House of Commons Hansard #3 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was riding.

Topics

International TradeOral Questions

3 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

The hon. member for Vancouver Centre.

International TradeOral Questions

3 p.m.

Liberal

Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC

Mr. Speaker, this morning, the WTO sided with Canada for the third time on the matter of discriminatory U.S. COOL legislation. The WTO arbitrator has found that the nullification and impairment under COOL costs Canada about a billion dollars a year and costs Mexico about $228 million U.S. annually.

Would the minister tell us how this ruling will affect Canada's pork and beef products.

International TradeOral Questions

3 p.m.

University—Rosedale Ontario

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland LiberalMinister of International Trade

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Vancouver Centre for her question. I am delighted to back in the House with my cherished colleague.

We welcome the WTO ruling. This is a vindication of the Canadian position. We are working very hard in Washington with the Senate and we are very pleased that Congress has already repealed this.

I do want to say to Canada's beef and pork producers that the Minister of Agriculture is a former farmer. I am a daughter and granddaughter of ranchers. We are on the side of Canada's producers. We are in their corner, and if we have to retaliate we will.

Indigenous AffairsOral Questions

3 p.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Mr. Speaker, the new government was not given a blank cheque. Canadians expect due diligence.

On June 2, when the truth and reconciliation report was released, the current Prime Minister pledged his unwavering support for all 94 recommendations, the full list, no exceptions. Could the Minister of Indigenous Affairs give us the full cost of keeping this promise?

Indigenous AffairsOral Questions

3 p.m.

Toronto—St. Paul's Ontario

Liberal

Carolyn Bennett LiberalMinister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo for her question and for the work that we will get to do together on this really important file.

We are so pleased to see that already the provinces and territories have taken up those calls to action that are theirs. The universities in the country have already committed to help with the things that are theirs and that we will be able to do this.

It was inappropriate for us to cherry-pick out of the 94 recommendations. With political will, leadership, and partnership, nation-to-nation, we are going to get this done.

Canada PostOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

NDP

Karine Trudel NDP Jonquière, QC

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign people told us that they wanted to keep the home mail delivery service.

In my region, 50,000 families, including 20,000 in Jonquière, lost their home mail delivery service.

While the minister has reneged on her promises, can she at least confirm that community mailboxes are no longer being installed anywhere in the country?

Canada PostOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Bonavista—Burin—Trinity Newfoundland & Labrador

Liberal

Judy Foote LiberalMinister of Public Services and Procurement

Mr. Speaker, we certainly can commit that there will not be any more roadside mailboxes installed. We have put a stop to that, which means that anyone who did have roadside mailboxes would get their door-to-door mail delivery resumed.

We are in a position where we have committed to home delivery. We are going to have a complete review of Canada Post and they will determine the next steps.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Liberal

Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to stand in this place and again represent the people of the Yukon.

Over the past several months Canadian have made it clear that they not only want a new tone in leadership in Ottawa but they also want a more accountable government. During the election the Prime Minister made a commitment to implement a prime minister's question period. I now ask if the Prime Minister could please update this place on the status of this important promise?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Papineau Québec

Liberal

Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, Canadians voted for change, and we are committed to delivering that change. We are committed to open, honest, transparent government.

I have asked the government House leader to work with other parliamentarians to reform question period so that all ministers, including the Prime Minister, can be held to greater account.

The House leader has already initiated discussions with other parliamentarians in the opposition, and I look forward to participating in Prime Minister's question period some time in the future.

Democratic ReformOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

Mr. Speaker, in the past 15 years, three provinces have held referenda on electoral reform. In all three, voters rejected the proposals, so it seems a bit undemocratic, or even anti-democratic, for the government to assert in the throne speech that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first past the post voting system.

Would it not make more sense for the government, once it has designed a new system, to follow the example of British Columbia, Ontario and Prince Edward Island and allow Canadians to vote directly for or against the proposed new electoral system?

Democratic ReformOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Peterborough—Kawartha Ontario

Liberal

Maryam Monsef LiberalMinister of Democratic Institutions

Mr. Speaker, in this election, Canadians were clear that they were expecting us to deliver a change. This will be the last first past the post federal election in our history.

We have committed to listening to Canadians, not just in British Columbia but coast to coast to coast, and including them in a process and in the conversation that would change the history of this nation's democracy.

HealthOral Questions

December 7th, 2015 / 3:05 p.m.

Bloc

Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

In the Speech from the Throne last week we heard that the Liberal government intends to start working with the provinces and territories on developing a new health accord. During the election, the Prime Minister sent a letter to his counterpart in Quebec that referred to the 2004 10-year plan to strengthen health care, where Quebec had the right to opt out with full compensation.

Will the Prime Minister do what Quebec is asking for and set the health transfer increase at 6%, while respecting Quebec's right to opt out with full compensation?

HealthOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Markham—Stouffville Ontario

Liberal

Jane Philpott LiberalMinister of Health

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to speak about the Canadian health care system which has provided health care to Canadians now for well over half a century in offering universal, publicly insured health care. It is something Canadians hold dear.

On the matter of the Canada Health Act, we sincerely uphold the Canada Health Act and its principles, including universality.

I have already had the wonderful opportunity to speak with my provincial and territorial counterparts, and we will be meeting together in January to discuss a new health accord, which will provide ongoing health care for Canadians in years to come.

HealthOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Bloc

Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

The Quebec National Assembly has legalized doctor-assisted death as part of end-of-life care, in accordance with the express will of a terminally ill person. The Prime Minister even praised Quebec's legislation.

Can the Minister of Health guarantee that the six-month extension the federal government is asking for will not adversely effect the coming into force of Quebec's legislation?

HealthOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Vancouver Granville B.C.

Liberal

Jody Wilson-Raybould LiberalMinister of Justice

Mr. Speaker, the topic of physician-assisted dying is highly complex, sensitive and we need to ensure that we have a real discussion with Canadians that focuses on health care, personal choice and ensures that we protect the vulnerable.

We are committed to working with parliamentarians and asking the House to strike an all-party committee to examine this issue and proceed in a—

HealthOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

The hon. member for Manicouagan.

TaxationOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Bloc

Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister plans to move forward with the new Canada child benefit. The details will be in the next budget. In the meantime, parents are being shortchanged by the universal child care benefit that was introduced this summer and the elimination of the child tax credit.

Will the Prime Minister undertake to make the universal child care benefit a tax-free benefit for 2015, even though he plans to introduce a new benefit in the next budget?

TaxationOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Toronto Centre Ontario

Liberal

Bill Morneau LiberalMinister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, we intend to bring forward a new Canada child benefit in the course of our budget 2016. We believe that this is the appropriate way to get at this issue, and we will do so expeditiously to ensure that Canadian families can do better as they pursue their options for how they want to raise their children.

Notice of MotionWays and MeansRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Toronto Centre Ontario

Liberal

Bill Morneau LiberalMinister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 83(1) I wish to table a notice of a ways and means motion to amend the Income Tax Act. Pursuant to Standing Order 83(2) I ask that an order of the day be designated for consideration of the motion.

Economic and Fiscal UpdateRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Toronto Centre Ontario

Liberal

Bill Morneau LiberalMinister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2) I would like to table, in both official languages, a document entitled “Update of Fiscal and Economic Projections, 2015”. It was released on November 20.

A message from His Excellency the Governor General transmitting supplementary estimates (B) for the financial year ending March 31, 2016, was presented by the President of the Treasury Board and read by the Speaker to the House.

Public Accounts of CanadaRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Kings—Hants Nova Scotia

Liberal

Scott Brison LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour today to table, in both official languages, the Public Accounts of Canada for 2015. The Auditor General of Canada has provided an unqualified audit opinion on the Government of Canada's financial statements.

The government is committed to sound financial management and oversight of taxpayer dollars, and we will continue to strengthen financial reporting to Parliament to ensure accountability and transparency.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Labour RelationsRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Regina—Wascana Saskatchewan

Liberal

Ralph Goodale LiberalMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin this brief statement by first of all congratulating the member for Durham for becoming the official critic for Public Safety, and also the member for Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke for assuming those same responsibilities for the NDP. I look forward to working with both of them in what I expect to be a constructive and cordial relationship.

I am pleased to inform the House that the government is taking action as a result of an important ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada concerning the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Nearly 11 months ago, in January 2015, in a case titled the Mounted Police Association of Ontario vs. Canada Attorney General, the Supreme Court found that certain federal legislation and regulations were unconstitutional in that they prevented the formation of an independent RCMP employee organization for labour relations purposes. As such, according to the Supreme Court, they contravene the “freedom of association” guarantees enshrined in section 2(d) of the Charter of Canadian Rights and Freedoms.

The Court gave Canada 12 months—that is to January 16, 2016—to consider its options and to respond with a charter compliant labour relations framework.

Our government is acting as swiftly as possible to bring the law into compliance with what the Supreme Court said.

My colleague, the President of the Treasury Board, and I are announcing today that the government will introduce a bill early next year in order to create a new labour relations regime for members and reservists of the RCMP.

The proposed legislation would provide members and reservists with both representation and freedom of choice in labour relations matters that are independent of management. These are key requirements of the decision of the Supreme Court.

This past summer, a consultation process sought the views of RCMP regular members through a survey and a number of town hall sessions on the potential elements of a new labour relations framework. The members underlined the importance of having the freedom to choose for themselves who should represent them.

Other matters to be dealt with in the new legislation include binding arbitration as the mandatory dispute resolution process for bargaining purposes, with no right to strike; the requirement that the RCMP bargaining agent has the representation of RCMP members as its primary mandate; a single national bargaining unit for all RCMP regular members and reservists; the exclusion of commissioned officers and a process for the exclusion of other managerial positions from representation; and the preservation of the recourse mechanism in the RCMP act for issues regarding member conduct and discipline.

The bill that we intend to put forward would ensure that RCMP members can exercise their charter-protected right to engage in collective bargaining, by providing a labour relations regime that both complies with the judgment of the Supreme Court and at the same time reflects the policing operational environment of RCMP officers.

It is important to note that the negotiation of collective agreements is a charter right that has been enjoyed by other police officers in Canada for a long time. The government will uphold that right while recognizing the particular circumstances of the RCMP as the national police force.

As is appropriate, we are also consulting with those provinces and territories that have an RCMP police service agreement in place.

In closing, I want to thank the Supreme Court for its ruling and also thank all of the RCMP members who provided advice. The Government of Canada is obviously anxious to move this initiative forward as quickly as it can.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Labour RelationsRoutine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Conservative

Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. minister for his kind words. He is one of the most experienced ministers in the House. I know that he will take on the public safety portfolio with that experience and with forethought, and I will be here to provide wise counsel when necessary.

On my first occasion to rise in this Parliament, I want to thank the good people of Durham for giving me the honour to represent my hometown in Parliament. I am also proud of our RCMP, Canada's police force. I am very proud of the detachment in Bowmanville, Ontario, and the men and women who work hard every day across this great country, those in uniform and in the organizational structure of the RCMP.

Despite the sunny ways, I am sad to say that the minister has failed his first test. With the House returning on January 25, we are going to miss the deadline imposed by the Supreme Court of Canada in its decision. Much like the euthanasia case, if the government had wanted more time, it might have been prudent to seek more time from the Supreme Court of Canada, not just to express an intention, but to table the collective bargaining process outlined in the case. It was twelve months that was directly cited in that decision, and that is what the court expected.

The decision in the Mounted Police Association of Ontario v. Canada dealt with section 2(d) of the charter and highlighted the charter right to collective bargaining. The court said that the government needs to ensure there is a meaningful collective bargaining process, and it outlined in the decision that it must have two parts. The first requirement is that there must be employee choice, and the second requirement is sufficient independence.

Those items, as the minister outlined, were canvassed extensively over the last year with public safety advocates, members of the RCMP, and the various associations that brought forward this court challenge. It was to get into the details of what constitutes employee choice: the right to say who their representatives are, and the right to have some say on the prioritization of one's association. The independence is the freedom to then make sure that the bargaining unit representative is sufficiently free from management—in this case, the department—to allow the collective bargaining process to take root appropriately.

I had hoped that the government would have tabled this new process in the House today because the Supreme Court gave the government a lot of leeway with respect to its decision. In paragraph 140 of the decision, it in fact gave Parliament “much leeway” to set up a collective bargaining process that meets the spirit and intent of its decision. It also said that the government was not forced to choose the Public Service Labour Relations Act, or any specific bargaining model. As long as the two elements of choice and sufficient independence were met, the government was free to set up a process that fit with the unique nature of a public safety arm like the RCMP.

It also noted that it did not need to be adversarial. It did not need to be the traditional union construct that is covered in the Wagner policies and others. In fact, the court highlighted and suggested the designated bargaining model as a possible option that the government could consider. It said clearly that there had to be a system in place to show that the government could not substantially interfere with the right established in section 2(d) of the charter to have a collective bargaining process for members of the RCMP.

I thank the minister for addressing the timeline that is looming when the House will not be sitting. I sincerely hope that by the time the House gets back, the hon. minister has asked the Supreme Court for additional time so that we do not have a technical breach of its decision, and that it certainly has an intention to table this new collective bargaining process in legislation in the House early in 2016.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Labour RelationsRoutine Proceedings

3:25 p.m.

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC

Mr. Speaker, I will start my response by thanking the Minister of Public Safety for the advance notice that I received of his statement, a practice which bodes well for future co-operation in this Parliament. I also want to congratulate the minister on his re-election, which I believe is the eighth time he has been re-elected to this House, and also on his appointment as the public safety minister.

As this is the first time I have risen in the House in the 42nd Parliament, I would also like to take the opportunity to express my gratitude to the voters of Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke for returning me for a second term in the House.

New Democrats look forward to this promised legislation, which will be implementing the Supreme Court decision from January 2015 in the case of the Mounted Police Association of Ontario v. Canada. This is the decision which recognized that the members of the RCMP have the same rights to collective bargaining as all other Canadians, and indeed as all other police services already enjoy in this country.

Of course, introducing this legislation in the new year will miss the January 16 deadline from the Supreme Court of Canada. However, given the attitudes of the previous government on public sector labour relations, I guess we should all be grateful that it failed to act in a timely manner. It is a bit rich for Conservative members to stand and say that the government is going to miss the deadline when they spent nearly a year trying to reinvent the wheel in collective bargaining.

However, despite the welcome notice of this legislation, there are two concerns that remain.

The first concern is that we hope this new government will take the time to fully consult with the Mounted Police Association on its very specific proposals. No matter what has happened under the previous government, I think there is a need for new and fresh consultations on whatever the government will be putting forward.

Second, as with all legislation, the devil is in the details. We will be watching closely to make sure that this new government does not try to impose undue restrictions on the collective bargaining rights of members of the RCMP. As I said earlier, all other police forces at the provincial level already have collective bargaining in place. I would hate to see a regime that gives fewer rights to RCMP members that are already enjoyed quite successfully by other police forces.

The strong and effective representation of workers that is created in a unionized workplace should help the RCMP address critical workplace challenges, like harassment in the workplace and the critical ravages of PTSD on our first responders. When we have independent representatives of the RCMP, they will be able to speak up on both the problems that exist and the solutions we need to address those two urgent issues.

We look forward to this legislation, which can only help make the RCMP more effective in keeping all of us safe.

I will conclude by wishing good luck to the new recruits who have begun their training this fall at Depot, in Regina, while we were all otherwise occupied. That includes one of our family friends, Nick Brame. I will give a shout-out to our former dog sitter who has given us up to join the RCMP.

As I said, New Democrats look forward to this new legislation, as a contribution to the long and successful careers of the public service and for these new recruits to the RCMP.