House of Commons Hansard #94 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was hiring.
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I know that the NDP leader thinks that everything is a plot, but the candidate for this position is a public servant with 30 years of experience and an expert in his field. He comes highly recommended.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, apparently the only people who do not see that this is an obvious conflict of interest are the Prime Minister and the leader of the Liberal Party.
The code of ethics of the Barreau du Québec indicates that, to avoid conflicts of interest, lawyers must “take such reasonable measures as are required to ensure that confidential information or documents pertaining to the file are not revealed”.
However, the Prime Minister's candidate was the government's lawyer in this case. He is party to confidential information on his government's major spying programs.
How can the privacy commissioner do his work if he is involved in all of these files? It is a conflict of interest.
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the individual in question has worked on many files for the federal government for 30 years. He is recognized as an expert and he is quite capable of testifying about his expertise before the committee.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, Colonel Sanders is a nice guy too, but one would not put him in charge of the henhouse.
It is the privacy commissioner's job to ask the government for details of its surveillance and data-gathering programs and determine whether those programs violate the private lives of Canadians. However, this commissioner would have the legal obligation under his code of ethics to conceal information even from his own staff about spying programs he helped create, because he was acting as the attorney for the government at the time.
Are the Prime Minister and his pal, the Liberal Party leader, really the only two people in Canada who do not understand this obvious conflict of interest?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, once again, we know well, and see a demonstration again today, of the highly ideological, conspiracy-based theories of the NDP leader.
As I said, the individual in question is an expert in this field. He has spent 30 years as a distinguished public servant. He is fully able to understand both his role in the past as a public servant and his future role as privacy commissioner and would execute his responsibilities accordingly, and he will be able to explain that before committee.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, the highly personal medical data of people like Ellen Richardson were shared with the American government through the program this man put in place.
Ms. Richardson was at the airport and was headed on a cruise. A second later, an American border guard denied her access after reading her medical record, which was provided by the Government of Canada.
Does the Prime Minister realize that this is a serious violation of Canadians' privacy? Does he understand that Canadians are worried about this individual's appointment?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the NDP believes that someone who worked for the federal government is incapable of being privacy commissioner. That ideological position is ridiculous. Mr. Therrien is an expert. He is quite capable of explaining his expertise to the committee.
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
Mr. Speaker, last week the employment minister expressed “limited interest” when Alberta's labour minister proposed that his province monitor the temporary foreign worker program to make sure that such workers were not being abused.
Since the government is doing nothing at the federal level, with zero employers blacklisted for employee abuse, why does the Prime Minister not gleefully accept such offers from Alberta and other provinces in their own areas of jurisdiction? Does he not care about worker abuse?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, of course there are responsibilities in this regard for both levels of government, but once again, the position of the Liberal Party on this matter is completely bizarre. When the government brought in reforms precisely to ensure compliance and create employer blacklists, the Liberal Party opposed those measures.
We know the Liberal Party has a very different philosophy. It sought the long-term expansion of this program. Under the reforms that we brought in, the numbers have been coming down and will continue to come down in the future.
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
Mr. Speaker, as usual, that is a total manufacturing of history on the Liberal Party.
The Prime Minister can talk all he wants about new powers and jail time under the temporary foreign worker program, but none of this matters if he does not use any of these powers. Since not one employer is on his blacklist for employer abuse, I repeat, not one, no one is risking a penny in fines or a day in jail.
Will he finally do something serious and accept last week's Liberal motion on true enforcement of this program?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, in a number of well-known cases, the government has taken the force of an action and, as we know, has imposed a moratorium on a portion of the program pending further action.
However, once again, on one day the Liberal Party is demanding that fewer numbers be admitted under the program and on the next day Liberal members of Parliament are going to the minister of employment demanding that he overturn decisions and admit more temporary foreign workers.
Our position is clear. We are committed to making sure that if Canadians are available, Canadians always get the available jobs.
Marc Garneau Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, over 40,000 families and individuals are on the waiting list for affordable housing in Quebec. Subsidies available through federal agreements on social housing are coming to an end, and the future of one-third of these units is uncertain.
The Liberal Party of Canada is committed to ensuring that our communities receive predictable, stable long-term funding. Can the government say the same?
Will the government commit to coming up with a long-term housing plan together with the municipalities and the Government of Quebec?
Candice Bergen ConservativeMinister of State (Social Development)
Mr. Speaker, in typical Liberal fashion, the member has forgotten what his party did. Liberals actually ended the agreements on social housing back in the 1990s.
What we have done in response is renew our investment in affordable housing right across the country. We also have done something to address the issue of homelessness. The Liberals do not like the idea of Housing First, which is an evidence-based proven model. That member has spoken out against evidence-based initiatives to help those who are homeless and those who are struggling with affordable housing.
We will not follow the Liberal example when it comes to helping individuals with housing.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, there are reports from Brussels today that the Canada-Europe trade talks have stalled yet again. One official said, “It was premature...to announce a deal. There is a sense of embarrassment in many quarters”.
An embarrassment. Is the Prime Minister the least bit embarrassed that he has botched a trade deal with the world's largest economy?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, it is an interesting question from a party that does not even know whether it supports the trade deal. The Canada-European Union trade deal we have announced is obviously the biggest trade deal in Canadian history. Technical negotiations will be completed very soon, and I look forward to seeing if there is any trade deal on the face of the earth that the ideologues over there can possibly support.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, we would never announce a trade deal that is yet to be negotiated. Unlike the Liberal leader, we would never stand and applaud a trade deal we have never read.
We all remember when the Prime Minister flew off to Europe right in the middle of the Senate scandal, hoping to use the new agreement to draw attention away from corruption within his party. We all suspected the announcement was rushed for political reasons, and now we know.
Why did the Prime Minister sign the agreement before it was even close to being finalized?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, another question, another conspiracy.
The NDP says that it has not had an opportunity to read the trade deal. As we know, every major organization in the country has endorsed the deal. I would be happy, after question period, if the leader of the NDP has not seen any of the documents, to send them over to him so he can finally read them.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
What deal, Mr. Speaker?
The Obama administration is introducing new regulations—
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order, please. The hon. Leader of the Opposition now has the floor and I would like to hear him.
The hon. Leader of the Opposition.
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Obama administration is introducing new regulations to reduce the main source of pollution responsible for climate change: coal-fired power plants.
In Canada, the Conservatives have postponed imposing new regulations on the oil and gas industry time and again.
Three months ago, the Conservatives promised a climate change plan for the oil and gas sector by mid-year. It is now June.
Will the Conservatives follow the American lead, yes or no?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, we welcomed the announcement by the Obama administration about greenhouse gas reductions for power plants.
However, the fact is, once again to correct the leader of the NDP, that we actually announced the regulation of this sector two years ago. Not only have we already been acting but, under the regulations this government has already brought forward, we will have 150% larger reductions than those in the United States.
We are acting sooner, we are acting bigger, and I would ask the Leader of the Opposition to look at the facts rather than his conspiracy theories.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, economist Andrew Leach says that failure by the Conservatives to take action as the U.S. moves ahead is in fact threatening Canada's economy, “...this will make it harder to sell oil sands products. Profitability and tax revenues will take a hit one way or the other”.
When even the oil and gas industry is calling for clear rules, what will it take for the Prime Minister to finally act?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the NDP praises the action today of the Obama administration, acting two years after this government acted and taking actions that do not go nearly as far as this government went.
The Leader of the Opposition today has shown he is unaware of the Canada-Europe free trade agreement, unaware of the government's GHG emissions reduction for the electricity sector, and thinks somehow that 30-year serving public servants are part of a vast right-wing conspiracy. That is why the NDP is going nowhere.
Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, we need to take action on our largest emitter, and the only thing growing faster than our emissions is the number of climate change deniers around the cabinet table.
The Conservatives have said for years that we need to wait for the U.S. to take leadership. Here is the leadership. Obama is taking action, and yet still we wait for the Conservatives to introduce their long-delayed oil and gas regulations.
Last week at committee, the Minister of the Environment said she that did not know when they would be coming out. Could someone over there, anyone, tell us when these regulations will be tabled?
Leona Aglukkaq ConservativeMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, we welcome the move on the part of the United States. We took action on this two years ago, which means our regulations will come into effect earlier than in the United States. We also estimate we will achieve a 46% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in this sector by 2030, compared to 30% in the United States.
We should also note that we have the cleanest electricity system in the world, with 77% of our electricity supply emitting no greenhouse gas, compared to in the United States which is at 33%.