Debates of Nov. 3rd, 2016

Employment

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

Mr. Speaker, this week the Liberals have had a chance to address the concerns that Canadians face today. Jobs are being lost, the economy is shrinking, and small business owners are wondering each and every day who they might have to lay off next.

However, instead of presenting a plan for jobs, the Minister of Finance just presented a plan of more spending and massive deficits for years to come.

Is the minister not at all concerned about jobs for today? Why is he playing this reckless and dangerous game of massive spending with absolutely nothing to show for it?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should join with Canadians to celebrate some of the success our government has had in attracting global companies like Thomson Reuters to bring 1,500 new head office jobs to Canada, companies like General Electric and Amazon, which are choosing Canada because they believe the work of this government in investing in jobs and growth, and creating more opportunities for the middle class is exactly the right thing to be doing.

Ethics

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

Mr. Speaker, maybe the Liberal problem is that they continue to be completely out of touch with everyday Canadians, Canadians who work hard every day, pay their taxes, and follow the rules. This is something we have known for decades that the Liberals do not seem to be able to do. They do not seem to be able to follow any rules, much less their own.

Therefore, when it comes to cash for access, if the Prime Minister cannot enforce his own rules, will he support our motion today and allow the Ethics Commissioner to do what he refuses to do?

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism]

Mr. Speaker, the member very well knows that in Canada we have some of the strictest fundraising rules across the country.

If we want to talk about access, let us talk about some of the good work this government is doing. Just today the Prime Minister and members of his cabinet were engaging with over 300 high school students from the national capital region. These students were able to talk about the challenges they faced and to ask some tough questions. The Prime Minister was there to answer them all.

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

Mr. Speaker, that answer is becoming very embarrassing for the government House leader.

We are not talking about Elections Canada rules. We are not talking about other jurisdictions. We are not talking about consultations with high school students. We are talking about the government violating the Prime Minister's own ethical standards.

Again, I ask the government if it will uphold its own standards. We are not talking about Elections Canada. We are not talking about Ontario or any other province. We are talking about the government's rules. If the government will not uphold them, let the Ethics Commissioner do her job and uphold its rules.

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has some of the strongest rules when it comes to fundraising across the nation. The member knows that very well.

When it comes to our young people, when it comes to women entrepreneurs, when it comes to under-represented groups, these are concerns this government recognizes Canadians are facing. We were elected to engage with Canadians. We were elected to represent Canadians. We will continue to work with Canadians and for Canadians. That is why we are here every day.

Finance

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance's inability to tell us when we will achieve a zero deficit proves that the government has completely lost control of public finances.

The government seems to be proud that it managed to shrink the deficit, saying that it is not as bad as expected, but it is forgetting one little $6-billion detail. The government blew through its $6-billion wiggle room so it could come up with a presentable number. That is hardly something to be proud of, and we are not the only ones saying so.

Rudy Le Cours of La Presse called it sleight of hand, and Radio-Canada's Gérald Fillion wrote that “the minister is playing fast and loose with his numbers”—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Order.

The hon. President of the Treasury Board.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, when we came to power, we inherited a sluggish economy.

That is why we made infrastructure investments. That is why we cut taxes for more than nine million middle-class Canadians. That is why we created the Canada child benefit, which is helping nine out of ten families.

Making these investments for the middle class is very important, and that is what we will keep doing.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the only thing the government could think of to help our entrepreneurs, who are the real job creators and wealth creators, are measures that will in fact harm them, such as imposing the Liberal carbon tax, eliminating Conservative tax credits, and making pension plans more expensive, to name a few.

Yesterday, the Minister of Finance went and told the Senate that additional tax credits will be eliminated. Can the government tell us exactly which tax credits for small businesses will be eliminated?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, once again, it is very important to recognize the importance of investing in the middle class and creating economic growth.

That is exactly what we are doing and what we will continue to do, because that is the priority of Canadians. Our actions reflect that priority.

Democratic Reform

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, let me quote the Minister of Democratic Institutions on which voting system Canada should adopt, “the prime minister has a preference” and “I am arriving at a preference for a specific system”.

What is the preferred Liberal system?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, our Minister of Democratic Institutions is consulting broadly with Canadians. Members from our party, but also members from other parties, have consulted with Canadians throughout the summer. The fact is that we think is really important to listen to Canadians, to participate actively in town halls across Canada.

Those recommendations have come to a parliamentary committee. We look forward to the work of that committee, and we will not prejudge the work of that committee. Let that committee do its work.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Actually, Mr. Speaker, the minister should have listened to those quotes. It is quite clear that the Liberals have a preference. They admit that but they will not tell Canadians what it is. That is the problem. They continue to claim they are being transparent. Yeah, sure.

Will the minister acknowledge that it is their own statements that are indeed undermining the committee's work?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, it is that kind of cynicism that creates an environment—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

There is some disorder in the chamber. We need to have order. I need to hear the answer to the question. Hon. members are all anxious to hear the rest of the answer.

The hon. President of the Treasury Board can have a few more seconds if he needs it.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, that parliamentary committee is doing important work, and we should allow that parliamentary committee to do its work.

I would urge the hon. member, and all members, not to prejudge the work of the parliamentary committee. Let that committee do its work.

Freedom of the Press

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government members have already said twice that they already know what the result is. It is not our cynicism. It is they who are undermining both.

On Tuesday, I asked the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness if any other journalists are currently under surveillance by federal authorities. Today, the Prime Minister confirmed that he engaged with the RCMP and CSIS on this matter.

Is the minister now willing to tell Canadians how many journalists are under federal surveillance?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, freedom of the press is a fundamental Canadian value. The reports about transgressions in Quebec are cause for genuine concern, and the provincial government has announced some steps in that regard.

At the federal level, I do not comment on any specific operation, but with respect to sensitive sectors like the media, we can provide the assurance that the sort of thing that is being reported in Quebec is not applicable at the federal level.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is an interesting choice of words, “is not applicable”, because if the number were zero, I am sure the minister would have no trouble saying so.

Back in May, when I first called for a full investigation, the same minister claimed that it was an isolated case of police illegally spying on journalists, and that there was no need whatsoever to look any further. However, it is now obvious that it was not an isolated case.

Will the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness order a full public inquiry into police spying on reporters at the federal level, yes or no?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister was very clear today, as was the commissioner of the RCMP yesterday. The commissioner's answer was, very clearly and unequivocally, no.

Employment

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Treasury Board president is a banker, so I am going to ask him about cost-benefit analysis.

This year's $25 billion deficit was supposed to buy all kinds of jobs for Canadians; instead, we got 6,000 fewer full-time jobs. The government's answer to the problem was to borrow even more.

If we spent $25 billion to buy a lot of nothing, would we buy even more of it?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, let us come back to the assets. What we announced this week, in the fall economic statement, is a plan to invest in Canadians.

After budget 2016, where we made historic investments in Canadian families and in the middle class, what we presented to Canadians was historic investments in infrastructure and historic investments to create the invest in Canada hub to attract investment in Canada, to attract global talent. That is the plan that is working for Canadians, that is what Canadians want, and that is what we are going to deliver.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is not working, and neither are the 6,000 people who do not have jobs.

The Liberal Party promised solemnly that its deficit over the term would not exceed $25 billion. This week's economic statement showed that the number will be $100 billion, which is four times what it promised, and that presumes it does not spend another cent in its next three budgets.

How could the Liberals have been so wrong, so fast? Is it because they cannot count or because they cannot tell the truth?