Debates of Sept. 18th, 2023

Question No.1575—

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

With regard to applications submitted to the Universal Broadband Fund program that have not been selected for funding within Hamilton, Ontario: (a) how many applications have not been selected for funding for projects located within Hamilton, Ontario; (b) what are the names of the interested parties whose applications have not been selected for funding; (c) what is the location within Hamilton of projects whose applications have not been selected for funding; and (d) what is the amount of funding requested by each interested party that have not been selected for funding?

[Gudie Hutchings, Liberal, Minister of Rural Economic Development and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, there were 17 applications submitted to the universal broadband fund program that have not been selected for funding within Hamilton, Ontario.

In processing parliamentary returns, the government applies the Privacy Act and the principles set out in the Access to Information Act. Therefore, information regarding applications that are under review, withdrawn or rejected is being withheld on the grounds that the information may constitute third party information.

Question No.1576—

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

With regard to applications submitted to the Universal Broadband Fund program that have not been selected for funding: what (i) are the names of interested parties, (ii) are the locations of the projects, (iii) is the amount of funding requested for each project?

[Gudie Hutchings, Liberal, Minister of Rural Economic Development and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, there have been applications submitted to the universal broadband fund program that have not been selected for funding in all provinces and territories except for the Yukon.

In processing parliamentary returns, the government applies the Privacy Act and the principles set out in the Access to Information Act. Therefore, information regarding applications that are under review, withdrawn or rejected is being withheld on the grounds that the information may constitute third party information.

Question No.1580—

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

With regard to statistics recorded by Health Canada pertaining to its Medical Assistance in Dying Program (MAID), since June 2016: (a) how many veterans have made a request for MAID, broken down by year; (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by province or territory; (c) what is the median age of veterans who have requested MAID, broken down by year; (d) of the requests in (a), how many were (i) granted, (ii) denied; and (e) what is the median age of veterans whose request for MAID were (i) granted, (ii) denied?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, Statistics Canada supports Health Canada by collecting data related to the medical assistance in dying program, MAID. Aggregate statistics on the state of MAID in Canada are published annually by Health Canada. The “Third annual report on Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada 2021” is available on the Health Canada website at https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/publications/health-system-services/annual-report-medical-assistance-dying-2021.html. However, Statistics Canada does not specifically collect or record data pertaining to veterans and their use of the program.

Question No.1581—

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

With regard to the government's plan to increase the mandatory security fees at airports by 33 percent: (a) will the fee increase lead to faster security screening for passengers, and, if so, by how many minutes on average will passenger wait times decrease; and (b) what methodology was used to determine and quantify the decrease in the average wait time?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the air travellers security charge came into effect in April 2002 to fund the air travel security system, including the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, which is the federal authority responsible for the security screening of air passengers and their baggage. Also included in the air travel security system are Transport Canada’s related regulatory oversight and the contracting of Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers on selected flights. The air travellers security charge is generally paid by passengers when they purchase airline tickets. The Government of Canada has committed to balancing air travellers security charge revenues with air travel security system expenses over time.

Budget 2023 proposed to provide $1.8 billion over five years, starting in 2023-24, to maintain and increase the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority’s level of service, improve screening wait times, and strengthen security measures at airports. To support financing of this proposal, budget 2023 proposes to increase air travellers security charge rates by 32.85%. The air travellers security charge rates were last increased in 2010, at which time they were raised by 52.4%.

The cost of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority’s operations has grown along with traffic volumes over the past 12 years, whereas its annual, fixed appropriations have not. As a result, the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority has been receiving annual top-ups to help it meet increased volumes. The vast majority of the incremental revenues generated by the air travellers security charge increase will go toward a three-year top-up versus the historical one-year. A portion of the incremental revenue will be used to improve wait times. The Canadian Air Transport Security Authority’s current wait time target is based on meeting a service level where on average 85% of all passengers wait less than 15 minutes to be screened at Canada’s top eight airports on an annual basis. This means that longer wait times may occur during peak periods, when checkpoints experience higher traffic volumes. Details on the proposed changes to wait times are being worked out with the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority.

Question No.1583—

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

With regard to media reports that Canadian soldiers in Latvia have had to purchase their own modern ballistic helmets equipped with built-in hearing protection: (a) why was such equipment not provided by the government to all Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) soldiers serving in Latvia; (b) will the soldiers who had to purchase these helmets with their own funds be reimbursed; and (c) what is the timeline for when these helmets, or ones of a similar quality, will be provided to all CAF soldiers participating in theatre or live fire exercises?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, ensuring that our soldiers are equipped with modern and effective equipment is a top priority for National Defence. This includes safe, modern ballistic helmets.

The following is a response to parts (a), (b) and (c).

All members of the Canadian Armed Forces, CAF, are provided with the required operational equipment, whether serving at home or abroad.

When deploying, CAF members are provided with an authorized list of clothing and equipment specific to that mission. The operational headquarters, in collaboration with the task force and supported by the respective technical and functional authorities, creates and amends this list as required. Prior to their deployment, all CAF members are provided the clothing and equipment on this list, should they not already have it. For those deployed to Latvia, this would include a helmet.

Per CAF policy, the unauthorized procurement and use of weapons, personal protective equipment, and clothing is not allowed in any form.

As such, no CAF member deployed to Latvia was forced to purchase their own helmet for safety or operational reasons. Should a member buy their own equipment, it is based on their preference, and it is not due to shortages. Members are not reimbursed in such cases.

Question No.1587—

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

With regard to delays in the reimbursement of meal expenses for Canadian Armed Forces members serving in Poland: (a) what was the total number and total value of meal expense reimbursements (i) requested between January 1 and June 1, 2023, (ii) issued as of June 7, 2023; (b) what was the average number of days between when the reimbursement was requested and when the payment was issued; (c) what are the reasons why reimbursements were delayed; and (d) on what date were or will each of the reasons in (c) be rectified?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the sustainment and support of deployed troops is always a top Canadian Armed Forces, CAF, priority. This includes ensuring the provision of food for our members, no matter where they are deployed around the world.

With regard to (a)(i)(ii), (c) and (d), over the past year, Canada has rapidly expanded Operation Unifier with a focus on providing immediate training support to Ukraine as it fights for its sovereignty and security. In most cases, the CAF provides food for its members through CAF military cooks or those of our allies. However, given the geographically dispersed nature of the training cadres, this was not logistically feasible for most training locations in Poland. In such cases, members were authorized to receive a per diem in line with Treasury Board policies. This resulted in an unprecedented number of claims submitted.

To address this issue, the Department of National Defence extended the deployment duration of administrative personnel who volunteered to stay and support the mission. Their efforts, along with those of newly deployed personnel in March 2023, cleared the backlog.

Between January 1 and June 1 of 2023, 316 meal allowance claims were submitted for reimbursement by soldiers deployed to Poland on Operation Unifier for a total value of $683,076. As of June 7, 2023, 290 of these claims had been settled for a total value of $569,780.

All claims have since been settled, with the last from this period paid out on June 24, 2023.

With regard to (b), in March 2023, the average time between meal allowance claim submission and payout was four to six weeks. Since then, the payout time for these claims has steadily reduced, such that the current average is now two to three weeks.

Finally, the CAF has also since expanded the number of administrative staff positions for future deployments to ensure this situation does not reoccur.

Question No.1588—

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

With regard to Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members having to purchase their own equipment in the last two years: (a) how many instances is the CAF aware of that were a result of shortages in what the CAF provides to its members; (b) what is the estimated value of the purchases in (a); (c) what are the details of all such purchases that were eventually reimbursed by the government, including, for each, the (i) item description and quantity, (ii) amount of reimbursement, (iii) month of purchase, (iv) month of reimbursement; (d) what measures were taken by the CAF to ensure that members serving abroad had all of the equipment needed prior to their arrival abroad; and (e) were there any instances where CAF members arrived in a country without being equipped with all of the necessary equipment, and, if so, what are the details, including, for each, the (i) country, (ii) number of CAF members impacted, (iii) details of what was not provided, (iv) date members arrived, (v) status of whether the equipment has since been provided, (vi) reason the equipment or gear was not provided?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, ensuring that our soldiers are equipped with modern and effective equipment is a top priority for the Department of National Defence.

With regard to (a), (b) and (c), all members of the Canadian Armed Forces, CAF, are provided with the required operational equipment, whether serving at home or abroad. Should a member buy their own equipment, it is based on their preference and is not due to shortages. Members are not reimbursed in such cases, and details regarding equipment purchased by members are not centrally tracked. When deploying, CAF members are provided with an authorized list of clothing and equipment specific to that mission. The operational headquarters, in collaboration with the task force, and supported by the respective technical and functional authorities, creates and amends this list as required. Prior to their deployment, all CAF members are provided the clothing and equipment on this list, should they not already have it.

Per CAF policy, the unauthorized procurement and use of weapons, personal protective equipment and clothing is not allowed in any form.

If a shortage does occur, the technical authority responsible for the equipment will either allow the concerned unit to purchase what is missing, using a short list of pre-approved items, or initiate an emergency procurement to ensure that no deployed and/or deploying member of the CAF is without proper operational equipment.

In November 2022, the Operation Unifier training element, based in the United Kingdom, identified a deficiency with the CAF-issued wet weather clothing. In December 2022, deployed members were authorized to procure suitable wet weather clothing from an approved list. To date, approximately 400 CAF members deployed over three rotations from August 2022 to January 2024 have received this authorization.

Question No.1597—

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

With regard to the Canada Border Services Agency: what is the spending by governmental and non-governmental organizations on settlement services for people (immigrants, refugees, asylum claimants and other individuals) who have entered Canada at official and irregular border crossings, broken down by the (i) organization, (ii) fiscal year, since 2015-16, (iii) projected spending for the 2023-24 fiscal year, (iv) province and territory, (v) program spending?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, the CBSA has not incurred any spending on settlement services for immigrants, refugees, asylum claimants and other individuals in the indicated time frame.

Question No.1602—

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

With regard to Canada’s trade relationship with China, the Tibetan Autonomous Region’s (TAR) recent GDP growth in the first quarter of 2023, and the general economic forecast of the region: (a) what role do Canada’s trade offices in China, the consulates and embassies that offer Trade Commissioner Services, or the embassy in Beijing, play in the relationships between Chinese and Canadian companies; (b) is there a guide, guidelines, model or other document that outlines what Canada considers as good governance and best practices, used in Canada’s trade, and, if so, have there been instances where good governance and best practices were found to be in violation of or against the spirit of the guide, guidelines, model or outline; (c) since 2020, has there been an increase in interest or communications at Canada’s trade offices in China from companies about exporting or importing goods or conducting business in the TAR, and, if so, from which companies; (d) are there plans for Canada to open a trade office in Lhasa, TAR, and, if not, under what circumstances would Canada make such plans; (e) have Canada’s trade offices in China promoted trade in the TAR; and (f) did Canada attend the one-day Tibet Development Forum held in Beijing on May 23, 2023, and, if so, (i) what was the program of the forum, (ii) what events did Canada attend, (iii) did Canada speak or raise questions at the forum, and, if so, what was said by Canada and who were the guests present?

[Mary Ng, Liberal, Minister of Export Promotion]

Mr. Speaker, the following reflects a consolidated response approved on behalf of Global Affairs Canada ministers.

With regard to (a), Canada’s Trade Commissioner Service, TCS, helps Canadian businesses grow with confidence by connecting them with our funding and support programs, international opportunities, and our network of trade commissioners in over 160 cities worldwide, including with our network in greater China, including Canada’s embassy in Beijing, its consulates in Shanghai, Guangzhou and Chongqing and its trade offices across 10 secondary markets. The TCS helps companies find key local players that have the knowledge needed for clients to refine and carry out their international strategy. This may include connecting Canadian companies with potential local Chinese business partners.

With regard to (b), the Government of Canada expects Canadian companies active abroad to abide by all relevant laws, to respect human rights in their operations and to adopt best practices and internationally respected guidelines on responsible business conduct, such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD, Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. In support of these objectives, Canada’s responsible business conduct, or RBC, strategy – “Responsible Business Conduct Abroad: Canada’s Strategy for the Future”-- was launched in 2022. This five-year strategy, 2022-2027, sets out priorities for the Government of Canada, through the TCS and partners, to provide guidance and tools in order to support Canadian companies to uphold Canada’s RBC expectations. The TCS provides advice to Canadian companies to identify and mitigate risks and to strengthen their responsible business conduct practices. If there is a legitimate concern and there is credible information of a Canadian company’s misconduct or wrongdoing abroad, the TCS can withhold all services and support from the company.

With regard to (c), available records show no such interest or inquiries to Canada’s trade offices.

With regard to (d), there are no plans for Canada to open a trade office in Lhasa in the Tibetan Autonomous Region, TAR. Canada makes plans to open trade offices in a given location based on market potential for Canadian clients and based on broader international commercial strategies. The 10 trade offices currently operating in China were established when two separate Canadian strategies were executed. The first six offices were established under Canada’s global commerce strategy in 2007, while the final four were added as part of the Global markets action plan in 2013.

With regard to (e), Canada’s trade offices in China have not promoted trade in the TAR. The current trade offices do not deal with any matters related to the TAR.

With regard to (f), Canada did not attend the event.

Question No.1603—

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

With regard to Canada’s trade relationship with China and the activities of Canadian companies involved in development projects in China, specifically those that have been involved with mining, hydroelectricity, and rail, including, but not limited to, Bombardier Inc., SNC Lavalin, Nortel, Eldorado Gold Corp., Power Corp., RailPartners, Continental Minerals, GobiMin, MinCo Capital Corp., Sterling Group, Inter-Citic Minerals, Tri-River Ventures, China Gold International Resources, and Roctest LTD between 2000 and 2020 in the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) and Tibetan areas in Gansu, Qinghai, Sichuan, and Yunnan: (a) has Canada ever facilitated contact or participated in the meetings between Chinese companies and Canadian companies involved with development projects, and, if so, what are the details, including, for each, (i) who participated, (ii) on which dates, (iii) at what locations; (b) has Canada ever provided funding for development projects in the TAR and Tibetan areas, such as those in Gansu, Qinghai, Sichuan, and Yunnan, and, if so, what are the details, including, for each, (i) for which projects, (ii) the amounts, (iii) the source of these funds; (c) was there a guide, guidelines, model, or other document that outlines what the government considered as good corporate governance and best practices for Canadian companies operating in the TAR and Tibetan areas of China; (d) what mechanisms exist in the case where there are complaints as a result of violations on the part of Canadian companies of the policies, norms or official guidelines delineated in (c); and (e) if such mechanisms exist, (i) what complaints have been made, (ii) how were these complaints addressed?

[Mary Ng, Liberal, Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, the following reflects a consolidated response approved on behalf of Global Affairs Canada ministers.

With regard to part (a), based on available records, Canada has not facilitated any such meetings between Canadian and Chinese companies involved in development projects.

With regard to part (b), Global Affairs Canada does not disaggregate the geographic scope of international assistance projects beyond the country level. Therefore, data specific to development projects in the Tibetan Autonomous Region or the other Tibetan areas referenced are not available. Canada’s bilateral aid program to China expired in 2013.

With regard to part (c), Canada’s responsible business conduct expectations, including Canada’s Responsible Business Conduct Strategy, applies to all Canadian companies active abroad, regardless of the region in which they operate.

With regard to part (d), the Government of Canada provides two non-judicial dispute-resolution mechanisms: Canada’s National Contact Point, or NCP, for Responsible Business Conduct and the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise, or CORE. Canada’s NCP has a mandate to facilitate dialogue/mediation to help resolves issues raised about the observance of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct, or the Guidelines, by multinational enterprises operating in or from Canada, in any economic sectors. The NCP can receive complaints related to any of the areas covered in the eleven chapters of the Guidelines, including those dealing with human rights, employment and industrial relations, and the environment. Outcomes of the NCP process can include agreement on remedy, changes to company policy, as well as relationship-building between companies and communities where they operate.

The CORE has a mandate to review allegations of human rights abuses arising from the operations of Canadian companies abroad in the mining, oil and gas, and garment sectors. The CORE can undertake a review on its own initiative or in response to a complaint received, offer informal mediation services, and issue recommendations at the end of a review. The CORE is required to report publicly throughout the process. The office of the CORE began accepting complaints on March 15, 2021. The Government of Canada expects Canadian companies involved in a dispute-resolution process to participate in good faith. If a Canadian company fails to act in good faith during a review or follow-up process, recommendations can be made to implement trade measures such as the withdrawal of Trade Commissioner Service support, and recommending that Export Development Canada and the Canadian Commercial Corporation withdraw future support.

With regard to part (e), Canada’s NCP has closed 25 cases since 2000. The NCP publishes a Final Statement at the conclusion of each case. These Final Statements, as well as other information on past NCP cases, can be found on the NCP’s website. The CORE publishes a quarterly report on complaints received and is required to publish reports on its reviews. CORE publications are available on the CORE’s website.

Question No.1605—

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

With regard to Order in Council 2023-0524 dated June 1, 2023: (a) who is named in Schedule A; and (b) what offences and convictions were listed in Schedule B?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, the Royal Prerogative of Mercy, or RPM, also known as clemency, is the discretionary power of the Crown to grant pardons, remit sentences, and exercise other forms of clemency. Clemency can be exercised either by the Governor in Council under sections 748 and 748.1 of the Criminal Code, or by the Governor General under the Letters Patent, which is the document that bestows power to the Governor General. In practice, the granting of an act of clemency by the Governor in Council or by the Governor General will occur only after receiving the advice of a Minister of the Crown. In most cases, it is the Minister of Public Safety who makes the recommendation.

As outlined in the Order in Council 2023-0524, the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Public Safety, ordered the remission of all outstanding fines and a conditional pardon to the person named in Schedule A. A conditional pardon can be ordered prior to eligibility, or due to ineligibility, under the Criminal Records Act, or prior to eligibility under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, or CCRA. There are criteria that must be met in order for a conditional pardon to be granted, including the aforementioned evidence of substantial injustice or undue hardship.

In the case of clemency pardons under the RPM, there is no framework for disclosure because the over-riding principle and convention has been to guard the privacy of the individual in receipt of clemency, other than the notification in the Canada Gazette concerning the fact of the pardon or remission of fines.

As such, the request to disclose the name listed in Schedule A and offences including convictions listed in Schedule B for Order in Council 2023-0524, cannot be fulfilled.

Clemency is granted in exceptional circumstances in deserving cases involving federal offences, where no other remedy exists in law to reduce severe negative effects of criminal sanctions. Clemency can be requested for numerous reasons, including employment, perceived inequity, medical conditions, immigration to Canada, compassion and financial hardship.

The Parole Board of Canada, or PBC, reviews applications, conducts investigations at the direction of the Minister of Public Safety, and makes recommendations to the Minister regarding whether to grant the clemency request.

There are several guiding principles regarding the exercise of clemency which are assessed and reviewed by the PBC in accordance with section 110 of the CCRA: there is evidence of substantial injustice or undue hardship that exceed the normal consequences of a conviction and sentence; the application is examined on its own merit, taking into consideration the circumstances solely of the applicant; the applicant has exhausted all other avenues available under the Criminal Code or other pertinent legislation; the independence of the judiciary shall be respected; and the RPM does not result in an increased penalty.

Question No.1607—

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

With regard to revenue collected by the government from the federal carbon tax: (a) does the revenue collected go into the government's general revenue fund or a separate fund; (b) if the revenue goes into a separate fund, what are the details, including the name and balance of such a fund; and (c) how much revenue did the government collect from the carbon tax in the 2022-23 fiscal year, in total and broken down by province?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, all proceeds collected from the federal fuel charge go into the Consolidated Revenue Fund. Under the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, or GGPPA, all proceeds from the federal fuel charge assessed must also be returned from this Fund back to the jurisdiction of origin.

Pursuant to section 270 of the GGPPA, the Minister of the Environment must table a report in Parliament annually with respect to the administration of the act, which includes details of proceeds assessed and how they were returned.

The most recent annual report was tabled in March 2023, in respect of a pollution price of $40 during the 2021 22 fuel charge year. For reference, that report is published here: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/pricing-pollution-how-it-will-work/greenhouse-gas-annual-report-2021.html.

Detailed information in respect of the 2022 23 fuel charge year will be available in the next annual report, which is required to be tabled by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change by the end of the current fiscal year. Note that these data have yet to be fully assessed and audited as part of the 2022 23 year end Public Accounts process.

In provinces where the fuel charge applies, the majority of proceeds are returned to households through climate action incentive, or CAI, payments while the balance of proceeds is to be returned to small and medium sized businesses and Indigenous groups. Proceeds relating specifically to the use of natural gas and propane by farmers are returned directly to farmers via a refundable tax credit.

Over time, any difference between proceeds assessed and disbursed in each jurisdiction is corrected through adjustments to future CAI payment amounts, such that all proceeds are returned to the jurisdiction of origin. These differences are reported upon in the annual reports.

Question No.1612—

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

With regard to VIA Rail’s passenger service: what was the operating revenue and the operating costs for each year between 2018 and 2022 for (i) the Toronto—Québec City corridor, (ii) each VIA Rail passenger service route outside of the Toronto—Québec City corridor?