Finance Committee on March 6th, 2017

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Yes?

[An hon. member]

We can keep this up.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Go ahead, Mr. Liepert. You have the floor.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

All I would say in closing, Mr. Chair, is that I think what our colleagues across the way have missed here is the intent of the motion. The intent of the motion was to study the report. There was nothing in the motion that said this committee had to accept the report. We heard lots of good arguments on the other side of the table about what was wrong with the report, but what we wanted to do is study the report, and they would also have had every opportunity to do that.

We knew from the outset that this motion was not going to be accepted, so this was a great opportunity to have a two-hour discussion on the “Alberta Jobs Taskforce Report”, and nobody on this side made a better case than the folks across the way, who went through every recommendation. We're really pleased that all of the work we did got two hours of discussion and recommendations clearly laid out by the government members. We're really happy about that.

With that, I would only say that I think what we should do is have a vote. If others want to participate in the discussion, that's great, but I'm quite happy to have a vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Do I have others who want to speak?

I do. Okay, we'll have Ms. O'Connell and then likely Mr. Albas.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm happy to speak and correct the record for any Albertans or Canadians listening to this debate today or in the future, because the irony is the Liberal members and our colleagues in the NDP actually voted to support debate on this issue. It was the Conservatives who, on a recorded vote, asked to adjourn this vote and not even take a vote on their own motion.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Until Wednesday.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

That's interesting to me. On the non-partisan report, as they claim, they wanted to shut down debate before we could vote. Still, I'm happy to be here and to talk about it.

My colleagues who spoke, Mr. Sorbara and Mr. Ouellette, listed the items and the work our government has been doing to help Alberta as well as the provinces and the people across this country who have been hit hard by the commodity downturn. It's not just Alberta that's been hit; there are several provinces facing this. However, I'm not going to go through the list that my colleagues have, because I think Canadians can see that we have been taking this issue very seriously, not only for Alberta but also for Canadians across the country.

I want to highlight a couple of points so that anyone listening to this debate sees it for the partisan work that it is. The fact is, Mr. Liepert just mentioned that we should study the report. We need to study this report—the very report they forgot to provide to this committee. We had to look it up on our iPads as this debate was happening. The report was so important they forgot to send to this committee. I find the timing interesting.

It was said earlier that it's a non-partisan blueprint for the finance minister. Well, my colleagues pointed out the work our government has done in a short number of months that the previous government failed to do in nearly a decade, so I don't think we need the Conservative blueprint for economic growth in Alberta. In fact, Albertans chose differently.

If this report truly wasn't partisan, then, as my colleague pointed out, why weren't others included? Why weren't MPs from Alberta who were not Conservatives included? Based on the website—because, again, no documents were actually submitted to the committee, and the report wasn't even submitted to the committee to look at—it looked like seven meetings were held in developing this report. There were no submissions presented to this committee about what was said at these meetings, how many people attended, who attended, or where the recommendations came from.

It's important, because it was the Conservative members of this committee who said that it was the recommendations of the people and that this was not partisan. In that case, why didn't they invite any members who weren't Conservative?

Ultimately the situation in Alberta and across the country is a debate our government takes very seriously. My colleagues have highlighted all of the work we are doing. I think it's really sad that the Conservative members tried to end the debate before taking a vote. I'll highlight once again that if studying the report was so important, they should have provided the report to the committee.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Pierre-Luc Dusseault]

Thank you, Ms. O'Connell.

Mr. Albas, please go ahead.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I want to thank members for their engagement on the issue.

With regard to Mr. Liepert's last intervention, when he said it's important for us to be discussing things like the economy, particularly where there are widespread impacts, this is particularly true for my area, where there have been impacts such as local unemployment. Many people will work in the oil patch and then return back, pay their taxes, and spend in the local Kelowna and Okanagan economy. I want to say that I appreciate my colleague for raising that point.

I have a couple of brief notes, Mr. Chair.

First of all, the committee does have free time available this month, and we should be using that time to the benefit of Canadians. While I recognize that there was a lot of debate on certain recommendations, those, I believe, would be best put to witnesses who can come before us. You can make your points about the recommendations and whether you agree with them and you can get testimony from people on whether or not they agree that those are good.

Perhaps if we had MPs from Atlantic Canada—who all happen to be Liberals—who did a similar task force and went through all that process that we saw here with the Alberta task force, I would hope that we would be willing to listen to them, to listen to Atlantic Canadians or to Canadians from any region of the country, particularly when they are suffering through a hard time and want to have their voices heard, so let's just refocus on what we were asking. We were asking to study the work of local members of Parliament engaging in Alberta. I think that in broad strokes, we should be welcoming any members of Parliament from a region facing similar challenges. If they wish to come to a parliamentary committee to have their situation further examined, I think we should be open to that.

Again, I would just point out that we do have free time available. I've made suggestions previously on the studies we could do. Members had other ideas, and that's fine, but right now we do not have anything on the docket, so rather than letting that time and energy go to waste, another member has presented an idea, something that would be good for Canada, and we would have an opportunity for Albertan MPs to substitute in, to share their knowledge and make that part of the official record here in Parliament and make recommendations to the government.

I'm sorry to hear that some members opposite are not supportive. I think that this would give them an opportunity to give voice to some of the issues that they think they've engaged on. We'd be able to have people come in and comment on whether or not those initiatives have been successful and clarify their record. As well, we would be able to ask them whether they felt that the work presented by those members of Parliament who submitted this work was of value and would help take the country forward.

I'm sorry to see that members of the government side have viewed this report as a partisan angle. Even if it is, even if there are elements of that, don't you think it would be worth the effort to say to Albertans that we're willing to take their concerns front and centre, particularly since you don't seem to have any other ideas that this committee can be going for?

I guess we'll see the outcome in a vote, but Mr. Chair, I just want to go on the record that, one, I support my Albertan colleagues; two, I'm supportive of any members of Parliament likewise doing reports, bringing them here, and having us review them, if this committee deems it important; and three, I would like to see our committee work on some of these issues, because ultimately the finance committee should be looking at things that are fiscal or economic or in the long-term interests of this great country.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you, Mr. Albas.

Mr. Fergus is next, and then Mr. Grewal.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I am happy to have this opportunity to talk about these concerns related to the situation in Alberta, a province that is very dear to us.

As a Quebecer, I firmly believe that we have to look after all our fellow citizens right across the country, particularly in Alberta, whose economic situation poses a great challenge to the Canadian economy, to say the least.

I have to admit, Mr. Chair, that I am disappointed by the debate today. In the vote, we saw that the member from the third party and the government members voted to continue the debate, while the official opposition voted against its own debate, its own report. I'm sorry, but I have to say—

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Greg, I'm going to try to keep people on the motion.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I will continue, Mr. Chair, because I think the motion is very important. I simply wanted to point out that they voted against their own motion by not wanting to continue the debate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Greg, I'm going to cut you off, because that has nothing to do with the motion. The vote is on the record. People can see the vote if they want to look at it. Keep the discussion on the motion, or I'm going to cut people off.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I understand, Mr. Chair. I will continue to speak to the motion before us then.

I am very happy that we have had this opportunity to discuss the economic issues in Alberta, the opportunity to discuss the pros and cons of certain initiatives. As my colleague from outside Toronto just said, this is important. We cannot say this is a non-partisan exercise. It is unfortunate, but that is where we are at.

It seems that the members of the official opposition do not have enough confidence in their own report since they did not even have the courtesy to send it to the members of the Standing Committee on Finance. Unfortunately, since they do not have faith in their own initiative, I feel obliged to vote against the motion.

Mr. Chair, I hope we can proceed with the vote now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

I first have Mr. Grewal.

[Raj Grewal, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to take a moment to say that any work done by members of Parliament from any party is extremely important and I want to congratulate the members for taking the time and the effort to talk to their constituents.

I was born in Alberta, so I have a soft spot in my heart for the province. I want to mention that in the middle of the 1980s, my parents were new immigrants to the country. My older sister was born in British Columbia, and I was born in Alberta. My parents were moving eastward in search of economic opportunity. I was born in 1985. In 1986 there was a severe recession in Alberta. It was an economic downturn in terms of—

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

It was called Trudeau's national energy program.

[Raj Grewal, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thanks for the educational lesson, Ron.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

You were too young to know.

[Raj Grewal, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Again, it had to do with falling oil prices. My parents, in search of economic opportunity, moved to Toronto, and the rest is history.

However, we're sitting here today talking about a motion to study a report that was never presented to this committee. In essence, that's where I feel the heart of the motion kind of falls apart. If you're asking for something to be studied, at a bare minimum it should have been presented to the committee.

I will also say that when the members opposite say that the government doesn't recognize the pain of the people of Alberta, that just isn't true. At the end of the day, I think we all understand that when our Canadian brothers and sisters are struggling, whether that's on any coast or in any province or in any territory, the Government of Canada has a role to play. If Brampton East is thriving and people in Calgary are struggling, that's still my problem too, as a member elected to this House.

I will also say that the government recognizes that. It has done a lot in terms of federal funding to the Province of Alberta and it will continue to do that and support the Province of Alberta, and I think that's where we can all work together to ensure that all Canadians have great opportunity for success.

I wanted to get my comments on the record because I really think it does a disservice to the country when we try to pit one area of the country against another. I think that as members of Parliament elected in a democratic country, we are here to serve the interests of all Canadians.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Does that conclude our list?

Okay, we are on the motion.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Could we have a recorded vote?

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We'll have a recorded vote, Madam Clerk.

(Motion negatived: nays 5; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Do you want to vote on the supplementary estimates? Do they automatically go, or do you want to vote on them? Okay.

First are the estimates from the Department of Finance that you have in your documents. I will read it.

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE

Vote 1c—Program expenditures..........$1,500,000

(Vote 1c agreed to on division)

Shall I report the supplementary estimates 2016-17(C) under the Department of Finance to the House?