Debates of Nov. 23rd, 2016

Ethics

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. opposition House leader knows that we do not use props in here, and tearing up papers is certainly using a prop.

I ask the hon. opposition House leader to finish her question.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would gladly tape this back up, and maybe the Prime Minister will follow his own ethical guidelines.

If the Prime Minister cannot keep himself from selling influence to billionaire Chinese communists, how can Canadians trust any of his ethical standards?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries]

Mr. Speaker, the member obviously is on a fishing trip. What she is trying to do is to stitch together a whole series of things which, when taken together, have absolutely no basis in reality.

One thing I can tell her is that instead of ripping up an artificial piece of paper, one thing we did not do is leave fundraising events in leg irons in a sheriff's van, or be like Peter Penashue and resign in disgrace for not following the fundraising rules.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Order. It definitely is Wednesday. Members are excited.

The hon. member for Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques.

Infrastructure

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when he is not busy calling his detractors stupid, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister sometimes makes sense.

On Twitter, he conceded that there are times when it costs more to do things faster. Eureka! Well done. That is exactly what we have been speaking out against. We want the government to invest in infrastructure as promised. We do not want the privatization of revenue in the form of tolls and user fees.

Will the Liberals scrap their infrastructure privatization bank, or will they keep listening to their friends and Bay Street and Wall Street interests?

[Amarjeet Sohi, Liberal, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Speaker, we have put forward an agenda to invest more than $180 billion in public infrastructure from coast to coast to coast. Only 8% of that infrastructure will be delivered through the bank.

The role of the bank is to build more infrastructure for Canadian communities, not less infrastructure. The vast majority of the communities, municipalities, and provinces are supportive of that plan, and we are proud to deliver it in partnership with them.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the minister asked what the NDP would do to invest in infrastructure. I am happy to tell him.

We would invest public dollars for public infrastructure. This is what the Liberals promised during the campaign, but now they are moving full speed ahead with privatization. We have seen how privatization and P3s cost taxpayers millions, yet the Liberal infrastructure bank is a P3 system on steroids.

Why are the Liberals so intent on a system that will cost more, while imposing tolls and user fees on Canadians?

[Amarjeet Sohi, Liberal, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Speaker, if the member opposite and her party support public dollars for public infrastructure, they will support our budget. That is exactly what we are doing.

We are investing $180 billion of public money into public infrastructure to help communities build public transit, more affordable housing, recreational and cultural facilities, as well as to invest into green infrastructure to reduce the impact of greenhouse gas emissions, and to make our communities more resilient and sustainable.

National Defence

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' decision to sole-source the Super Hornet is very dangerous, and is another broken promise. It is dangerous for taxpayers since there was no price announced yesterday. It is dangerous for Canadian jobs since all F-18s are made in Missouri, and it is dangerous to our air force which will now be flying obsolete fighter jets.

Do the Liberals even have a clue how much a Super Hornet is going to cost Canadian taxpayers, and how many jobs are going to be lost in Canada's aerospace industry?

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Minister of Public Services and Procurement]

Mr. Speaker, what I am very pleased about is our announcement yesterday for an open and transparent competition that will ensure that our men and women in uniform get the equipment they need to do the jobs expected of them.

We are going to make sure that we have a robust, transparent competition that will ensure that Canadians will get jobs from coast to coast to coast, as a result of our determination to do what is right for the men and women in our military.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Liberals announced that they would be taking billions of dollars from Canadians to cover the Prime Minister's backside. The decision to purchase an interim aircraft makes no sense.

According to the commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the current fleet of CF-18s will be operational until 2025, which means there is time to move forward with a competitive process now. The government is still going to purchase the F-18 Super Hornet as an interim aircraft at a cost of $335 million each, the price Kuwait just paid, to fill a gap that does not exist.

How much is this useless acquisition going to cost Canadians?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the previous government decided to risk manage the capability gap. Our government is not willing to take this risk.

We are going to be investing in the Canadian Armed Forces. That is why we are going to have an interim fleet of new aircraft to fill this gap, making sure we can meet all our obligations to NORAD, NATO, and any unforseen situations.

If anybody thinks we are not going to have any unforseen situations, then think about 9/11, when we had to put every single fighter up in the air.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Speaker, they are buying a bunch of flying white elephants.

The Prime Minister is risking Canadian jobs, taxpayers' money, and the well-being of our pilots.

The former head of procurement for National Defence, Alan Williams, said that we do not tell a company we intend on buying its product, and then try to negotiate a price. That is like me walking into a car dealership, telling the salesman that I will buy a car in the showroom, and then try to sit down to negotiate a price.

Everybody knows that is ridiculous. The Liberals have bungled this file completely.

Will the Prime Minister reverse this irresponsible decision and immediately launch a fair competition?

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Minister of Public Services and Procurement]

Mr. Speaker, there is an obligation of government to make sure that the men and women have the equipment they need to do the job expected of them.

That is exactly what we are doing, because of the capability gap the former government did not take care of. We are taking care of that, so we can make sure they are not in harm's way, and that we can fulfill our obligations.

In the meantime, we are having an open and transparent competition, just like we committed to do. We are taking care of our men and women in uniform.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I am afraid I have to remind the hon. members for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman and Abbotsford that once the question is asked, we need to hear the answer and so, they should not be talking.

The hon. member for Beauport—Limoilou.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, our participation in the joint strike fighter program over the past few years has injected more than $1 billion into the Canadian economy and created and maintained thousands of job across the country.

Yesterday the Premier of Manitoba, Mr. Pallister, expressed his concerns about the plan to purchase the Super Hornet, and with good reason, since those aircraft will be built almost entirely in the U.S.

Is that what leadership means to this government, creating jobs outside the country?

Can the Minister of Public Services say otherwise? Has she forgotten her mandate?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, our number one priority is to create good, quality jobs in Canada, and through this initiative, we are going to use the industrial technological benefit initiative to maximize opportunities for Canadian businesses.

This will, of course, help Manitoba, Quebec, Ontario, Atlantic Canada, and British Columbia. From coast to coast to coast, we will see a very strong and vibrant aerospace and defence sector that contributes over 235,000 jobs and $31 billion of economic activity.

That is what we are proud of. We are going to continue to invest in that sector and create good, quality jobs.

Pensions

[Scott Duvall, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, 10 times I stood in the House last week and asked if the government would fix its flawed CPP legislation, Bill C-26. Ten times I received non answers.

Today, I will be introducing my amendment at committee to fix this Liberal flaw that would have serious consequences on the well-being of Canadian women and people living with disabilities.

I have a very simple question for the minister. Will he fix the flaw in the bill by supporting my amendment, yes or no?

[Bill Morneau, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I can tell the House that we were very pleased to enhance the Canada pension plan. We know that improves outcomes for Canadians, all Canadians in future, around Canada pension plan opportunities.

We also recognize that it is particularly good for women, who have less participation in workforce pension plans, and who live longer, so we are indeed sure this is a positive thing for women.

We will continue to advocate for provisions that will make sense for all Canadians, including women, and it is something I will bring up at the meeting with the premiers.

Status of Women

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, is he kidding? How can a feminist government be proud of a bill that penalizes women?

Yesterday, Alberta MLA Sandra Jansen rose in the legislature to read out some of the hateful and misogynistic comments she had received after joining the NDP. We need to ask ourselves why women in politics are targeted with sexually violent language when men are not.

Will the government stand with Sandra Jansen, denounce sexist language in our politics, and work with us to remove misogyny from this House?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Minister of Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, I share the member's disgust at the misogyny that women in politics, in fact in public spheres, receive every single day in the cyber-world, but in the real world as well.

We are working so hard to make sure that we have a comprehensive federal strategy that will address the violence that women are receiving, whether it is in the cyber-world, the real world, or in their personal lives.

I am very proud of this work, and I look forward to working with the member opposite to make sure that we achieve our goal.

Justice

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has instructed the justice minister to gut the laws that punish criminals and protect victims of crime. These are the laws that the previous Conservative government supported.

First, the victims surcharge got chopped, and now mandatory jail times are under threat. Why is it that the Liberals have a problem with a 50-year-old man molesting a 15-year-old girl not being subject to mandatory imprisonment?

What is their problem with that? Let us hear it.

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to speak to this again. To repeat, without question, child sexual assault is absolutely unacceptable.

The Prime Minister has instructed me to do a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system, including sentencing reform. That includes a comprehensive review of mandatory minimum penalties. It is evident, over the last number of years, that mandatory minimum penalties are being challenged by the courts. The necessary discretion for judges needs to be in place.

We are going to move forward with this comprehensive review, and fundamentally ensure that the protection of the rights of Canadians are imbued in the sentencing reforms that we undertake.