House of Commons Hansard #155 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was consultation.

Topics

Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsRoutine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsRoutine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

Is that agreed?

Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsRoutine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Economic and Fiscal Update—Speaker's RulingPrivilegeRoutine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised by the hon. member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley concerning the economic and fiscal update by the Minister of Finance on November 12, 2014.

I would like to thank the hon. member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley for raising this matter, as well as the hon. Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and the hon. House Leader of the Official Opposition for their interventions.

The hon. member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley explained that on November 12, 2014, the Minister of Finance delivered the government's official economic and fiscal update to a private audience of financial professionals rather than in the House. This, he argued, obstructed members' access to that critical information, which is required to fulfill their parliamentary functions, thereby constituting contempt of Parliament if not a breach of members' privileges.

The hon. government House leader responded that, since the economic and fiscal update is not the budget, it is not governed by the Standing Orders. Consequently, the minister was not obligated to deliver that statement in the House and, in fact, there is a long-standing practice of the government making announcements outside the House on a range of policy issues.

The release of and accessibility to information is, of course, a matter of importance to all members since it touches the role of members as legislators. The chair shares Speaker Parent's views when he indicated on November 6, 1997 at page 1618 of Debates that this role should not be trivialized. In fact, we should take every opportunity to underline its significance in our system of responsible government.

That is not to say, however, that every proceeding or activity related to delivering or accessing information by members implicitly involves their parliamentary duties.

For instance, in 2009, Speaker Milliken was asked to determine whether the public release of the government's third report on the economic action plan made in Saint John, New Brunswick, was a breach of privilege.

In a ruling on October 5, 2009, Speaker Milliken stated:

Matters of press conferences or release of documents, the policy initiatives of the government, are not ones that fall within the jurisdiction of the Speaker of the House unless they happen to be made in the House itself.

It is very difficult for the Chair to intervene in a situation where a minister has chosen to have a press conference, or a briefing or a meeting and release material when the Speaker has nothing to do with the organization of that [event].

In fact, a review of economic and fiscal updates delivered by the Minister of Finance has revealed that, since 2009, the minister has provided this update to a business audience in various provinces, with last year's being delivered to the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce on November 12, 2013. Furthermore, the Chair can find no cases of questions of privilege or points of order in relation to these updates.

In addition, Speakers have consistently ruled that there are certain fundamental conditions that must exist in order for it to constitute a matter of contempt or privilege. As O’Brien and Bosc states at page 109:

In order to find a prima facie breach of privilege, the Speaker must be satisfied that there is evidence to support the Member's claim that he or she has been impeded in the performance of his or her parliamentary functions and that the matter is directly related to a proceeding in Parliament.

Based on the precedents established by previous Speakers, I cannot find evidence that members were obstructed in the performance of their parliamentary functions. Accordingly, I must conclude that there are not sufficient grounds to arrive at a finding of a prima facie breach of privilege in this case.

I thank the House for its attention.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:20 a.m.

York—Simcoe Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

moved:

That in relation to Bill C-43, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration of the report stage and one sitting day shall be allotted to the third reading stage of the said bill; and

That, fifteen minutes before the expiry of the time provided for government business on the day allotted to the consideration of the report stage and on the day allotted to the third reading stage of the said bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the stage of the bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

There will now be a 30-minute question period. I will ask members to keep their questions and comments to around about a minute and responses to a similar length of time.

The hon. member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Mr. Speaker, sadly, it is no surprise that the government has chosen to shut down debate yet again. I guess the only surprise is that the government House leader has not memorized the actual statement he has made, because he has made it 83 times. The government has shut down debate 83 times on important pieces of legislation, more than any other government in Canadian history in wartime or in peace.

On this one, a budget implementation bill of 460 pages, in the few speeches we have heard from government members, they have cited all sorts of things that do not even exist within this budget implementation bill. What does exist, in a time of economic fragility, is a rip-off of the employment insurance program of $550 million that may create as few as 800 jobs, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer. That is more than half a million dollars per job.

It would also rip social assistance away from refugee claimants. That does not affect the federal treasury whatsoever. That is contained in this bill.

Is it because there are so many terrible things in this bill and there is so little to help the Canadian economy at a time when it needs the help that the government is shutting down debate? Is it because of outright embarrassment for the lack of ambition and foresight contained in this massive omnibus bill?

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:20 a.m.

Crowfoot Alberta

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson ConservativeMinister of State (Finance)

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for his question.

This budget was brought down in February of last year. We have had ample opportunity to look through the budget. The budget implementation act no. 2 came in this October, and again, we have had debate in the House on that.

The member referenced the economy. Since forming government in 2006, and even going into the global downturn, we have had the strongest economic growth of any country in the G7. Our economy has been managed. We have come forward with economic action plans and a strategy. When we moved into a global downturn, we said that it was going to be a difficult time, but we had a strategy.

Whether it be by the OECD or the IMF, Canada is recognized as the place to be. There have been 1.2 million jobs created since the downturn. The second part of the budget is part of that plan.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the government House leader. He is the instrument that is used to bring in time allocation.

As has been pointed out, this majority Conservative/Reform Party government has now brought in time allocation a record high number of times. No other government in the history of Canada has brought in time allocation or used it in the manner the current government has. That is not to mention the huge budget implementation bills that have ramifications for numerous pieces of legislation. The Conservatives almost sneak a legislative agenda into these budget legislation bills.

Why is the government House leader being so disrespectful to basic democracy in the House of Commons?

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, again, Canadians expect their government to govern. They expect their government to make decisions. They expect their government to be transparent in the strategy and the plan we had in this budget in the early spring and again with the budget implementation bill in October. They expect the government not only to make promises and commitments but to take action on those promises and commitments, which is exactly what our government is doing with the budget implementation bill, no. 2. We are going to continue to keep those commitments to Canadians by introducing and advancing important legislation.

The hon. member from the Liberal Party who just asked the question knows that it is common practice to include various other measures in a budget. His party did it. It is common practice. It is nothing new. It is nothing groundbreaking. It simply reflects the central role of the budget in a government's agenda.

The bottom line is that this budget implementation bill supports our low-tax plan. It supports plans to increase jobs and also increase skills within our workforce.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:25 a.m.

NDP

Alain Giguère NDP Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Mr. Speaker, we often discover that there are things we would really like to talk about, but the problem is that time allocation does not allow us to do so.

The best example is that the government took $500 million that could have gone to the unemployed. I am sure that during the holidays, the unemployed would have liked to share $500 million. It is the holiday season. There are presents to buy and special groceries to get. Now, apparently, we cannot talk about it.

One important thing that is not in this legislation is a rationale for taking $500 million and giving a credit to businesses. The problem is that the Conservatives are referring to a document prepared by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. That document does not exist. The federation itself said that the minister is referring to a document that it never wrote.

Can my colleague explain to me how it is that the government is taking $500 million away from the unemployed based on a non-existent document?

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, Canada has one of the best programs for unemployed individuals. Part of what we do in Canada is encourage people to go back to work. In fact, we have seen that. We have seen this country have one of the lowest unemployment rates during the recession, and we have been able to create 1.2 million net new jobs. The majority of these jobs are in the private sector, and they are full-time jobs.

My hon. friend asks why we do not just give more money to the unemployed. When we speak to those individuals who are looking for work, they are saying that they want to be certain that they can find jobs. They want the government to invest in areas where they can increase their skills, enhance their jobs, and help them find jobs. That is exactly what we are doing.

Again, we are focusing on the issues that matter most to Canadians. We are seeing that our job growth is very positive, but we are also seeing people having more hope in being able to enhance their skill levels.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Ted Opitz Conservative Etobicoke Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. minister of state, who has been in my riding talking to my constituents many times.

I would like to correct some of my colleagues. Under the strong, stable majority Conservative government we have had, Canadian democracy and the Canadian economy have been something other nations have marvelled at and have tried to duplicate. We are one of the top nations in the world. When we look at the opinions of our national colleagues, we see that.

One hundred per cent of the families in Etobicoke Centre with children under the age of 18 will benefit from our government's new family tax-cut plan. Parents in my riding of Etobicoke Centre will be pleased with this new money. They know that families should benefit from the surplus, not the government. They also know the numerous positive social and physical effects of keeping their kids active in sports and fitness.

Could the Minister of State for Finance please tell us how BIA no. 2 is going to help parents get their kids involved in fitness activities? Could he tell us specifically how it will help low-income families put their kids in sports programs?

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Etobicoke Centre for the good work he does as a member of Parliament. He asks difficult questions in caucus. He advocates not only for his constituency but for Ukraine and for groups he has a real interest in. He works hard.

With respect to economic action plan 2014, no. 2, I am pleased to tell the House that the government will be doubling the children's fitness tax credit, increasing the maximum amount from $500 to $1,000. We are also making it refundable. We are delivering on the commitment we made in 2011. In addition, making the credit refundable will increase benefits to low-income families who want to see their children involved in sports and fitness activities.

We understand the importance of organized sports, such as hockey, gym, and those types of things. People on low incomes cannot afford that. Doubling the child fitness tax credit is good news for families who want to see their children involved in fitness activities.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:30 a.m.

NDP

Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, when we had officials from Citizenship and Immigration Canada before committee on the measure in the BIA that would allow provinces to implement residency requirements for refugees, they said that there was no data to suggest that this measure would act as a deterrent or save any money.

Why would the government want to implement a measure it says would do both of these things and then limit debate? Why not pull that measure out and have it as a free-standing bill?

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to helping all newcomers to Canada, including genuine refugees. We want to see newcomers to Canada integrate into our country and into our society and fully contribute to our economy and to our communities.

Make no mistake. Canada has the fairest and most generous immigration system in the world. I think the Canadian public understands this, and I want to make sure that the New Democratic Party also understands this. We can have great confidence in Canada's values and compassion. Many people from around the world aspire to come to Canada, because they recognize that this is a country of opportunity and hope.

We also recognize that it is the provinces' jurisdiction to deal with these social programs. We want to make certain that they understand that they have the ability to provide benefits through a timely process. It is a provincial decision.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

Ted Hsu Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, since we are about to impose time allocation on report stage debate in the House, I have a couple of questions that I would like to ask about the committee's work on this bill.

The first point is that it does not seem to me that the committee properly considered the fact that there is very little for veterans in Bill C-43. I would have thought that the committee would have spent more time on omissions in the bill as well as the things that are wrong about the bill.

The second point I want to make is about something that is a little more detailed and that I do not believe the finance committee considered. Bill C-43 contains some changes to the Industrial Design Act. Budget 2014 said that there would be legislation to implement certain treaties, and one particular change in the Industrial Design Act says that a design is registerable if the design is not contrary to public morality or order.

My questions to the minister are as follows: why did the finance committee not consider this bill in more detail, how is the government intending to regulate the industry based on this line in the Industrial Design Act, and is that change related to a treaty?

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, there are a number of elements of this budget implementation act that deal with industry. Intellectual property is an example. There were certain amendments made to this bill that deal with intellectual property. These come out of amendments that were included in budget implementation act 1. These amendments are intended to move us forward in the Madrid protocol, in the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks, and in the Nice agreement.

Amendments in BIA 2 would implement the final two international agreements, the Patent Law Treaty and the Hague agreement relating to patents and industrial design. When he talks about the Industrial Design Act, as far as I understand, those are the measures that he is talking about.

Our government understands that reducing red tape, especially for small and medium-sized businesses, is central to Canada's economic growth. Reducing red tape makes certain that our businesses can compete abroad and are not on an uneven playing field. When we recognize these international developments and sign on to them, it helps industry. Signing on to these protocols is part of what this budget implementation act would do, and that is why it is so important that this bill gets passed through the House.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:35 a.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am very curious about his definition of transparency. The bill is 460 pages long and amends dozens of laws, including some that have nothing to do with the budget

For example, not so long ago, the House was studying Bill C-585, which would have left refugees without a dime for months upon their arrival in Canada, which was not very encouraging. Furthermore, debate was cut short. The bill was withdrawn and, even though it has nothing to do with the budget, included in this budget implementation bill. Moreover, debate on the budget, and therefore on the bill, is being limited. Is that transparency? Is that his definition of transparency?

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, these measures are transparent. They have been in the media. The budget was released last February and the budget implementation act was released in October. There has been a month and a half of transparency when members could look at the budget and see what is in this bill.

The member talked about welfare for refugees. I wish that the NDP would stand in the House and recognize that Canada is the most fair and generous country in the world to refugees, and certainly to immigrants. Canadians have no tolerance, however, for those who would abuse the system. When refugees come to this country from refugee camps, for example, we give them as much as we can to give them a good start here in Canada. That very well may mean health care that some of us do not receive, but if they are not genuine refugees but bogus refugees trying to beat the system, we want to be certain that they do not receive better health care services than the average Canadian.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Jay Aspin Conservative Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON

Mr. Speaker, our government has a strong record of standing up for the interests of consumers. Every consumer benefits from our GST cut, and more than 10 million Canadians have opened a tax-free savings account. We believe Canadian consumers also deserve access to credit on fair and transparent terms. That is why we have taken action to protect Canadians who use credit cards by banning unsolicited credit card cheques, requiring clear and simple information, providing timely advance notice of rates and fee changes, and ensuring prepaid cards never expire.

My question is to the Minister of State for Finance. How will this budget help the consumers in my riding of Nipissing—Timiskaming?

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Nipissing—Timiskaming for the question and also for his hard work for his constituents and for the whole northern part of Ontario, whether it be the Ring of Fire or other areas. In caucus and in meeting with him, I know the member has a real passion for his riding and for the industries up there.

The member brought forward a very good point, and that is the point on consumers: consumer conduct, a consumer code, a consumer agenda. That is the brand that this government is very pleased to be under, the brand of looking out for consumers.

While both opposition parties advocate for higher taxes, taxes that are going to affect every consumer and every family and every mom and dad, we are the only party that is standing up for consumers. We want to do that by lowering taxes and by making sure that we can put money back into their pockets.

We have also taken action to improve low-cost bank accounts and expand no-cost banking options for more than seven million Canadians.

As we go forward in the next budget and as we look to this budget implementation bill, Canadians can be assured that we will do all we can to better the plight of consumers, of Canadians, of families, of pensioners, of seniors, and of all those people who keep our economy strong.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

Mr. Speaker, we live in a funny world. In recent years, we have seen lots of trends, including speed dating, as though people needed to date in a hurry. I have the impression that something like “speed parliamentarism” is emerging, because they are trying to sell us all the extraordinary measures that are supposedly in this bill in about 15 minutes and we cannot debate them. That is the purpose of this measure.

The debate should revolve around the reasons why the government is bulldozing the parliamentary system, which gives each member the chance to speak on behalf of his or her constituents on such an important and sizeable bill. Nothing is being said about that. I would like to hear what the government representative has to say about that. What is the basic reason for bulldozing the parliamentary rules for the 83rd time?

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to comment on speed dating. I will leave that up to the New Democratic Party or the Liberal Party.

Let me be very clear that a budget implementation bill allows us to implement the budget. A budget implementation bill is brought forward in two different parts, number one and number two. Canadians understand that this budget implementation bill is part of the plan that the Conservative Party of Canada has been rolling out, calling it the economic action plan.

It is one that the OECD, the IMF, and all countries around the world recognize as being a leader plan. When we go to G7 and G20 countries and encourage other countries to come to up to a level, whether it be in banking or in increasing employment, they look to Canada.

That is why Bloomberg, for example, says that Canada is one of the best places to invest and is the second-best place to start a business. Of all the countries in the world, Canada is where we want to be. That is because we have a Prime Minister like ours, it is because we have a finance minister like ours, and it is because we have a plan like ours. The opposition wants to stall this plan.

Bill C-43—Time Allocation MotionEconomic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2Government Orders

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON

Mr. Speaker, I heard the member opposite talk in the last few days about this extraordinary transparency and how most of the measures in this bill were announced months ago. In fact, a couple of provisions were neither announced months ago nor had any consultation.

On the provisions related to the port authorities, not a single port authority in this country has been consulted, not a single municipality with a port authority in this country has been consulted. When we asked questions at the technical briefing, this was confirmed by staff. Why did the government not consult with anybody before bringing these measures forward?