House of Commons Hansard #100 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was benefit.
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
It sounds like once again members are getting confused as to the sequence. When members are asking the question, members are supposed to be silent and asking their supplementals when the minister is finished answering them. We will try to keep that in mind from now on.
The hon. member for Vancouver Quadra has the floor.
Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
Mr. Speaker, after the Auditor General exposed the Conservatives for completely botching the CF-18 jet replacement, they promised a thorough review of the process. We are now learning that the review has been rigged to select the F-35 jets. So was this a seven-point plan, or a seven-point scam?
The panel's report is not classified, but the government is refusing to release it. Why will the Conservatives not table this report? Why can Canadians not know the truth?
Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, the truth is that it was the Liberals who signed the original documents for the F-35s, and look where that got us. That is why we had to step back and launch a seven-point plan to review the process, so that all of the options could be properly evaluated in a way that was both rigorous and impartial.
That has been done. It has been reviewed by a panel of independent experts to make sure that those terms were met. The ministers are now in the process of reviewing a wide range of reports that they need to make sure we make the right decision in getting the equipment that our forces need to do the job we ask of them.
Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe NDP Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
Mr. Speaker, when the Conservatives announced that Marc Nadon had been appointed to the Supreme Court, Rocco Galati, a Toronto lawyer, immediately challenged the constitutionality of the appointment and managed to have it revoked.
Now Mr. Galati has given notice that he will take the government to court if it cannot prove that its citizenship reform bill is constitutional.
Will the Conservatives avoid making the same mistake twice? Will they listen to Mr. Galati's advice and take their bill to the Supreme Court to ensure that it is constitutional?
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, here is what we do around this place. The government actually introduces bills. They are examined by Parliament. They go to committees. That is one of the fundamental obligations of the elected body in this country. Do bills eventually make their way into law that result in challenges from lawyers around the country? Yes. In fact, they do. However, let us live up to our obligation. Let us do our work. Let us examine bills in committee. Let us not wait for lawyers and courts to step in and do our work for us.
Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe NDP Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Bar Association, UNICEF, the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers, Amnesty International, the Canadian Council for Refugees and many other experts agree that Bill C-24 does not comply with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or international law.
They believe that some parts of the bill are unconstitutional. If the Conservatives really want to improve the Citizenship Act, why are they stubbornly ignoring these experts? Why not amend Bill C-24?
Chris Alexander ConservativeMinister of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Speaker, virtually all Canadians believe that citizenship should be revoked if it was obtained—
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order, please. Members know that they are supposed to wait until the minister is finished answering the question to applaud. I am sure they will be happy to give him their applause when he is finished answering the question, but we should wait until then.
The hon. Minister of Immigration.
Chris Alexander Conservative Ajax—Pickering, ON
Mr. Speaker, if the hon. members do not want to listen to us, then we do not understand why they ask questions.
Canadians are virtually unanimous in accepting that citizenship be revoked when it has been obtained fraudulently, as we already do and have the power to do. It is very popular, under the authority of the Federal Court, that power be expanded to allow citizenship to be revoked when new Canadians have misled us with regard to war crimes that they have committed in the past, or human rights violations that they committed in the past. We consider it completely acceptable that dual nationals should lose their citizenship for treason, for spying, and for terrorism.
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, that is a pretty liberal definition of the word “unanimous”.
The Canadian Bar Association, UNICEF, Amnesty International, and the Canadian Council for Refugees have all raised concerns about this bill. Now the Constitutional Rghts Centre says that it will challenge this in court if the Conservatives let this stand. Will Conservatives stop ramming through a bill that they know is going to be dragged through Canadian courts for years?
Chris Alexander ConservativeMinister of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Speaker, once again, the members opposite are not listening. The power to revoke citizenship already exists for administrative reasons when it has been fraudulently obtained. Under the new act, we would have the power to revoke it when someone has refused to reveal that they have committed crimes, committed human rights abuses, committed war crimes. And yes, Canadians find it entirely acceptable that we should revoke the citizenship of dual nationals for terrorism, spying, or treason.
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, how much bad legislation can one government draft? It seems that for these Conservatives, the sky is the limit.
Let us enumerate: a Supreme Court pick, rejected; the crime bill is overturned; the Senate reform proposal, ruled unconstitutional. And that was just the spring session.
Now the Conservatives are stubbornly forging ahead with another unconstitutional bill. Will the Conservatives listen to Canadians, start respecting Canadians' rights, and withdraw this bill?
Chris Alexander ConservativeMinister of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Speaker, that question speaks to the pitiful quality of opposition criticism and commentary throughout this debate on Bill C-24. We will stand behind a bill if the main opponent to it is the disgraced ideological former lawyer of the Khadr family.
Rob Clarke Conservative Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Mr. Speaker, three RCMP officers were killed, and two others were wounded in Moncton—
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order, please. I am going to ask the member for St. Paul's to come to order. I can hear her voice all the way up here, and I can only imagine what it sounds like on that end of the chamber.
We have moved on to the next question, and the member for Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River has the floor.
Rob Clarke Conservative Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Mr. Speaker, three RCMP officers were killed, and two others were wounded in Moncton. Having personally experienced the loss of two members of the RCMP at Spiritwood detachment, I have seen a community's pain.
This tragic loss has shown the true resiliency of the people of Moncton and New Brunswick. I have seen and heard countless stories of the bravery of ordinary citizens helping one another stay safe, and the incredible courage in the face of imminent danger of front-line police officers from across the region, in apprehending the suspect in the early hours of Friday morning.
As Canada lays these three heroes to rest today, can the parliamentary secretary please update the House on this situation?
Roxanne James ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, I would like to first thank the member for Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River for that question and for his service in the RCMP.
Our thoughts and prayers continue to go out to the family and friends of the three Canadian heroes who lost their lives in Moncton last week.
Today's ceremony, attended by the Governor General, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, is a testament to the good work that the RCMP does to keep Canadians safe right across this country.
On behalf of the government and all Canadians, we expect the individual responsible for these horrific and brutal crimes to be held accountable to the full extent of the law.
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
Mr. Speaker, this is the second time in 15 months that prisoners have managed to escape from a provincial prison in Quebec with the help of a helicopter. After the first incident at the Saint-Jérôme prison, the Government of Quebec asked Transport Canada to impose no-fly zones over Quebec prisons. It seems this request fell on deaf ears.
Can the Minister of Transport confirm that she received that request? Can she tell us whether she will implement the same no-fly zones over provincial prisons as over federal prisons?
Roxanne James ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite knows, this was a provincial jail and certainly was under provincial jurisdiction.
I would like to inform the members of this House, and all Canadians across the country, that Correctional Service Canada officers, under federal jurisdiction, have the tools they need to prevent these types of incidents.
Of course, our government is always ready to assist the Province of Quebec in this matter.
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Mr. Speaker, that is just what we are asking about.
Last year, the Quebec minister of public safety requested a no-fly zone over Quebec prisons. Right now, federal prisons are no-fly zones, but provincial facilities are not. Apparently, he has never even had a response to his request and now, once again, there has been a dangerous prison break using a helicopter from a Quebec institution.
Instead of blaming the provinces for not carrying out their duties, why will the minister not take the initiative, contact the counterpart in Quebec, and implement a no-fly zone over Quebec penitentiaries?
Roxanne James ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, and as I just mentioned to the House, this is a matter under provincial jurisdiction. It was a provincial jail.
Of course, as the member knows, and all Canadians know across this country, under federal penitentiaries and jurisdiction, our officers have the ability to deal with these situations.
Charmaine Borg NDP Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Mr. Speaker, according to the privacy commissioner, 97% of companies collect personal information about their clients. In the digital age, that information can be shared or stolen more easily than ever. Bill S-4 contains some important measures, but also some ill-conceived measures that will allow companies to share information without a warrant and without notifying their clients.
Will the government agree to amend this bill in order to correct these dangerous measures?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, these are effective and responsible measures that we adopted and included in a bill after numerous consultations with the private sector, the wireless sector and consumer advocacy groups. This morning or yesterday, the Senate studied three amendments and adopted one of them. This bill will come to the House. The hon. member and her colleagues will have the opportunity to examine the bill and propose amendments if they want.