House of Commons Hansard #70 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was infrastructure.

Topics

InfrastructureOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

Order, please.

The hon. Minister of Infrastructure, Communities and Intergovernmental Affairs and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec.

InfrastructureOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Conservative

Denis Lebel Conservative Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, QC

Mr. Speaker, the money is already available. We will renew the gas tax fund with municipalities and provinces all across the country. That is more than $2 billion a year. That is $32 billion for 10 years only for municipalities. They will receive 71% of all that plan of $53 billion.

I would invite them to vote for this plan, because it is the best plan we have ever had.

InfrastructureOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Liberal

David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are now facing Conservative cuts of 87% to infrastructure funds. The City of Ottawa desperately needs about $65 million in federal funds to upgrade its sewage system. Without this investment, sewage will flow into the Ottawa River every time there is a significant amount of rainfall. Can the minister explain to the 1.4 million residents affected why he is compromising job creation and putting our environment at risk?

InfrastructureOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean Québec

Conservative

Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Infrastructure

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's statements are false. It is not true that the amount allocated for all types of projects undertaken by Canadian municipalities is being reduced. That is false.

Municipalities across Canada are eligible for even more money than before with the renewal of the gas tax and the GST credit. This will total more than $32 billion, and 71% of the plan funds will go to municipalities. His information is wrong.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, the President of the Treasury Board recently referred to former auditor general Sheila Fraser as “a self-proclaimed expert” on elections law. He went on to suggest that Ms. Fraser was somehow biased because of her work with Elections Canada.

Does the Minister of State for Democratic Reform agree with the President of the Treasury Board in his attacks on her, and does he think Sheila Fraser is somehow biased?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, for the third time today, the NDP is misquoting members of the government.

It is very interesting that suddenly Elections Canada is questioning the independence of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Let me quote from the Commissioner of Canada Elections:

Since the creation of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada in 2006, when the Director of Public Prosecutions Act came into force, the DPP acts as an independent prosecution authority....

Those are Elections Canada's own words from its annual report in 2012-2013. For them now to question the independence of that office really does raise new questions about Elections Canada.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, the quote from the President of the Treasury Board was “self-proclaimed expert”. It seems that the only thing the minister is really successful at is undermining the faith of the public in our voting system.

Sheila Fraser pointed out that the government has been suggesting that officers of Parliament are biased against the government and cannot be trusted.

Why are the Conservatives attacking officers of this Parliament?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, what the NDP should understand is that the CEO of Elections Canada, as an officer of Parliament, serves the democratically elected Parliament and not the other way around. That is the way our system works. That is the way it should work in a democracy.

We will consider the advice of officers of Parliament. At the end of the day, they provide advice but Parliament decides because that is the institution from which a democratic mandate emanates.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe NDP Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

Mr. Speaker, the former auditor general of Canada said this past weekend, “I find some of the insinuations and comments that have been made about the Chief Electoral Officer have been, quite frankly, inappropriate”.

Will the Minister of State for Democratic Reform continue to undermine the credibility of all those opposed to his reform, or will he recognize that the Conservatives' repeated attacks on Elections Canada are completely inappropriate?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, Elections Canada has the right to author recommendations. It does not have the right to author the law. Laws are made by democratically elected legislatures like this one.

Obviously, at the end of the day, I have been long aware of the CEO's positions on all of these issues. I just happen to disagree with them.

I brought forward a fair elections act founded on common sense, which would require people to bring ID when they vote, which would require those who make mass calls to register them so they are compliant with the law, and which would render the investigator of elections law independent.

These are common sense and reasonable changes. We are proud to move forward with them.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe NDP Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

Mr. Speaker, Sheila Fraser believes that the electoral reform bill would limit the powers of the Chief Electoral Officer to hire the staff needed to hold elections.

Under Bill C-23, the government will have to give its approval before election staff are hired. This is another impediment to Elections Canada's independence that the Conservatives have slyly imposed.

Does the minister feel that the former auditor general's criticism is valid or will he continue to reject constructive criticism?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, I think the member is referring to the issue of the central poll supervisors, which an all-party committee here recommended be appointed on the recommendation of the first place party in each constituency across the country. That is the same way that the deputy returning officers have long been appointed at a local level in every riding in the country.

Elections Canada would continue to have the ability to reject any recommendations that are not acceptable, but at the same time, we think this is a fair and democratic part of our system that the various parties—all parties—have the power to recommend officials who work in the election apparatus on election day.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Ève Péclet NDP La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Mr. Speaker, let us continue with our constructive criticism while the Minister of State for Democratic Reform pretends that everything is just fine.

Sheila Fraser fears that the Chief Electoral Officer will no longer be consulted regarding the appointment of the commissioner and that no one who has ever worked at Elections Canada will be able to apply.

Does the minister agree with Ms. Fraser that this is a serious problem?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, I would state, without any reluctance, that the CEO should not be consulted on future appointments of the Commissioner of Canada Elections, because that commissioner is responsible for investigating all of the offences in the act, of which 34 apply to the office and the function of the CEO.

How is it possible that we would have Elections Canada recommending the investigator to, potentially, one day, investigate Elections Canada?

What we have made clear is that the future investigator should not be a member of a political party and he or she should not have worked with Elections Canada. That is independence.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Ève Péclet NDP La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Mr. Speaker, although the Minister of State for Democratic Reform does not appear interested in listening to the criticisms of those who know more than him about elections, I still have a faint hope that he will eventually listen to what our seniors have to say.

Disrespecting experts is one thing, but I doubt the minister would do the same thing to our seniors.

Given that 80% of the seniors surveyed oppose the electoral “deform” and say that it will undermine democracy, will the minister admit that he has to start from scratch?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, I think the member is referring to the issue of our proposal that people bring ID when they vote. I think that is very reasonable. These are the ID that will be allowed: the social insurance card number, old age security card, and old age security correspondence from the government. For example seniors residences will be allowed to write letters of attestation as to the identity and the residency of the voter. There are 39 different ways that people can identify themselves currently, and that will not change under the fair elections act.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

NDP

Chris Charlton NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives once praised Sheila Fraser. Now they target her for payback. The Conservatives have become everything that they used to hate.

This weekend, Sheila Fraser said: “I think it will be very troubling if we see a lot people being turned away at the polls. [...] I think it will start to call into question the credibility of that election”.

Why are the Conservatives stubbornly ignoring warnings from so many independent experts?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, of the 39 forms of ID that are permitted and will continue to be permitted under the fair elections act, I will give some examples of the 13 that include the addresses of Canadians. There are utility bills, which could be telephone, TV, public utilities commissions, hydro, gas; bank and credit card statements; vehicle ownership; attestation from an authority of a first nation; a government cheque, like an OAS cheque or employment insurance; a pension plan statement; residential lease or mortgage statement; income and property assessment notice; insurance policy. I see I am running out of time.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

NDP

Chris Charlton NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON

Mr. Speaker, the next round of criticism is coming from just behind him, as even Conservative MPs are demanding that the minister amend his unfair elections act. It is not only experts who are concerned. Leading seniors advocacy group, CARP, polled its members and found that 80% disapprove of the minister's unfair elections act changes. Four out of five say that the bill diminishes our democracy.

Canadian seniors understand how precious our right to vote is. Why will the minister not listen to them and withdraw the bill?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, on the one hand the NDP believes that people should vote without bringing any ID at all. On the other, it believes that seniors and stay-at-home moms who volunteer in local campaign offices should have to fill out a bunch of paperwork for a national telecommunications regulator. Its position is completely unreasonable.

On this side of the House of Commons, we believe in bringing in tougher penalties for election fraud, requiring people to bring ID when they cast their ballot, and imposing a registration requirement on those who make mass calls. These are reasoned, fair-minded changes, and we are moving forward with them.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

NDP

Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, the minister has clearly lost sight of what the elections act is supposed to be about. The Supreme Court has made it crystal clear that the overarching purpose of the elections act is to safeguard people's constitutional right to vote. However, according to a person who has a name, Sheila Fraser, “this bill would appear to be making it more difficult” for some people to vote. Will the minister now withdraw the bill and reintroduce one that actually protects people's right to vote, and also, by the way, that goes after real electoral fraud?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, the fair elections act does protect people's right to vote. It provides 39 different ways to identify oneself, in addition to which it requires that Elections Canada inform people of the ID requirements so that people know what ID to bring with them when they show up to vote. It also gives an extra day on which people can cast their ballots before election day, making it easier for people who might have difficulty getting out on the actual day. Also, it will improve the information that Canadians have about the basics of voting: where, when, and what ID to bring.

Agriculture and Agri-FoodOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, about grain transportation, all parties are trying to deal quickly with Bill C-30. The deadline for filing amendments was last Friday. Because of that timing, some key stakeholders had no chance to submit their views, including the Province of Saskatchewan.

We have all just received a letter from provincial minister Lyle Stewart. Will the government accept his request that emergency legislation not be sunsetted in 2016, but kept in place until the CTA review is done and permanent legislation is enacted? That is sensible. Will the government agree?

Agriculture and Agri-FoodOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Glengarry—Prescott—Russell Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Lemieux ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture

Mr. Speaker, this government has shown real leadership in putting in front of Parliament, Bill C-30. We had witnesses come in front of committee; we held extensive meetings all last week, and we have received written inputs as well. Tonight we will be doing clause-by-clause, and the committee will be doing its work. I ask the member to let the committee do its work.

Citizenship and ImmigrationOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Mr. Speaker, for a few days now, I have been asking all the witnesses at the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration about the language testing for sponsoring spouses. All the witnesses agree that the language tests will do nothing to help protect women from violence.

Can the minister therefore now confirm that he will not impose any criteria based on language, income or education for the sponsorship of spouses?