Debates of Nov. 29th, 2016

Foreign Investment

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, this particular file is under review under the Investment Canada Act. With regard to the Investment Canada Act, these are done on a case-by-case basis. Overall, our objective is very clear. We are going to do what is the net benefit for Canada. We are going to make sure we advance our national interest. When we make a decision, we will make that public.

Status of Women

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, during the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, we are reminded that gender-based violence is far too common in Canada. We are also reminded of the importance that shelters can play in the lives of women experiencing violence.

Could the Minister of Status of Women please inform the House what the government is doing to ensure women have a safe place to turn?

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

Mr. Speaker, we know that when women and girls are facing violence, they deserve a safe place to turn. That is why we are investing nearly $90 million to build or renovate over 3,000 spaces over the next two years. It is why I announced last week $1 million in funding for the Canadian Network of Women's Shelters & Transition Houses to collect better data and provide better services. It is also why we are currently building a federal strategy to end gender-based violence.

Our government is working to ensure that women and girls can reach their full potential.

National Defence

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

Mr. Speaker, Royal Canadian Air Force commander General Hood confirmed yesterday that the Liberals unilaterally changed the number of jets the air force needed. When asked why, he said, “I'm not privy to the decisions behind the policy change”.

On a decision of this magnitude, why is the Minister of National Defence not consulting the commander of the air force? Why is the minister playing politics with our military?

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

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite should not take the words out of context.

Our NORAD and NATO obligations have not changed. The only thing that has changed is that our government is not willing to risk manage our commitments. We are going to make sure that we have all of the necessary capabilities, all of the necessary aircraft to be able to fill all of these obligations. This is the only thing that has changed. It was the policy of the previous government to risk manage those obligations.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals did not consult with the air force. They made this decision entirely in isolation, and this was politically driven by the PMO. They put a lifetime gag order on over 230 federal employees to cover up this political interference.

Will the minister confirm that General Hood was pushed to the sidelines, while the minister forced his politically driven decision on our air force?

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

Mr. Speaker, the only thing that has changed right now is that we are going to make sure our Canadian Armed Forces have the right tools to fulfill all of the work. A lot of work has been done. Our obligation to NORAD and NATO, and any unforeseen circumstance is extremely important.

We are not going to be asking our air force to risk manage our obligations. We are going to make sure we have all the right tools, and that is what we are going to be providing.

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

Mr. Speaker, we learned yesterday, not a month ago, of the source of the capability gap that is affecting the Royal Canadian Air Force. General Hood confirmed that it was the Liberal government that created the deficit. The Liberals increased the number of jets that the Royal Canadian Air Force must have available at all times.

Thus, it is not a matter of national security, but rather a political decision meant to justify the Liberals' desire to purchase the outdated Super Hornet immediately.

Can the minister tell us when and why the requirements changed?

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

Mr. Speaker, let us make it very clear in terms of math here. We have a NORAD obligation that has not changed from the previous government to now. We have a NATO obligation as well. When we combine the two, right now we do not have enough operational aircraft to meet both commitments simultaneously, let alone any unforeseen things.

This is the policy that has changed, that we will not risk manage this gap. We are going to make sure we have enough aircraft to do this. That is what our announcement was about last week.

Public Services and Procurement

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

Mr. Speaker, one of the duties of the Minister of Public Services and Procurement is to ensure, first, that government contracts are financially viable; second, that they are in line with the priorities and interests of the federation; and third, that they are executed with broad benefits to Canadians and our businesses.

We are currently missing important salient details to be able to properly judge the contract to purchase the F-35 fighter jets.

Can the minister now confirm the price of each individual jet?

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

Mr. Speaker, we have committed, as we said we would do, to an open and transparent competition. We are looking to get the best plane we can get for the men and women in uniform. That is exactly what we are going to do. We are not going to prejudge the outcome of an open and transparent competition. We are going to work with all suppliers, and all aircraft that meet the requirements will be able to compete.

Softwood Lumber

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, last Friday, the U.S. Lumber Coalition filed a petition triggering what could be the start of yet another softwood lumber war, and this is before Trump is even sworn in. The last time around, unfair duties and a bad deal led to the closure of hundreds of Canadian mills and the loss of thousands of good paying jobs.

Day after day the minister refuses to lay out a plan.

When will the government stand up for Canadian workers? When will it ensure Canadians do not bear the brunt of another softwood lumber war?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, it was the previous Conservative government that allowed the old softwood lumber agreement to expire and did nothing to launch new negotiations.

Canada is prepared for any situation. I want to assure Canadians that we will vigorously defend the interests of Canadian workers and producers. International courts have invariably ruled in our favour in the past, and we are confident they will do so again.

I will at the same time continue negotiations with Ambassador Froman in Geneva over the weekend. We are seeking a good deal for Canada, not just any deal.

Transportation

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is hard to believe that safety is a priority for the Minister of Transport.

This morning, the Auditor General noted in his report that the minister cut the budget for vehicle testing by 59%, reduced funding for regional teams that collect data on collisions, and refused to require industry to have a new anchoring system that would keep children safe.

Will the minister stop making cuts and stop playing with Canadians' safety?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question.

In fact, in budget 2016, we announced an additional $5.4 million for assessing the safety of Canadian automobiles. The budget also included $7.3 million for regulating new vehicles that will be available shortly, automated vehicles. The Senate just introduced a bill to enhance the safety of our cars. We are working hard.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in 2001, one-quarter of the CBC's funding was from advertising. However, this has fallen in recent years as advertisers are abandoning CBC programs. Today it seems only around 15% of revenues come from advertisers. Taxpayers are now being asked to make this failure into a virtue.

What is the solution? Another one-third of a billion dollars per year from the poor beleaguered taxpayer and a guaranteed annual increase in the CBC subsidy forever.

Does the government agree with the CBC president that its business model is “profoundly and irrevocably broken?”

[Mélanie Joly, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, we just reinvested $675 million in the CBC. We also decided to launch important public consultations on how to support Canadian content in a digital age.

What we heard in these public consultations was that Canadians loved the CBC. Thirty thousand people participated in these public consultations. Hundreds of people submitted ideas and reports. I understand the CBC submitted its own report. We will be studying all submissions and we will—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for York--Simcoe.

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Apparently, Mr. Speaker, all that money is not working. Canadians look for high-quality Canadian content from the CBC, but fewer are watching. In 2001, the CBC drew almost 10% of the prime time audience. Today, that number is close to 6% as viewers tune out.

No wonder ad revenue is in free fall. The CBC has a solution. Taxpayers can be conscripted to replace ad revenue. After all, when Liberal spending is out of control, what is one-third of a billion dollars between friends?

Do the Liberals really plan on rewarding falling viewership by giving the CBC even more taxpayer money?

[Mélanie Joly, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, we understand that the media and the entertainment sectors are facing important challenges because of technological changes that are affecting how people consume information and entertainment. That was why we decided to look into the entire federal policy tool kit to adapt it to the digital age. Our entire federal policy tool kit does not take into consideration the Internet and the Broadcasting Act. All different levels within Heritage Canada were developed under the Mulroney era.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, during the many consultations held by the Minister of Canadian Heritage, CBC/Radio Canada asked the government to provide an additional $400 million and to depoliticize its funding by indexing it to inflation

I imagine that the minister will grant all the corporation's requests because, as she herself said, “That's easy: Radio-Canada”.

Is this government going to play Santa Claus for its friends and unfairly spend another $400 million of taxpayers' money?

[Mélanie Joly, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, as we have often said, we announced during the election campaign that we would be investing $675 million in CBC/Radio-Canada and that is what we did. Why? Because we wanted to make up for the Conservative cuts of the past 10 years, and because Canadians believe in a strong public broadcaster. That said, I also initiated important public consultations in which 30,000 people participated. Therefore, in 2017, I will present a new plan revising our approach to the media—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The member for Mississauga—Lakeshore.

Canada Revenue Agency

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we know that middle-class Canadians work hard and pay their fair share of taxes, but some wealthy taxpayers are hiding their income in tax havens.

The government promised to do something about those who use sophisticated schemes to hide their money off shore to avoid paying taxes.

Can the Minister of National Revenue tell the House about the government's strategy to identify and locate these individuals and take action against them?

[Diane Lebouthillier, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Mississauga—Lakeshore for his important question.

Our government is more committed than ever to combatting tax evasion because we understand that all Canadians need to pay their fair share of taxes.

The $444-million investment has made it possible to implement a jurisdiction-based approach. We are examining four jurisdictions per year. We started with the Isle of Man. We are now working on Guernsey. We are looking at transactions of over $7 billion. That is just the beginning. Other jurisdictions will follow.