Debates of Feb. 4th, 2015

Employment

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, as job losses mount in Alberta, the Conservatives are busy making it easier for employers to hire temporary foreign workers.

Today we learned that they secretly made a deal with Alberta to allow employers there to exceed the 30% cap. Just like they have so many times before, the Conservatives made a big splashy announcement about cracking down, and now they are quietly creating loopholes.

When are the Conservatives finally going to get serious about protecting Canadian jobs?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Multiculturalism]

Mr. Speaker, sometimes the NDP's hypocrisy really is breathtaking. This is the party that demanded that we give permanent residency to every single temporary foreign worker in Canada, which would imply, by the way, doubling Canadian immigration levels. Canadians do not support that.

However, there are about 1,000 temporary foreign workers in Alberta with pending permanent residency applications who are about to fall out of status. We are just going to allow them to stay in Canada until a decision is made on their permanent residency applications, which is exactly what the NDP asked us to do.

Why can the socialists never take yes for an answer?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, while we are losing jobs by the thousands, the Conservatives continue to cave in to blackmail from Alberta industries. Last year they made a whole show of saying that they had finally fixed the problems with the temporary foreign worker program. However, we have now learned that they flouted the rules once again, allowing employers in Alberta to exceed and circumvent the cap on the number of foreign workers hired, at the expense of Canadians.

When will the Conservatives get serious about protecting Canadians and creating jobs for Canadians?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Multiculturalism]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP's comments are embarrassing. The NDP is the one that demanded the government allow 100% of temporary foreign workers to remain in Canada permanently. That is not what Canadians or this government want.

One thousand workers in Alberta applied to remain in Canada permanently. There is a good chance that these applications will be approved by the Alberta government. They will be allowed to remain here a few months until their applications are finalized. It is the compassionate thing to do and it is exactly what the NDP originally asked for.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, job growth is at its lowest level in five years. Some 200,000 jobs that were in the economy before the recession are gone and have not come back, and the Conservatives are panicking with no budget and no plan.

Does anyone else notice how desperate the Conservatives have become to talk about anything other than the economy? But it is their mismanagement that has led to 1.3 million Canadians being out of a job. New Democrats will keep putting forward solutions to help Canadians and the manufacturing sector.

However, when will see this Minister of Finance stand up with some of his own solutions, with his own budget perhaps? When will see a plan to get Canadians back to work? Why will he not answer a simple question?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Multiculturalism]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP sees a plan, but voted against every single element of it.

They voted against cutting taxes for small businesses. They voted against cutting income taxes. They voted against cutting the GST. They voted against increased investments in job training. They have voted against every constructive measure: the Canada apprenticeship loan, the Canada job grant, and the incentive grant for new apprentices.

Everything that has helped this country have one of the best job creation records in the developed world has been opposed by the NDP, and their only solution is higher taxes, reckless spending, and more debt. That would lead to more jobs being lost.

Veterans Affairs

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Veterans Ombudsman has said that he is “...disappointed that the update provides no details on how the substantive deficiencies with the New Veterans Charter (NVC) are to be addressed.” He continues that “...we’re not starting from scratch. Much research has been done and many reports have focussed on them.”

Now VAC needs to act. The Royal Canadian Legion has said that the government had plenty of time to make changes, but lacked the willingness to look after our veterans.

The minister thinks veterans can be satisfied with a late Friday night tweet. What happened to his new approach? Is he really any different from the predecessor?

[Erin O'Toole, Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC]

Mr. Speaker, as that member knows, I was in Hamilton on Friday where I spoke directly with Canadian Forces members and veterans on the new veterans charter, while opening an operational stress injury clinic that will serve veterans in Guelph.

In addition to that, the report was filed with the committee, and I will not apologize for engaging and talking with veterans wherever they are, in our legions or online. I am listening and acting, and I hope he would get on board.

Census

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, eliminating the mandatory long form census is perhaps not the worst thing the Conservatives have done—competition for that title is fierce—but it is certainly the stupidest. This move has been widely condemned.

I would like to quote Paul Jacobson, president of the Canadian Association for Business Economics:

...it has become all but impossible to draw intelligent—or even accurate—conclusions about...critical aspects of economic policy.

To clean up the mess it has made of our economy, will the government support the excellent bill introduced by the member for Kingston and the Islands?

[James Moore, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, if my colleague wants to support an excellent bill on this matter, he should support the bill introduced by my colleague from Elgin—Middlesex—London.

With regard to the census, we are confident that in 2016, as was the case in 2011, the government will get plenty of quality information on each region so that it can implement all the requisite systems and programs to meet the needs of Canadians.

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that is simply not true. Everyone in business knows that we live in the age of big data. That is why Canada's leading economists and the CFIB are united in calling for the return of the long form census. As Roger Martin of the University of Toronto said, in direct contradiction of what we just heard, “It is just disinformation to say the current survey works”.

Will the government finally reverse its anti-science, anti-business, and antediluvian policy and return the long form census as my colleague's bill calls for?

[James Moore, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

It is quite ridiculous, of course, Mr. Speaker, as Wayne Smith, the CEO of Stats Canada, has testified before the industry committee and said quite clearly to Canadians that the 2011 census provided Canadians with the data that we require as a government and all levels of government require in order to provide the necessary services to Canadians.

The 2016 census will yield quality data for all Canadians that they can rely on as we move forward.

Democratic Reform

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, nearly a year ago, we asked the Minister of State for Democratic Reform if he had consulted the Chief Electoral Officer about his unfair elections act.

He said he did, but he did not. Now we have another bill before us that is violating Canadians' right to vote.

Did the minister actually consult Elections Canada this time?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Minister of State (Democratic Reform)]

Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada's position.

The purpose of this bill is to ensure that everyone who votes is a citizen. It requires people to show identification before voting. That applies to Canadians living here in Canada, and once the House of Commons passes this bill, it will apply to all Canadians living abroad.

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the minister keeps spinning this new bill as somehow being about preventing fraudulent voting from abroad. We have seen this movie before. The reality is that the minister is creating new obstacles and new hoops to jump through that would make it exceptionally difficult for all Canadians abroad to vote in our elections, for no reason at all.

Can the minister provide a single scrap of evidence that Canadians voting from abroad are engaging in any form of cheating whatsoever?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Minister of State (Democratic Reform)]

Mr. Speaker, 87% of Canadians believe that when they vote, it is reasonable to expect them to bring some ID. Obviously, when people from outside the country vote, they do not present that ID in person. That is why the bill before the House would allow them to do so, by scanning the documents, emailing them in, and requesting that the ballot be sent to them by mail, which they can send back. The timelines work out for them to do that.

The bottom line is this. The bill would ensure that those people who vote are citizens and that they have identification to prove they are eligible to vote in the riding in which their vote would be counted.

Public Safety

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the current government does not seem to get the message. More powers for CSIS means a need for better oversight. In case the minister missed it, let me quote the latest annual report from the Security Intelligence Review Committee. This report said that “...it seems reasonable for Canadians to ask whether the intelligence accountability framework that was designed 30 years ago is still appropriate to deal with the realities of contemporary intelligence work.” That is what the SIRC annual report says.

The Conservatives agree that the intelligence environment has changed, so why are they so opposed to better oversight?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, there is oversight. We believe that the oversight in place is consistent. It is third-party, non-partisan, independent expert oversight that is required in this instance. Those key powers that exist in the legislation are subject to that oversight, in addition to the judicial oversight and the oversight of the Attorney General or prosecutors working with the police. We believe that is sufficient. We believe that is the way this bill would protect Canadians and, as the Leader of the Opposition said, strike that balance between security and the need to protect Canadians' rights.

[Rosane Doré Lefebvre, NDP, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the minister went on at length about the program to counter violent extremism.

However, he never said a word about any new funding even though the program has been in place since 2013. The minister said that urgent measures must be taken to protect Canadians.

If that is the case, why is he dragging his feet when it comes to funding the fight against radicalization?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, this legislation does include tools that would allow the authorities to take practical action regarding radicalization. That includes, of course, the take-down of material that might be seen as promoting or actively engaging terrorists.

In addition, there are already in place abilities for our security forces to engage with the public, with groups that might be subject or prone to radicalization. We have cultural round tables. There are a number of ways in which outreach helps us in this regard.

With respect to resources, we have consistently increased resources, while members of the NDP have consistently opposed those increases.

Social Development

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, families in Calgary Centre have told me that what they really want from their federal government is tax relief. They also want direct support, money in their pockets they can use as they see fit to help with the costs of raising their kids. What families do not want is big government bureaucracy and waste.

Can the Minister of State for Social Development please tell us and Canadian families what our government is doing for them.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Minister of State (Social Development)]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Calgary Centre is right: parents with children need support. They need lower taxes. That is exactly what we are delivering with our family tax cut, which would benefit close to two million families with children; and the expansion of our universal child care benefit, which would benefit every family in Canada with children.

Families that I have spoken to are excited. They are looking forward to this benefit and the tax cut. What they need to know, and what they do know, is that the Liberals and the New Democrats would take that away. Instead, they would introduce reckless spending, higher taxes, and more debt. This Prime Minister and this government will not let that happen.

Public Safety

[Isabelle Morin, NDP, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's firefighters are very concerned, and for good reason. They are asking the government to take concrete action to improve Canadians' safety and especially to save lives.

Our firefighters are on the front lines every day, and they know what makes the difference between life and death. We have to listen to them. They gave the government a detailed plan to, for example, make seniors' residences safer.

Will the government agree to work with firefighters, the provinces and municipalities to better protect public safety?

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member is fully aware, firefighters across this country do not fall under federal jurisdiction.

I will let members know that I am married to a firefighter, and when it comes to issues concerning keeping Canadians safe and putting out fires, I am very supportive of the work that my husband does to keep the residents of Toronto safe.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, recent train derailments in Lac Mégantic; Plaster Rock, New Brunswick; and Clair, Saskatchewan have demonstrated the threats that first responders face when trains with dangerous goods derail. Yet, too many have to face these dangers without adequate training in hazardous materials.

The Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs has long called for special training to deal with derailments specifically. It calls for this training to be provided in co-operation with the rail companies.

When will the government finally put into a place a comprehensive plan to get firefighters the training they need?