has now set a precedent. Given that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has, in fact, said that there was a clear instance of the government providing information to the media and that she was deeply concerned, but she decided not to provide censure, I am wondering not about future actions but about what precedent has been set.Is it now okay? Is the Chair now saying, given her, once again, looking over the actions of the government, that she has formally set a precedent and that it is okay for the government to give information to the media prior to members in this House being able to review it? That is deeply concerning.
Madam Speaker, this week we learned that the Liberal government would give a carbon tax exemption to New Brunswick's Belledune coal facility. Now, the Liberals have admitted that their carbon tax on large emitters will kill jobs, but the fact is that this carbon tax is already costing jobs in my community.Why does the Liberal government give exemptions to Liberal ridings while punishing hard-working Canadians?
Madam Speaker, climate change is real and those of us in the House who have a platform have a responsibility to do something about it. We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. Part of our plan to protect the environment includes putting a price on pollution that is going to actually see polluters pay more and make middle-class families better off. I am curious when the Conservatives are actually going to come up with their plan. So far as I can see, their only plan to date is to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, all members of the House share the deep angst of the families who have tragically lost children to crime. That is why I asked for a thorough review by the corrections commissioner to ensure that long-standing policy in these matters has been followed, and to reassess the appropriateness of those policies to determine that they are, in fact, the right ones. The report was made available late yesterday. I am reviewing it at the moment. We all want this system to be as good as it can possibly be for the protection of the public.
Madam Speaker, on a point of order. Earlier today in question period, I stood and asked a question on a very important issue about bankruptcy laws.The seniors minister responded to me that I was giving misinformation or false information. I take offence to that. I strongly encourage the minister to retract that statement and apologize for making that statement about my integrity and character.
Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise once again to offer a response on the important issue of climate change.I am aware of the evidence that the hon. member opposite cites and take this problem very seriously. We played an integral role at the Paris conference in achieving an agreement that would meaningfully move the needle in the fight against climate change. In order to implement our plan domestically and reach our targets, we are putting a price on pollution. We are investing in clean energy. We are helping small businesses become more efficient.It is a pleasure to be part of this government that takes this threat seriously. We have to work to grow the economy at the same time.I am pleased to work with the member across the aisle to move the needle forward on both of these initiatives.
Madam Speaker, our benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 veterans or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. They are based on estimates, and they provide us some guarantees. Whether a veteran comes forward this year or the next year or the year after, we will always have the resources available for veterans. When we took office, we immediately increased financial supports by putting more money in veterans' pockets, increasing mental health supports, delivering on the promises we made to veterans and their families.
Madam Speaker, we understand that privacy is important to Canadians. That is why we have taken measures to protect Canadians' privacy in this matter and in a number of different places.Nobody will have access to the personal nominative information that Canadians give to Statistics Canada. Indeed, Statistics Canada cannot even be compelled to give that information to a court of law. It is protected in their hands.Statistics Canada has policies and procedures in place to protect the privacy of Canadians, and we need, all Canadians need
Madam Speaker, the accusations made by the member are completely inaccurate and wrong. There is not a file that is closer to my heart than this one. From the day I was elected, I have been working on this. As the daughter of a proud steelworker and a lifelong Hamiltonian, this file is extremely important. Consultations have and will continue to take place. In our 2018 budget, as well as my mandate letter, I have been tasked with this. I have consulted and I will continue to consult. The member knows this is a decades old problem and it is our government that will solve it. No matter what misinformation he gives, it will not stop me or our government.
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada has been collecting data about Canadians for 100 years in an exemplary manner. Reliable, good quality information is vital to making decisions that actually reflect the needs of Canadians.Unlike the Conservatives, we believe that facts, not ideology, are a very good starting point for public policy. I know that the Conservatives like to make their decisions based on ideology. However, as a government, we like to base our decisions on the facts.
Madam Speaker, that was some mighty fine kowtowing. We already know that governors generals do not really do anything. Why should taxpayers have to pay for this?It is unbelievable that they can claim office expenses for the rest of their lives. It is even more unbelievable that these aristocrats do not even have to disclose where the money is spent.The Prime Minister said that he expected greater transparency.Will he open the books instead of opening his wallet for these freeloading carpetbaggers?
Madam Speaker, we understand absolutely the impact the work disruption is having on employees and their families. That is why our government has been encouraging both sides to reach a fair agreement as soon as possible. Unfortunately, when a strike occurs, the expiry of the collective agreement affects some of the benefits of Canada Post employees, but not all. I will give an example. Prescription drugs will continue for employees. I can assure the House that employees will maintain full access to their EI benefits, which include maternity and parental benefits. Canada Post has put in place a request for a compassionate grounds exception to this. It is taking those requests seriously and addressing them very quickly.
Madam Speaker, our government has been going around the country to talk to Canadians about how much immigration matters to them and their local communities. Canadians have been asking for immigration as an important tool to address labour market shortages, as well as to bring in much-needed skills.After three years in opposition, my hon. colleague has finally discovered the importance of talking to Canadians about immigration. With all the blocking of people she has done on Twitter, I hope this will be the last way she can communicate with Canadians.
Madam Speaker, our government knows the importance of taking action to protect our species and wildlife. That is why this week we are taking unprecedented new measures to further help the recovery of B.C. southern resident killer whales. The new measures include $143 million invested in critical steps to protect this west coast icon. Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment please further explain the steps the government is taking to protect our southern resident killer whales?
Madam Speaker, for the record, I would like my question of privilege to stand for the following reason. As I read into the record when I made the additional information and submission on the question of privilege, the conversation my staff member had with the reporter stated that the information was provided so they could get a story under the wire. What this means, of course, is that I was going to be asked for comment on a 43-page document at the end of a news cycle with no time to be able to respond to it, nor any other members in this place if they wanted to do the same. While the minister can stand and apologize, it is still incumbent upon the Speaker to ensure that this does not happen. As I have stated, there have seen many instances in this Parliament when the government has been repeatedly found to have done the exact same thing. My problem is that it is all well and good for the minister to stand up here because he was caught, but the reality is that I was still in a position where I was being asked for comment by a journalist who had been given information prior to the House being able to consider it. That is wrong. It is not right. Frankly, I do not think the amount of time spent on points of order or whatnot in the House should be given any consideration in terms of the fact that I still did not have the ability to comment on that particular piece of business that was put before the House that day. At some point in time, and with the deepest respect, the office of the Speaker has to rule consistently on the fact that the rights of members need to be put before the rights of any other person in the public in terms of being able to review information or matters before the House. This is in alignment with several of the decisions, previous rulings or comments that have been made by the Speaker in this Parliament and in previous Parliaments. This should not be happening across any flavour of government at any time. The rights of the members here should be sovereign. Madam Speaker, I ask you to consider that particular principle above the minister's contrition today.
I will take that as a no, Madam Speaker, but let me try again.I am not sure if the minister watched that interview, but he really should, because it was really a hot mess. However, this is not about his lack of media training. This is about positive federal-provincial relationships to come up with good public policy solutions.Will the minister humble himself and apologize to one of the strongest women I know, Lisa MacLeod, for his shameful, inappropriate name calling and outburst?
Madam Speaker, I have asked twice now whether the 11¢-a-litre tax the government promised is the final price. Twice the member has refused to answer. That suggests the government has a hidden agenda to increase the tax even more than it already has admitted. This document released this week does not even talk about increased rebates, just increased taxes.Will the parliamentary secretary confirm if the tax will ever go above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Madam Speaker, it is still only 2% of the contract.We learned this week that after governors general have completed their mandates, during which they are grossly overpaid to eat canapés on the taxpayers' dime, their office expenses are paid for life.Adrienne Clarkson alone is still costing us over $100,000 a year, even a decade after her retirement.Will the government give a detailed account of all the expenses reimbursed to all governors general, especially before Michaëlle Jean gets wind of this scheme?
Madam Speaker, as a government, we rely on data. Other Canadians rely on data, the Bank of Canada, small businesses, other levels of Canadian government and municipal governments.For 100 years, Statistics Canada has done that job of collecting the data of Canadians and of making it available for Canadians to use to make better decisions. This is not a surveillance exercise. This is an exercise in providing Canadians with the information they need to run their lives.
Madam Speaker, our government takes the privacy of Canadians very seriously, but I need to correct a few things in the hon. member's discourse.First, this is a pilot project currently in the design stage. No data has been collected to date. It is Statistics Canada that would be gathering the data, not the government. Statistics Canada's job is precisely to provide good data that is reliable and necessary to meet the needs of all Canadians, all Canadian levels of government, including municipal governments, the federal government and provincial governments. It has done this for 100 years.
Madam Speaker, again, we have to take protecting the environment seriously. The only plan we put in place is the one we have been telling Canadians about for a significant period of time now, which is to have the price on pollution that we have laid out in public leading up to 2022.I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate that all the revenues generated from this are going back to the citizens who live in the provinces where it is collected and it is going to put more money into the pockets of middle-class families. One final time, I am pleased to share that I am disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaigning on a promise to take that money from their constituents to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, here are the facts. We invested $173 million to better manage the situation. Over $7 million of that money is in place to ensure that failed asylum claimants leave Canada. We are managing the situation properly. That is what Canadians expect from us, and that is exactly what we are doing.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for SaanichGulf Islands for her work on this file over the past number of decades.This is a threat we need to take extraordinarily seriously. I have read through the IPCC report and know that we need to take action and take action immediately.We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment. That included putting a price on pollution, and a number of other measures. We played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris, and our government is committed to making our targets. If we need to do more after that, I would be pleased to continue to work with the hon. member to protect our environment for our kids and grandkids.
Madam Speaker, I would like to address the question of privilege raised by the hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill on October 31, 2018.This past Wednesday, I tabled the annual report on immigration, 2018. My intention was to table this report during routine proceedings, under the rubric of tabling of documents. However, given events in the House, this was not possible. Following question period that day, there were a number of questions of privilege and points of order on a multitude of issues, which in turn delayed the start of routine proceedings. The video of the House proceedings for that day shows that I rose on a point of order at 3:41 p.m. to table the report. However, I did not get the floor. At 3:59 p.m., I rose again for a second time and was allowed by the Speaker to duly table the report in the House. All this added to the confusion. Unfortunately, an item contained in the said report was provided to a member of the media before the report was officially tabled in the House of Commons.Madam Speaker, I assure you and all hon. colleagues that I take this matter very seriously. There was absolutely no ill will and no intention to attack the dignity of this House. I assume full responsibility for this unfortunate incident, and I can assure the House that I have taken steps to ensure that the appropriate safeguards are in place to prevent such an occurrence in the future. Out of respect for the House, and to each and every member of Parliament who sits in this chamber, I offer my unreserved apology.
Madam Speaker, if they had not created the problem, there would be no need to reinvest the money.The situation is much worse than that. The Liberals boast about reinvesting in borders services, but the union president, Jean-Pierre Fortin, seems very surprised by what the minister is saying because, to date, not a single penny has found its way down to our border officers. The money is there. It is somewhere in the sky, in the department, but it has not made its way down to the ground.Can the Liberals give us an intelligent answer? They need to stop saying that we made cuts and tell us where their money is.
Madam Speaker, the government admits that its new carbon tax will add at least 11¢ a litre to Canadians when they gas up their cars. However, a government analysis, quietly posted online this week, shows that after the next election, the Liberals plan to increase that tax even further. How much? Well, an earlier ministerial briefing note said that it would have to go up six times as high as the government currently admits. One UN report cited today by the government says that it will have to be 100 times higher than the government is currently admitting.Will the government today confirm it will not increase the tax after the election?
Madam Speaker, over the past four days, Canadians have been hearing about a massive Liberal overreach into their personal banking information. For four days, the Liberals have been defending it as though accessing line-by-line, transaction-by-transaction details of my mother and father's bank account without their consent is normal behaviour. If foreign governments tried this, they would be accused of hacking into my mom and dad's account. Why do the Liberals think it is okay to hack into Canadian bank accounts and take personal data without their consent?
Madam Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. The government will not have access to this information. The first thing Statistics Canada does is to scrub all of the personal information from the data so it becomes anonymous. Then it repackages that data for a variety of different Canadians to use in a variety of different ways. It is not a question of surveillance. Statistics Canada has an exemplary reputation in Canada. It is seen as a leader around the world in statistical gathering and statistical methods. It will continue to do this to the highest standard and to the highest standard of privacy.
Madam Speaker, again, we were elected on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. We have been transparent with our plan to put a price on pollution that will increase over time to being $50 a tonne by 2020.Again, I am curious why the Conservatives refuse to put forward a plan. Instead of actually coming forward with productive ideas in the conversation, they seem committed to adopting the approach taken by Doug Ford in Ontario, which is to do absolutely nothing.
Madam Speaker, now the Liberals are hiding behind Statistics Canada when it was their idea to invade Canadian privacy. This is why the personal violation and breach of trust becomes important. If a mom and a dad transfer $15,000 to their son and daughter-in-law to help with the purchase of their first home, should they expect a call from the government asking them why? Will the government call new Canadians after they transfer money back home to their family in the Philippines, asking what that transfer was for? The potential for abuse is real. This personal violation of privacy is wrong on every level. Why can the Liberal government not see that?
Madam Speaker, the Liberal government will be collecting personal financial and banking information without consent from Canadians. That includes seniors, moms and small businesses in my community of Oshawa. This is not automated information. It includes debit and credit transactions, bill payments and mortgage payments. Even trips to Tim Hortons and Oshawa Generals games will be handed over to the leaky Liberal government, line by line, without the knowledge or consent of Canadians.Will the big brother Liberal government do the right thing and respect the privacy of Canadians instead of incorporating them into the plot of 1984?
Madam Speaker, no government and no Canadian will have access to the personal information of Canadians. It will end with Statistics Canada, which will keep it in a secure fashion. What governments do get, what other institutions will get, what other Canadians will get, are Statistics Canada reports, which are relied on by Canadians, by members of Parliament and by other governments across Canada and have been for 100 years.Statistics Canada has worked with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go. It will continue to do so in respect of the privacy of Canadians. Canadians do not need to be worried about their information.
Madam Speaker, benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. We estimate the number of people who will claim benefits to ensure that the resources are there for these veterans, no matter which year they file their claim.
Madam Speaker, my colleague opposite is comparing apples and oranges. Fighting tax evasion, especially abroad, is a priority for our government, as is service to Canadians. The Conservatives are in no position to lecture this side of the House considering the cuts made to the Canada Revenue Agency when they were in power.We are working on it. People will receive the credits and benefits to which they are entitled.
Madam Speaker, veterans have fought hard for this country and deserve nothing but respect from our government. When the Liberal government allocated funds for veterans, we expected these funds to be spent. The government is doing what it said it would never do, authorize funds for veterans and fail to use them. The Liberals are not honouring their promise to respect veterans and to make sure every dime allocated is spent. This is unacceptable.When will the Liberals show veterans the respect they deserve and make sure every dollar allocated by this House is spent?
Madam Speaker, speaking about privacy, we are talking about millions of records that could potentially impact millions of Canadians, and the Privacy Commissioner is concerned.Speaking about the Privacy Commissioner, yesterday he said that privacy is not a right to be traded off in exchange for innovation. He also said that the current law allows the government to seek this information without anyone's consent. The information in Canadians' bank accounts belongs to them, not to the Liberals.Will the government finally listen to Canadians and end this Orwellian program?
Madam Speaker, again, part of our plan to protect the environment, which is essential for those of us in government to take seriously, is to put a price on pollution that is increasing to $50 a tonne by 2022. This is going to have the impact of putting more money into the pockets of middle-class families.I am extraordinarily disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaign in 2019 on a promise to take money from their constituents so they can make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, it is news to us that this is a pilot project. Could the government tell the pilot to land the plane? This situation is ridiculous.What is worse, there could be privacy breaches. We requested information about this. In Canada, during the past 19 months there were more than 1,000 situations where personal information was disclosed.How can we have faith in this so-called pilot project?
Madam Speaker, Canadians are appalled to learn that Statistics Canada plans to access their detailed personal banking information. They were never consulted and did not consent. Like Apple or Facebook, the Liberal government is failing a fundamental principle of consent for privacy. Building a massive database of personal banking information without telling anyone is just wrong. This banking data breach is only the tip of the sphere of the new Liberal census Canada scheme. It is not a pilot project; it is the actual new regime the Liberals put in place.Will the government halt this data collection from running wild until it is investigated, there are consultations and consent is obtained?
I am going to keep on this, Madam Speaker. I think we have them on run here.He refuses to answer the question. He said that by 2022, the Liberals will have a price of $50 a tonne, which is 11¢ a litre for a litre of gas. I have asked, given the evidence, whether they plan to increase it further if they are re-elected. He keeps dodging.Will he end the hidden agenda and confirm, yes or no, whether the tax will rise above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Madam Speaker, Liberals always put criminals ahead of victims and law-abiding Canadians. Tori Stafford's killer was transferred from jail to a healing lodge on their watch. Today, her loved ones are gathering to call for action, demanding that child killers be kept behind bars, not in healing lodges without fences. However, so far the Liberals refuse to act. Canadians are outraged about it. What is taking so long, and when will the Liberals actually do the right thing and put Tori's killer back behind bars where she belongs?
Madam Speaker, I do not know how many times we need to stand in the House to make the government understand that our workers' pensions are vulnerable under bankruptcy laws. Steelworkers are disappointed to see the lack of will from the seniors minister to take action. She has not taken their livelihood or their years of hard work seriously. They deserve better. Now that three years have passed, could she tell us what she is waiting for? When will the minister get to work to change the bankruptcy laws and stand up for workers and retirees? This is the right thing to do.
Madam Speaker, I would say that incompetence is cutting $400 million from border services and thinking it would not affect results.I must inform my hon. colleague that we have invested $173 million to ensure that we have the resources in place to get the job done right. In August and September, the numbers were down compared to last year's figures. We hope the same will happen in October. This clearly shows that our plan is working.
Madam Speaker, it sounds like he has confirmed that the President of the Treasury Board is part of the court action. The President of the Treasury Board claims that he interfered with the Davie ship deal as part of his job to oversee spending. At committee yesterday, he was not able to name one other contract that he thought was part of his job to review, not even the failed Phoenix pay system.Why did he only interfere with the Davie deal, and what is he trying to hide?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals have been defending this for four days. What a backtrack this is. This is a personal violation of every Canadian. Canadians have no faith or trust in the current Liberal government and how it will use that data. Over the past 19 months, there have been hundreds of thousands of examples of privacy breaches by the Liberal government. Canadians are rightly cynical, and they will not stand for this intrusion into their personal lives. Why are the Liberals supporting this gross violation into the privacy of Canadians?
Madam Speaker, the Minister of Border Security is not aware that the number of illegal migrants in Canada is going up, which is odd considering that his officials and policy advisers have the RCMP's figures at their disposal. Even the media has confirmed the facts. For two years now, we have been saying that urgent, responsible action is needed. Either the minister is getting bad advice or he is simply incompetent. Do we need to do the minister's job for him, or is he finally going to take action?
Madam Speaker, these unjustified and illegal tariffs are hurting the American economy, American workers and American consumers of course. The national security excuse is absurd and insulting to Canadians. That is why we have imposed measured tariffs that are perfectly reciprocal. Canada must stand united against these attacks on our workers.
Madam Speaker, the President of the Treasury Board has tried to downplay his ties to Irving, claiming that he was only copied on one letter. According to the lobbyist registry, he has met with Irving 16 times in the past two and a half years.Does the President of the Treasury Board still want to claim that he has had little contact with Irving, or perhaps his meetings with the Irvings were just part of a pilot project?
Madam Speaker, the Minister of National Revenue keeps claiming that service is her priority, yet under her watch, service continues to get even worse, despite the budget increase. She has been picking on single parents, she has not reviewed all of the disability tax credits she took away, she has taken no meaningful action on offshore tax avoidance and evasion, wait times are getting longer and the call centre is still a disaster.Will the minister stop claiming that service is her priority and start delivering service to Canadians?
Madam Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour announced changes to the Canada Labour Code. We have all heard the stories of Sears workers. In my riding, Vimy, the layoffs also affected our community. Middle-class workers in Vimy felt they were not well served by Conservative policies, which only benefited the wealthy.Could the parliamentary secretary tell the House what these announcements mean for middle-class Canadians in my riding?
Madam Speaker, Canada Post's targeting of vulnerable postal workers is shameful. First it cut off short-term disability payments, then long-term disability payments. Then it went after people's maternity leave benefits. This is a morally bankrupt tactic by Canada Post and so far the government has chosen to be complicit. Cutting benefits is not good faith collective bargaining. What is the government doing to stop this brutal assault on workers' rights and encourage Canada Post to bargain in good faith?
Madam Speaker, our government takes Canadians' privacy very seriously. Let us be clear. This is a pilot project that is still in the design stages. No data have been collected to date.Statistics Canada's job is to provide the reliable data needed to meet the needs of Canadians, businesses and communities. Statistics Canada has worked and collaborated with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go, and it will continue to do so.
Madam Speaker, let me once again correct the narrative.This was a pilot project that is still in the process of being designed. From the beginning, Statistics Canada has been open to working with the Privacy Commissioner and has in fact had privacy concerns protected from the get-go. It invited the Privacy Commissioner to take a look at what it was doing. Statistics Canada is going to move ahead with the Privacy Commissioner in order to ensure that the privacy of Canadians is protected. Those are the facts. We take the privacy of Canadians seriously.
Madam Speaker, for the workers currently on the floor of steel mills in Hamilton or at SMEs in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean, the negotiations between the United States, Mexico, and Canada are not just some game to be won.The unfair U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum are a serious threat to jobs and my region. Workers always need to come first in trade negotiations.Will the government promise to refuse to sign the agreement as long as the tariffs have not been lifted?
Madam Speaker, now that the Liberals have their new agreement, millions of tonnes of American chicken, eggs and turkey are about to flood the Canadian market.Pierre-Luc Leblanc, president of Éleveurs de volailles du Québec, the provincial poultry farmers' association, says it may seem like no big deal now, but over the next five to 10 years, it will put poultry producers in a precarious position. This agreement came as a surprise and a disappointment to poultry farmers, and they are asking the government for compensation.Here is my question on their behalf for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the Prime Minister: When they will listen to farmers?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals are making promises to our veterans that they cannot even keep. They authorize spending but keep the money.They left $80.9 million unspent in 2016, $183 million in 2017, and $148.6 million in 2018. Without this money, veterans cannot access the services they are entitled to. Will the Liberals keep their promise or will they fail our veterans?
Madam Speaker, in possibly one of the worst interviews ever given, yesterday the Minister of Immigration once again angrily called his Ontario provincial counterpart several inappropriate names after she requested federal support to pay for the social welfare costs of the Prime Minister's #WelcometoCanada illegal border crossers. When pressed on what evidence he had to support the name he called her, he got even angrier and doubled-down.Will the minister apologize for his name calling and shameful disregard for all Ontario taxpayers?
Madam Speaker, as I just said, we are very proud of our Governor General, who represents our country. We are reviewing the spending policy to ensure that it meets the degree of transparency that Canadians expect.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his concern for a great challenge of our time, and that is the challenge we face in respect of climate change.The results of the recent IPCC report are not lost on me nor on our government. I was very proud when our government and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris that led us to set forth a plan that is going to allow us to make a meaningful difference to reduce our emissions.We know that after this plan is implemented, we may have to do more after that. I look forward to working with members from all parties to continue to fight this existential challenge.
Madam Speaker, of course we recognize Davie's excellent work. Yesterday, we announced that part of a contract worth $7 billion would go to Davie. This summer, we committed $610 million for the construction of three icebreakers. We are continuing to work with Davie. The Department of National Defence has determined that there is no operational need for a second ship. We are continuing to work on shipbuilding in Canada.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Vimy for her hard work on behalf of those Sears workers. It was great. We can all agree here in the House that Canadians benefit when there is growth in the economy. Where we differ here from the Conservative opposition is that we do not believe any growth should take place on the backs of workers. We want workers to get a fair shake in this country, and that is why we announced yesterday the doubling of benefits in the wage earner protection program. That will benefit her Sears workers. I am proud to be part of a government that takes action for Canadian workers.
Madam Speaker, it is hockey season and kids of all ages in DartmouthCole Harbour, in fact across the whole country, are buying new gear and hitting the ice. As a hockey dad, I know very well that parents want to make sure their kids are safe and I know that concussions are of great concern to them.Could the Minister of Science and Sport please tell us what our government is doing to make sports in Canada safer and to perhaps reduce concussions?
Madam Speaker, again, the tactic being employed by the opposition is to drive by with smears and innuendoes. That is the very reason we have the sub judice rule in the House of Commons that members of Parliament should not ask questions and ministers should not answer questions that could somehow impinge upon an outstanding court proceeding. The court will determine what documents are relevant. The court will determine what rules of privilege and confidence apply. The court has the jurisdiction in this matter.
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his work on the INDU committee. I share the hon. member's concern with the privacy of Canadians. Some of the information that Statistics Canada will gather is interesting to that side of the House. For example, in 2017, Statistics Canada reported that Canadians were spending more than 30% of their income on housing. That led us to develop a social housing policy in Canada that would address the issue.It is those kinds of statistics and data that will help Canadians of all stripes.
Madam Speaker, it is critical for Canada's resources to be developed in a sustainable way so that economic growth and environmental protections go hand in hand.Provinces manage their own environmental liabilities. They are responsible for having the tools to mitigate potential risks associated with upstream oil and gas development. Our government works with provinces and territories to support their regulatory regimes and share best practices.In budget 2017, we made a $30 million investment in support of Alberta's efforts to advance the reclamation of orphan wells. While this important task remains with the province, we have been able to show our support.
Madam Speaker, our government takes sport-related concussions very seriously. Far too many youths and athletes experience concussions during sport and recreation activities. That is why we have released the new Canadian guideline on concussion in sport and are working to harmonize an approach on concussion awareness, prevention, detection, management and surveillance. We are pleased that Parliament's health committee has created a subcommittee to study concussions. We look forward to its work and its report.
Madam Speaker, it is important to note that immigration continues to be a tool for Canadians to address labour market shortages. We rely on immigration to make sure we continue to be a leader in the G7 in terms of ensuring that investment follows talent. We have attracted a huge number of skilled labour through the global skills strategy and the changes we have made to the express entry system.The announcements that we made yesterday about our new multi-year plan will ensure that Canada continues to prosper through immigration, a lesson that the party opposite should learn.
Madam Speaker, again, I presume the hon. gentleman's question relates to the issues presently before the courts. There is an outstanding legal proceeding before the courts and between the prosecution and Vice-Admiral Norman. The parties to that proceeding will seek disclosure of documents. That is routine. If any of those relevant documents are in the possession of the government, the government will provide them to the court, but it is up to the court to decide and not the House of Commons. The court will determine how to apply any rules with respect to privilege or confidence.
Madam Speaker, if this was a pilot project, then why did the Privacy Commissioner launch a full investigation?If the Liberals are so proud of this, they certainly should have been announcing this publicly. The Prime Minister once expressed his admiration for basic dictatorship. Is this where he got the idea to start tracking every purchase that we make?
Madam Speaker, here is the deal. We have Canadians who are having their bank accounts snooped through by the government. We are talking about transaction records. We are talking about bill payments. We are talking about bank balances. We are talking about social insurance numbers. Now the parliamentary secretary is saying, Don't worry, Canadians. We're not keeping it. We're sharing it. We're repackaging it. We're giving it away as a gift, so don't worry, Canadians. It's okay that we're collecting your personal data. In what world is that okay?
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for FleetwoodPort Kells for raising this important issue and his advocacy to protect this iconic species.We take our role to protect the southern resident killer whale very seriously, and that is why I was incredibly proud to stand beside the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans this week to announce new measures to protect this species. These measures include an investment of $61.5 million, which includes funding to support marine habitat restoration. Importantly, we will also be strengthening controls on five harmful contaminants that we know have an impact on this species when their food resource is scarce and interfere with their reproduction.We are going to continue to protect nature and wildlife that these species depend upon.
Madam Speaker, Canadians can be proud to be represented by such inspiring, dynamic governors general. They provide a great service to Canada, and that is why they continue to be supported throughout the years after they have left. Clearly, Canadians expect transparency and accountability when public money is spent. We will carefully examine the support arrangements to ensure that best practices are being followed and that Canadians' expectations are being met.
Madam Speaker, we look forward to working with the Government of New Brunswick to protect our environment and grow our economy. New Brunswickers, like all Canadians, know that we need to take action on climate change. That is something my Conservative friends have not yet realized. We will continue to work with the Government of New Brunswick and our Liberal New Brunswick caucus, which we are very proud of, to promote clean growth, to strengthen the middle class and to continue to deliver for all Canadians.
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada as an institution has an exemplary record of gathering the personal information of Canadians. It has been doing it for 100 years, in a safe and secure fashion, and will continue to do so. The reports that Statistics Canada puts out are important to Canadians in all walks of life in terms of how they plan their personal lives. For municipal governments, provincial governments and the federal government to create good policy, and for institutions such as the Bank of Canada, Statistics Canada performs a necessary role. We will continue to defend its ability to do so. It is respecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, another day has gone by with the Liberals refusing to actually listen to Canadians. Putting aside the hundreds of pages of privacy breaches by the government, the state does not have the right to monitor law-abiding citizens going about their daily lives, full stop.Will the Liberals accept that people are rightfully concerned, and end this unprecedented surveillance scheme?
Madam Speaker, it is a bit rich for the other side to try to criticize an institution such as Statistics Canada regarding privacy concerns.It was in fact their government, under Vic Toews, that tried to have everyone tell Vic Toews what they were doing every day. Tell Vic everything.That was the Conservative government trying to do that. In this case, it is not our government; it is not any government gathering information. It is Statistics Canada. It does it reasonably and effectively, protecting the privacy of Canadians.
Madam Speaker, the situation is very clear to millions of Canadians. Statistics Canada has no business poking around in the personal bank accounts of honest Canadians. That is clear. Pilot project or not, that is a fundamental principle that we, the Conservatives, will defend.Yes, Statistics Canada has been gathering information for 100 years, but it has been doing so with Canadians' consent and permission.In this case, Statistics Canada plans to poke around in their bank accounts without their consent. That makes no sense. Why do the Liberals continue to defend the indefensible?
Mr. Speaker, let me correct something the hon. member is saying. The government is not accessing the nominative data of Canadians; Statistics Canada is for all Canadians to be able to use.The personal information gets protected. Once the information is processed by Statistics Canada, it is available for the use of municipal governments, provincial governments, the federal government, small businesses, individual Canadians, the Bank of Canada, other institutions and other individuals who have to make economic decisions in their lives based on the best available information.It is
Madam Speaker, Vancouver Aquarium research just warned that climate change threatens our coast even more than before. Climate plans fall well short of what is needed. Oceans are warming and sea levels are rising much faster than anticipated. Alarm bells are ringing for our coast, but the government just bought a leaky old pipeline. The government just called this an existential crisis. Is the government not embarrassed to still be using Harper's discredited climate change targets?
Madam Speaker and friends, a month from today, the climate negotiations will begin in full at COP24. The agenda will be the IPCC report on 1.5° and a review of every government's actions and whether we are on track. We know that some countries have done a huge amount, but collectively, we are off course. We are headed for the risk of global extinction. This is not a joke. We are running out of time. We have one chance, and one chance only. Can Canada show leadership and go, accepting the target of 45% by 2030, or do we give up on our children?
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I would like to note that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has ruled in instances when the government has very clearly provided information to the media ahead of members of Parliament.I guess my question for the Chair is this. At what point will the Chair consider a member's privilege to be breached when there is a clear instance? There have been many times when the Chair has essentially given the government a slap on the wrist for the same instance. When the Chair says he or she is deeply concerned, but the behaviour keeps repeating itself, one actually wonders if any change will occur or if a precedent has been set by the Chair, now that there have been so many rulings when the Chair has been deeply concerned, that it is okay for the member's privilege to be violated.I am just wondering, for clarification, given the number of times in this particular Parliament that this particular Speaker has said she is concerned about the government's actions in this regard but has not referred it to PROC or perhaps any other study for review, if the Chair has now ruled that this is now an acceptable precedent.That is something for all members in this place to understand. Where does the Chair draw the line? I strongly believe that my privilege was violated, and I strongly believe that the Chair has already said that we should be concerned that the government is doing this. However, at what point is there censure? At what point does the behaviour change? I would argue that this is the role of the Chair. The role of the Chair is to maintain order and to uphold the privilege of members in this place. There seems to be a pattern where the behaviour is occurring but there is no censure. I am wondering now if a precedent has formally been set that it is okay for the government to provide information to the media prior to this House having a chance to review it.
Madam Speaker, we have defended our supply management system against the Americans' aggressive attempts to dismantle it.Market access is similar to the changes the Conservatives negotiated in the TPP. On Monday, the minister announced the creation of working groups comprised of dairy, egg and poultry farmers, and we are committed to fully and fairly supporting them to ensure their success.
Madam Speaker, a report out this week says that over the last 25 years the earth's oceans have retained 60% more heat than scientists had thought. Also this week, a glacier in Antarctica lost a section of ice five times the size of Manhattan, but the Liberals do not seem to get the urgency of climate change. They think following Harper's targets is just fine. Our oceans are warming, our icebergs are melting. We need urgent action now.Why do the Liberals not ditch their grossly inadequate plan and come up with something consistent with the urgency of climate change?
Madam Speaker, I have some big news. Yesterday, the government announced that Davie will not get to build a single ship. Instead, starting in 2021, it is getting just one maintenance contract worth less than 2% of the shipbuilding strategy. Thanks to delays at Irving and Seaspan, the Asterix is the only ship the government has received. Davie, the best shipyard in America, delivered that ship on time and on budget. However, despite the success of the Asterix, the government has been slow to award it the Obelix contract, yet it can offer risk-free guarantees to the wealthy Irving corporation.Could the minister explain why he is so intent on undermining Davie? Why the fixation?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals just keep saying, Nothing to see here. Move along, folks.If there was really nothing to hide, then why did they not just tell Canadians, in the first place, that they were collecting this information? We are talking about things like Canadians' ATM withdrawals, their credit card transactions and their bill payments. The first step to fixing a problem is actually admitting that there is a problem.Will the Liberals stop trying to sweep this under the carpet and admit that trying to steal Canadians' data without their consent is a real problem?
Madam Speaker, revelations of the staggering scale of liabilities in the hundreds of billions for the cleanup of mines and well sites has stunned Canadians. However, for those who have long called for full disclosure of the true cost of reclamation of industrial sites in advance of project approvals, this comes as no surprise. The federal government holds the power to prevent downloading of this massive liability.I call on the government to act now on Alberta's demands, amend the federal bankruptcy and creditor laws and give higher priority to environmental cleanup to end the downloading of liability to Canadians.
Madam Speaker, the Liberal plan does make pollution free for large polluters. They do not pay the tax.However, I go back to the question. The government admits that it will increase taxes on gas per litre by 11¢, but a document released this week says that in 2022, after the election is over, it plans to increase it further. One ministerial briefing note says that it will have to go up six times what the government promises. That is 60¢ a litre. A UN report cited by the government says that it will have to go up 100 times more than the government admits, $10 a litre in new taxes.Will the government confirm whether it will increase the tax further?
Madam Speaker, just to clarify the question I asked, the question was whether the Chair has now set a precedent. Given that there have been several instances in this Parliament when the Chair has, in fact, said that there was a clear instance of the government providing information to the media and that she was deeply concerned, but she decided not to provide censure, I am wondering not about future actions but about what precedent has been set.Is it now okay? Is the Chair now saying, given her, once again, looking over the actions of the government, that she has formally set a precedent and that it is okay for the government to give information to the media prior to members in this House being able to review it? That is deeply concerning.
Madam Speaker, this week we learned that the Liberal government would give a carbon tax exemption to New Brunswick's Belledune coal facility. Now, the Liberals have admitted that their carbon tax on large emitters will kill jobs, but the fact is that this carbon tax is already costing jobs in my community.Why does the Liberal government give exemptions to Liberal ridings while punishing hard-working Canadians?
Madam Speaker, climate change is real and those of us in the House who have a platform have a responsibility to do something about it. We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. Part of our plan to protect the environment includes putting a price on pollution that is going to actually see polluters pay more and make middle-class families better off. I am curious when the Conservatives are actually going to come up with their plan. So far as I can see, their only plan to date is to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, all members of the House share the deep angst of the families who have tragically lost children to crime. That is why I asked for a thorough review by the corrections commissioner to ensure that long-standing policy in these matters has been followed, and to reassess the appropriateness of those policies to determine that they are, in fact, the right ones. The report was made available late yesterday. I am reviewing it at the moment. We all want this system to be as good as it can possibly be for the protection of the public.
Madam Speaker, on a point of order. Earlier today in question period, I stood and asked a question on a very important issue about bankruptcy laws.The seniors minister responded to me that I was giving misinformation or false information. I take offence to that. I strongly encourage the minister to retract that statement and apologize for making that statement about my integrity and character.
Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise once again to offer a response on the important issue of climate change.I am aware of the evidence that the hon. member opposite cites and take this problem very seriously. We played an integral role at the Paris conference in achieving an agreement that would meaningfully move the needle in the fight against climate change. In order to implement our plan domestically and reach our targets, we are putting a price on pollution. We are investing in clean energy. We are helping small businesses become more efficient.It is a pleasure to be part of this government that takes this threat seriously. We have to work to grow the economy at the same time.I am pleased to work with the member across the aisle to move the needle forward on both of these initiatives.
Madam Speaker, our benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 veterans or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. They are based on estimates, and they provide us some guarantees. Whether a veteran comes forward this year or the next year or the year after, we will always have the resources available for veterans. When we took office, we immediately increased financial supports by putting more money in veterans' pockets, increasing mental health supports, delivering on the promises we made to veterans and their families.
Madam Speaker, we understand that privacy is important to Canadians. That is why we have taken measures to protect Canadians' privacy in this matter and in a number of different places.Nobody will have access to the personal nominative information that Canadians give to Statistics Canada. Indeed, Statistics Canada cannot even be compelled to give that information to a court of law. It is protected in their hands.Statistics Canada has policies and procedures in place to protect the privacy of Canadians, and we need, all Canadians need
Madam Speaker, the accusations made by the member are completely inaccurate and wrong. There is not a file that is closer to my heart than this one. From the day I was elected, I have been working on this. As the daughter of a proud steelworker and a lifelong Hamiltonian, this file is extremely important. Consultations have and will continue to take place. In our 2018 budget, as well as my mandate letter, I have been tasked with this. I have consulted and I will continue to consult. The member knows this is a decades old problem and it is our government that will solve it. No matter what misinformation he gives, it will not stop me or our government.
Madam Speaker, Statistics Canada has been collecting data about Canadians for 100 years in an exemplary manner. Reliable, good quality information is vital to making decisions that actually reflect the needs of Canadians.Unlike the Conservatives, we believe that facts, not ideology, are a very good starting point for public policy. I know that the Conservatives like to make their decisions based on ideology. However, as a government, we like to base our decisions on the facts.
Madam Speaker, that was some mighty fine kowtowing. We already know that governors generals do not really do anything. Why should taxpayers have to pay for this?It is unbelievable that they can claim office expenses for the rest of their lives. It is even more unbelievable that these aristocrats do not even have to disclose where the money is spent.The Prime Minister said that he expected greater transparency.Will he open the books instead of opening his wallet for these freeloading carpetbaggers?
Madam Speaker, we understand absolutely the impact the work disruption is having on employees and their families. That is why our government has been encouraging both sides to reach a fair agreement as soon as possible. Unfortunately, when a strike occurs, the expiry of the collective agreement affects some of the benefits of Canada Post employees, but not all. I will give an example. Prescription drugs will continue for employees. I can assure the House that employees will maintain full access to their EI benefits, which include maternity and parental benefits. Canada Post has put in place a request for a compassionate grounds exception to this. It is taking those requests seriously and addressing them very quickly.
Madam Speaker, our government has been going around the country to talk to Canadians about how much immigration matters to them and their local communities. Canadians have been asking for immigration as an important tool to address labour market shortages, as well as to bring in much-needed skills.After three years in opposition, my hon. colleague has finally discovered the importance of talking to Canadians about immigration. With all the blocking of people she has done on Twitter, I hope this will be the last way she can communicate with Canadians.
Madam Speaker, our government knows the importance of taking action to protect our species and wildlife. That is why this week we are taking unprecedented new measures to further help the recovery of B.C. southern resident killer whales. The new measures include $143 million invested in critical steps to protect this west coast icon. Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment please further explain the steps the government is taking to protect our southern resident killer whales?
Madam Speaker, for the record, I would like my question of privilege to stand for the following reason. As I read into the record when I made the additional information and submission on the question of privilege, the conversation my staff member had with the reporter stated that the information was provided so they could get a story under the wire. What this means, of course, is that I was going to be asked for comment on a 43-page document at the end of a news cycle with no time to be able to respond to it, nor any other members in this place if they wanted to do the same. While the minister can stand and apologize, it is still incumbent upon the Speaker to ensure that this does not happen. As I have stated, there have seen many instances in this Parliament when the government has been repeatedly found to have done the exact same thing. My problem is that it is all well and good for the minister to stand up here because he was caught, but the reality is that I was still in a position where I was being asked for comment by a journalist who had been given information prior to the House being able to consider it. That is wrong. It is not right. Frankly, I do not think the amount of time spent on points of order or whatnot in the House should be given any consideration in terms of the fact that I still did not have the ability to comment on that particular piece of business that was put before the House that day. At some point in time, and with the deepest respect, the office of the Speaker has to rule consistently on the fact that the rights of members need to be put before the rights of any other person in the public in terms of being able to review information or matters before the House. This is in alignment with several of the decisions, previous rulings or comments that have been made by the Speaker in this Parliament and in previous Parliaments. This should not be happening across any flavour of government at any time. The rights of the members here should be sovereign. Madam Speaker, I ask you to consider that particular principle above the minister's contrition today.
I will take that as a no, Madam Speaker, but let me try again.I am not sure if the minister watched that interview, but he really should, because it was really a hot mess. However, this is not about his lack of media training. This is about positive federal-provincial relationships to come up with good public policy solutions.Will the minister humble himself and apologize to one of the strongest women I know, Lisa MacLeod, for his shameful, inappropriate name calling and outburst?
Madam Speaker, I have asked twice now whether the 11¢-a-litre tax the government promised is the final price. Twice the member has refused to answer. That suggests the government has a hidden agenda to increase the tax even more than it already has admitted. This document released this week does not even talk about increased rebates, just increased taxes.Will the parliamentary secretary confirm if the tax will ever go above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Madam Speaker, it is still only 2% of the contract.We learned this week that after governors general have completed their mandates, during which they are grossly overpaid to eat canapés on the taxpayers' dime, their office expenses are paid for life.Adrienne Clarkson alone is still costing us over $100,000 a year, even a decade after her retirement.Will the government give a detailed account of all the expenses reimbursed to all governors general, especially before Michaëlle Jean gets wind of this scheme?
Madam Speaker, as a government, we rely on data. Other Canadians rely on data, the Bank of Canada, small businesses, other levels of Canadian government and municipal governments.For 100 years, Statistics Canada has done that job of collecting the data of Canadians and of making it available for Canadians to use to make better decisions. This is not a surveillance exercise. This is an exercise in providing Canadians with the information they need to run their lives.
Madam Speaker, our government takes the privacy of Canadians very seriously, but I need to correct a few things in the hon. member's discourse.First, this is a pilot project currently in the design stage. No data has been collected to date. It is Statistics Canada that would be gathering the data, not the government. Statistics Canada's job is precisely to provide good data that is reliable and necessary to meet the needs of all Canadians, all Canadian levels of government, including municipal governments, the federal government and provincial governments. It has done this for 100 years.
Madam Speaker, again, we have to take protecting the environment seriously. The only plan we put in place is the one we have been telling Canadians about for a significant period of time now, which is to have the price on pollution that we have laid out in public leading up to 2022.I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate that all the revenues generated from this are going back to the citizens who live in the provinces where it is collected and it is going to put more money into the pockets of middle-class families. One final time, I am pleased to share that I am disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaigning on a promise to take that money from their constituents to make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, here are the facts. We invested $173 million to better manage the situation. Over $7 million of that money is in place to ensure that failed asylum claimants leave Canada. We are managing the situation properly. That is what Canadians expect from us, and that is exactly what we are doing.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for SaanichGulf Islands for her work on this file over the past number of decades.This is a threat we need to take extraordinarily seriously. I have read through the IPCC report and know that we need to take action and take action immediately.We campaigned on a commitment to protect the environment. That included putting a price on pollution, and a number of other measures. We played a key role in facilitating the agreement in Paris, and our government is committed to making our targets. If we need to do more after that, I would be pleased to continue to work with the hon. member to protect our environment for our kids and grandkids.
Madam Speaker, I would like to address the question of privilege raised by the hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill on October 31, 2018.This past Wednesday, I tabled the annual report on immigration, 2018. My intention was to table this report during routine proceedings, under the rubric of tabling of documents. However, given events in the House, this was not possible. Following question period that day, there were a number of questions of privilege and points of order on a multitude of issues, which in turn delayed the start of routine proceedings. The video of the House proceedings for that day shows that I rose on a point of order at 3:41 p.m. to table the report. However, I did not get the floor. At 3:59 p.m., I rose again for a second time and was allowed by the Speaker to duly table the report in the House. All this added to the confusion. Unfortunately, an item contained in the said report was provided to a member of the media before the report was officially tabled in the House of Commons.Madam Speaker, I assure you and all hon. colleagues that I take this matter very seriously. There was absolutely no ill will and no intention to attack the dignity of this House. I assume full responsibility for this unfortunate incident, and I can assure the House that I have taken steps to ensure that the appropriate safeguards are in place to prevent such an occurrence in the future. Out of respect for the House, and to each and every member of Parliament who sits in this chamber, I offer my unreserved apology.
Madam Speaker, if they had not created the problem, there would be no need to reinvest the money.The situation is much worse than that. The Liberals boast about reinvesting in borders services, but the union president, Jean-Pierre Fortin, seems very surprised by what the minister is saying because, to date, not a single penny has found its way down to our border officers. The money is there. It is somewhere in the sky, in the department, but it has not made its way down to the ground.Can the Liberals give us an intelligent answer? They need to stop saying that we made cuts and tell us where their money is.
Madam Speaker, the government admits that its new carbon tax will add at least 11¢ a litre to Canadians when they gas up their cars. However, a government analysis, quietly posted online this week, shows that after the next election, the Liberals plan to increase that tax even further. How much? Well, an earlier ministerial briefing note said that it would have to go up six times as high as the government currently admits. One UN report cited today by the government says that it will have to be 100 times higher than the government is currently admitting.Will the government today confirm it will not increase the tax after the election?
Madam Speaker, over the past four days, Canadians have been hearing about a massive Liberal overreach into their personal banking information. For four days, the Liberals have been defending it as though accessing line-by-line, transaction-by-transaction details of my mother and father's bank account without their consent is normal behaviour. If foreign governments tried this, they would be accused of hacking into my mom and dad's account. Why do the Liberals think it is okay to hack into Canadian bank accounts and take personal data without their consent?
Madam Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. The government will not have access to this information. The first thing Statistics Canada does is to scrub all of the personal information from the data so it becomes anonymous. Then it repackages that data for a variety of different Canadians to use in a variety of different ways. It is not a question of surveillance. Statistics Canada has an exemplary reputation in Canada. It is seen as a leader around the world in statistical gathering and statistical methods. It will continue to do this to the highest standard and to the highest standard of privacy.
Madam Speaker, again, we were elected on a commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. We have been transparent with our plan to put a price on pollution that will increase over time to being $50 a tonne by 2020.Again, I am curious why the Conservatives refuse to put forward a plan. Instead of actually coming forward with productive ideas in the conversation, they seem committed to adopting the approach taken by Doug Ford in Ontario, which is to do absolutely nothing.
Madam Speaker, now the Liberals are hiding behind Statistics Canada when it was their idea to invade Canadian privacy. This is why the personal violation and breach of trust becomes important. If a mom and a dad transfer $15,000 to their son and daughter-in-law to help with the purchase of their first home, should they expect a call from the government asking them why? Will the government call new Canadians after they transfer money back home to their family in the Philippines, asking what that transfer was for? The potential for abuse is real. This personal violation of privacy is wrong on every level. Why can the Liberal government not see that?
Madam Speaker, the Liberal government will be collecting personal financial and banking information without consent from Canadians. That includes seniors, moms and small businesses in my community of Oshawa. This is not automated information. It includes debit and credit transactions, bill payments and mortgage payments. Even trips to Tim Hortons and Oshawa Generals games will be handed over to the leaky Liberal government, line by line, without the knowledge or consent of Canadians.Will the big brother Liberal government do the right thing and respect the privacy of Canadians instead of incorporating them into the plot of 1984?
Madam Speaker, no government and no Canadian will have access to the personal information of Canadians. It will end with Statistics Canada, which will keep it in a secure fashion. What governments do get, what other institutions will get, what other Canadians will get, are Statistics Canada reports, which are relied on by Canadians, by members of Parliament and by other governments across Canada and have been for 100 years.Statistics Canada has worked with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go. It will continue to do so in respect of the privacy of Canadians. Canadians do not need to be worried about their information.
Madam Speaker, benefits are demand-driven, so whether there are 10 or 10,000 eligible veterans who come forward, they receive benefits. We estimate the number of people who will claim benefits to ensure that the resources are there for these veterans, no matter which year they file their claim.
Madam Speaker, my colleague opposite is comparing apples and oranges. Fighting tax evasion, especially abroad, is a priority for our government, as is service to Canadians. The Conservatives are in no position to lecture this side of the House considering the cuts made to the Canada Revenue Agency when they were in power.We are working on it. People will receive the credits and benefits to which they are entitled.
Madam Speaker, veterans have fought hard for this country and deserve nothing but respect from our government. When the Liberal government allocated funds for veterans, we expected these funds to be spent. The government is doing what it said it would never do, authorize funds for veterans and fail to use them. The Liberals are not honouring their promise to respect veterans and to make sure every dime allocated is spent. This is unacceptable.When will the Liberals show veterans the respect they deserve and make sure every dollar allocated by this House is spent?
Madam Speaker, speaking about privacy, we are talking about millions of records that could potentially impact millions of Canadians, and the Privacy Commissioner is concerned.Speaking about the Privacy Commissioner, yesterday he said that privacy is not a right to be traded off in exchange for innovation. He also said that the current law allows the government to seek this information without anyone's consent. The information in Canadians' bank accounts belongs to them, not to the Liberals.Will the government finally listen to Canadians and end this Orwellian program?
Madam Speaker, again, part of our plan to protect the environment, which is essential for those of us in government to take seriously, is to put a price on pollution that is increasing to $50 a tonne by 2022. This is going to have the impact of putting more money into the pockets of middle-class families.I am extraordinarily disappointed that the Conservatives seem committed to campaign in 2019 on a promise to take money from their constituents so they can make pollution free again.
Madam Speaker, it is news to us that this is a pilot project. Could the government tell the pilot to land the plane? This situation is ridiculous.What is worse, there could be privacy breaches. We requested information about this. In Canada, during the past 19 months there were more than 1,000 situations where personal information was disclosed.How can we have faith in this so-called pilot project?
Madam Speaker, Canadians are appalled to learn that Statistics Canada plans to access their detailed personal banking information. They were never consulted and did not consent. Like Apple or Facebook, the Liberal government is failing a fundamental principle of consent for privacy. Building a massive database of personal banking information without telling anyone is just wrong. This banking data breach is only the tip of the sphere of the new Liberal census Canada scheme. It is not a pilot project; it is the actual new regime the Liberals put in place.Will the government halt this data collection from running wild until it is investigated, there are consultations and consent is obtained?
I am going to keep on this, Madam Speaker. I think we have them on run here.He refuses to answer the question. He said that by 2022, the Liberals will have a price of $50 a tonne, which is 11¢ a litre for a litre of gas. I have asked, given the evidence, whether they plan to increase it further if they are re-elected. He keeps dodging.Will he end the hidden agenda and confirm, yes or no, whether the tax will rise above 11¢ a litre for gas?
Madam Speaker, Liberals always put criminals ahead of victims and law-abiding Canadians. Tori Stafford's killer was transferred from jail to a healing lodge on their watch. Today, her loved ones are gathering to call for action, demanding that child killers be kept behind bars, not in healing lodges without fences. However, so far the Liberals refuse to act. Canadians are outraged about it. What is taking so long, and when will the Liberals actually do the right thing and put Tori's killer back behind bars where she belongs?
Madam Speaker, I do not know how many times we need to stand in the House to make the government understand that our workers' pensions are vulnerable under bankruptcy laws. Steelworkers are disappointed to see the lack of will from the seniors minister to take action. She has not taken their livelihood or their years of hard work seriously. They deserve better. Now that three years have passed, could she tell us what she is waiting for? When will the minister get to work to change the bankruptcy laws and stand up for workers and retirees? This is the right thing to do.
Madam Speaker, I would say that incompetence is cutting $400 million from border services and thinking it would not affect results.I must inform my hon. colleague that we have invested $173 million to ensure that we have the resources in place to get the job done right. In August and September, the numbers were down compared to last year's figures. We hope the same will happen in October. This clearly shows that our plan is working.
Madam Speaker, it sounds like he has confirmed that the President of the Treasury Board is part of the court action. The President of the Treasury Board claims that he interfered with the Davie ship deal as part of his job to oversee spending. At committee yesterday, he was not able to name one other contract that he thought was part of his job to review, not even the failed Phoenix pay system.Why did he only interfere with the Davie deal, and what is he trying to hide?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals have been defending this for four days. What a backtrack this is. This is a personal violation of every Canadian. Canadians have no faith or trust in the current Liberal government and how it will use that data. Over the past 19 months, there have been hundreds of thousands of examples of privacy breaches by the Liberal government. Canadians are rightly cynical, and they will not stand for this intrusion into their personal lives. Why are the Liberals supporting this gross violation into the privacy of Canadians?
Madam Speaker, the Minister of Border Security is not aware that the number of illegal migrants in Canada is going up, which is odd considering that his officials and policy advisers have the RCMP's figures at their disposal. Even the media has confirmed the facts. For two years now, we have been saying that urgent, responsible action is needed. Either the minister is getting bad advice or he is simply incompetent. Do we need to do the minister's job for him, or is he finally going to take action?
Madam Speaker, these unjustified and illegal tariffs are hurting the American economy, American workers and American consumers of course. The national security excuse is absurd and insulting to Canadians. That is why we have imposed measured tariffs that are perfectly reciprocal. Canada must stand united against these attacks on our workers.
Madam Speaker, the President of the Treasury Board has tried to downplay his ties to Irving, claiming that he was only copied on one letter. According to the lobbyist registry, he has met with Irving 16 times in the past two and a half years.Does the President of the Treasury Board still want to claim that he has had little contact with Irving, or perhaps his meetings with the Irvings were just part of a pilot project?
Madam Speaker, the Minister of National Revenue keeps claiming that service is her priority, yet under her watch, service continues to get even worse, despite the budget increase. She has been picking on single parents, she has not reviewed all of the disability tax credits she took away, she has taken no meaningful action on offshore tax avoidance and evasion, wait times are getting longer and the call centre is still a disaster.Will the minister stop claiming that service is her priority and start delivering service to Canadians?
Madam Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour announced changes to the Canada Labour Code. We have all heard the stories of Sears workers. In my riding, Vimy, the layoffs also affected our community. Middle-class workers in Vimy felt they were not well served by Conservative policies, which only benefited the wealthy.Could the parliamentary secretary tell the House what these announcements mean for middle-class Canadians in my riding?
Madam Speaker, Canada Post's targeting of vulnerable postal workers is shameful. First it cut off short-term disability payments, then long-term disability payments. Then it went after people's maternity leave benefits. This is a morally bankrupt tactic by Canada Post and so far the government has chosen to be complicit. Cutting benefits is not good faith collective bargaining. What is the government doing to stop this brutal assault on workers' rights and encourage Canada Post to bargain in good faith?
Madam Speaker, our government takes Canadians' privacy very seriously. Let us be clear. This is a pilot project that is still in the design stages. No data have been collected to date.Statistics Canada's job is to provide the reliable data needed to meet the needs of Canadians, businesses and communities. Statistics Canada has worked and collaborated with the Privacy Commissioner on this pilot project from the get-go, and it will continue to do so.
Madam Speaker, let me once again correct the narrative.This was a pilot project that is still in the process of being designed. From the beginning, Statistics Canada has been open to working with the Privacy Commissioner and has in fact had privacy concerns protected from the get-go. It invited the Privacy Commissioner to take a look at what it was doing. Statistics Canada is going to move ahead with the Privacy Commissioner in order to ensure that the privacy of Canadians is protected. Those are the facts. We take the privacy of Canadians seriously.
Madam Speaker, for the workers currently on the floor of steel mills in Hamilton or at SMEs in SaguenayLac-Saint-Jean, the negotiations between the United States, Mexico, and Canada are not just some game to be won.The unfair U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum are a serious threat to jobs and my region. Workers always need to come first in trade negotiations.Will the government promise to refuse to sign the agreement as long as the tariffs have not been lifted?
Madam Speaker, now that the Liberals have their new agreement, millions of tonnes of American chicken, eggs and turkey are about to flood the Canadian market.Pierre-Luc Leblanc, president of Éleveurs de volailles du Québec, the provincial poultry farmers' association, says it may seem like no big deal now, but over the next five to 10 years, it will put poultry producers in a precarious position. This agreement came as a surprise and a disappointment to poultry farmers, and they are asking the government for compensation.Here is my question on their behalf for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the Prime Minister: When they will listen to farmers?
Madam Speaker, the Liberals are making promises to our veterans that they cannot even keep. They authorize spending but keep the money.They left $80.9 million unspent in 2016, $183 million in 2017, and $148.6 million in 2018. Without this money, veterans cannot access the services they are entitled to. Will the Liberals keep their promise or will they fail our veterans?
Madam Speaker, in possibly one of the worst interviews ever given, yesterday the Minister of Immigration once again angrily called his Ontario provincial counterpart several inappropriate names after she requested federal support to pay for the social welfare costs of the Prime Minister's #WelcometoCanada illegal border crossers. When pressed on what evidence he had to support the name he called her, he got even angrier and doubled-down.Will the minister apologize for his name calling and shameful disregard for all Ontario taxpayers?