House of Commons Hansard #174 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was terrorism.
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the bill, as I just outlined, does absolutely no such thing, not even remotely. This is, in fact, the attempt of the NDP to always say that anything that is in defence of our security somehow undermines our freedoms. That is simply not true.
All we are seeing here is that as the NDP's positions on this issue become more and more irrelevant, more and more unconnected to Canadians' real concerns, their statements on the issue become more and more extreme.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Of course, Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister uses the word “extreme” to define the opposition, and then he denies that this is about political opportunism, everybody can see right through it.
CSIS already has a mandate to investigate security threats and potential attacks of any kind against Canada.
The Prime Minister's bill would expand its mandate, but to what? What activities? He is not able to give Canadians a single example.
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the bill is very specific. The Leader of the Opposition says that the bill changes nothing, but it is excellent. It only makes sense to ensure that all of our police forces and security agencies have the power to deal with security threats and terrorism and share information. That is common sense, and that is why the vast majority of Canadians support this bill.
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, last night I spoke with Mohamed Fahmy, and today I have two questions.
First, will the Prime Minister pick up the phone and call President el-Sisi to personally ask for Mr. Fahmy to be returned to Canada?
Further, will the Government of Canada make a formal submission at trial requesting his immediate deportation?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, although Mr. Fahmy has been released on bail, the government remains very concerned about this case and about the process in question. We have expressed those concerns to the government of Egypt at all levels and we will continue to do so until we get a resolution of this that is satisfactory.
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, the government has a responsibility to educate Canadians about matters of public health, but yesterday the health minister simply pointed fingers at parents for not vaccinating children.
Instead of blaming parents, will the Prime Minister cancel his wasteful partisan ads and start a national education campaign on the importance of vaccinating our kids?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, there is a bit of a shuffle over there, because yesterday, the leader of the Liberal Party accused the government of having cut vaccination campaigns and vaccination funding. I checked on those numbers overnight and saw that there has been no reduction whatsoever. In fact, this government has not only continued doing what we have always done domestically, we are also involved in unprecedented programs internationally promoting vaccination.
The Minister of Health has made this very clear, and I would encourage all members of the House to indicate to Canadians that medical science is absolutely clear that vaccinations are good and children should be protected.
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
There has been a 23% cut since 2006, Mr. Speaker.
The Supreme Court has given the government just one year to draft legislation on physician-assisted death. Parliamentarians must be able to hear from Canadians and experts and hold a respectful, responsible discussion on this important issue.
Will the Prime Minister start this process in the coming weeks, or will he force Canadians to wait until after the next election?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, this is obviously a sensitive topic for many Canadians, and there are strong opinions on both sides. We will examine this decision and hold broad consultations on all aspects of this difficult issue.
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
Mr. Speaker, everyone here agrees that we have to do everything in our power to keep Canadians safe. However, we cannot do that at the expense of our identity, our values or our way of life. We should not have to choose between our safety and our rights and freedoms.
Why are the Conservatives acting as though we must choose between our freedom and our safety?
Steven Blaney ConservativeMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, it is very clear that freedom cannot exist without safety. Unfortunately, the NDP does not seem to have gone to the trouble of reading past page 3 of the bill. The bill includes provisions to ensure that anyone who engages in crime or terrorism will be prosecuted.
I would like to remind my colleague that safety and freedom go hand in hand and that our police forces and our intelligence agencies exist to protect our freedom and our democracy.
Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC
Mr. Speaker, frankly, it is very clear that Bill C-51 is a direct attack on our freedom and that it will quite simply not work. This bill goes way too far, period.
The government is getting rid of measures that work and that are already reducing the threat of terrorism. What is it replacing them with? With a bill that undermines our rights and freedoms.
Why are the Conservatives refusing to use common sense and include logical, necessary measures, such as increased oversight of CSIS and an anti-radicalization strategy?
Steven Blaney ConservativeMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, the New Democrats are blowing things out of proportion, which comes as no surprise to anyone because they never support measures to protect Canadians from the terrorist threat. The bill before us contains concrete measures to prevent terrorism. For example, it enables intelligence services to talk to parents whose child could fall prey to radicalization and to shut down websites that engage in terrorist or jihadist propaganda. Clearly, there are some very good reasons.
Once again, I am looking forward to the speeches for more on this excellent measure.
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Mr. Speaker, the issue of countering terrorism in Canada and doing what is necessary to protect Canadians while preserving our rights and freedoms is a profoundly serious debate. Canadians expect that all parliamentarians will do their jobs and stand up against any legislation that would erode our Canadian way of life. It is imperative that the government allow for an open and meaningful debate on Bill C-51. We cannot afford to allow this sweeping legislation to be rushed through the House.
Would the minister commit now to not railroading Bill C-51 through the House?
Steven Blaney ConservativeMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, I think there is a misunderstanding among the opposition. Those who are threatening our way of life, those who are threatening this very Parliament, and who have indeed done so, the terrorists, are why we need to table a sound, reasonable, well-balanced approach to tackle the terrorist threat. That is the first duty of our government. I am more than happy to open the debate right after question period so we can debate this issue and get the bill through so we can protect Canadians.
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Mr. Speaker, I did not hear a commitment to full debate. All I heard was a reference to starting the debate. This is not the kind of approach that Canadians expect from their government on this serious issue.
The Conservatives have put forward legislation that would simply go too far, a bill so vague that the minister cannot even explain its key provisions. Bill C-51 must be changed to remove the threat it would pose to our rights and freedoms.
Would the government commit to listening to Canadians and hearing from experts at committee, and then change its bill to strengthen oversight and to protect Canadian freedoms?
Steven Blaney ConservativeMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, two years ago we introduced the Combating Terrorism Act. We wanted to protect Canadians against terrorists. What did the NDP do? They opposed it.
We wanted to remove citizenship from those convicted of terrorism. Once again, regarding dual citizenship, the NDP opposed it.
It is not surprising that they oppose this common-sense and reasonable bill, because they seem to be ideologically opposed to any measure that would protect Canadians.
We are open for debate but, more importantly, Canadians are expecting us to take measures to keep them safe.
Anne Minh-Thu Quach NDP Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC
Mr. Speaker, the retail sector is going through a major crisis, and this is symptomatic of the general state of the economy.
Like Target, Mexx, Jacob and Smart Set, now Bikini Village is going out of business, and another 400 jobs will be lost. In my riding, merchants in Salaberry-de-Valleyfield are worried. Downtown businesses are disappearing one by one. In Ormstown, many other merchants are afraid of being pushed out.
The Conservative government is helping the richest 15%, but where is the plan to help SMEs and create jobs for the middle class?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, of course it is crucial to have a plan, a policy and budgets in place to protect and promote job creation across Canada. That is why, in last year's budget, we cut taxes to ensure we have an approach that will guarantee and create jobs.
Today we have the best employment numbers out of all G7 countries. We will certainly have new plans and policies in this year's budget to ensure Canada's future prosperity.
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the new so-called jobs minister had no answer for unemployed Canadians who cannot get EI benefits. Maybe he does not realize just how big the problem has grown under the current government's watch. We have lost more than 400,000 good manufacturing jobs under the Conservatives so far, and too many of them in my region.
The NDP has a plan to boost innovation in manufacturing and to create good jobs.
Why are the Conservatives turning their backs on southwestern Ontario?
Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, the only plan the NDP has is to raise job-killing taxes on workers and the businesses that employ them.
On the question of EI, the majority of eligible applicants receive their benefits within 28 days. However, the New Democrats are trying to distract from their irresponsible 45-day work-year plan, which would cost Canadian taxpayers $4 billion in job-killing payroll taxes.
On this side of the House, we will reduce taxes to create more jobs.
Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON
Mr. Speaker, unemployment is up by 200,000 since before the recession, and somehow the minister thinks he is doing a good job.
The fact is we have seen so many plant closures on the Conservatives' watch that the sector cannot even take advantage now that we have a lower dollar. In order to help manufacturers compete and create jobs, we need to support investments in equipment and innovation, which is exactly what the NDP plan would do.
Why do the Conservatives refuse to support good middle-class jobs for Canadians?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, Jason Myers, the president of the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, says the NDP plan is, to put it bluntly, a joke. He says that the NDP plan would result in higher taxes and would erode investment and put Canadian jobs at risk.
The New Democrats pretend to be in favour of lower taxes, but we actually lowered taxes and they voted against it. The Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters understand that, which is why they have supported our budget. They also recognize that the ideas of the NDP have failed everywhere they have been tried. The public understands that and knows that our government is the only government that is on the side of manufacturers.
Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are letting tax cheats of the hook and are doing nothing to help middle-class Canadians.
The media report that a single bank, the HSBC, has helped as many as 1,800 Canadians avoid paying their taxes. However, while the Swiss and American authorities are going after HSBC for money laundering and fraud, the current Conservative government does nothing but make excuses.
Billions of dollars are being lost every year to tax-evasion schemes, while the current government guts the Canada Revenue Agency. When will the minister start really going after tax cheats?
Kerry-Lynne Findlay ConservativeMinister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, this government has zero tolerance for tax evasion. Since 2006, the CRA has audited over 8,600 international tax cases, identified over $5.6 billion in additional taxes being collected, and we have not reduced our audit forces.
Regarding HSBC, the CRA has conducted hundreds of audits, leading to over $21 million in taxes and penalties being reassessed. Further, CRA has received over 250 voluntary disclosures relating to Canadians with an HSBC account. That represents another $123 million.