Debates of Dec. 9th, 2016

Warren Allmand

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the 1990s I was policy vice-president of the Young Liberals of Canada and we proposed what turned out to be a controversial policy resolution to the national convention.

Many MPs approached us hoping that we might be convinced to withdraw our proposal, but one MP encouraged us. That was Warren Allmand. He said that we should never be afraid of challenging the status quo and fighting for fundamental human rights. That was what Warren did his entire life.

For 32 years, he was MP for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce, NDG, and he held numerous cabinet positions. He then served as head of the International Centre for Human Rights and returned to public life as a Montreal city councillor.

Whether it was heading the fight to abolish the death penalty, reminding everyone of the importance of respecting minority language rights, or just supporting his residents who wanted a stop sign at the corner, Warren fought for his principles and his constituents his entire life.

I know all members will join me in extending condolences to his wife Rose, his children, and the entire NDG community.

Ethics

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

Mr. Speaker, we know that the Commissioner of Lobbying has launched an investigation into the Liberal cash for access fundraising practice, and the Ethics Commissioner has confirmed that her office is looking into these matters as well.

Although the Prime Minister had promised to set a higher bar for openness and transparency, he and his government continue to hide the details about these fundraisers from Canadians. If the Prime Minister is so committed to openness and accountability, why does he refuse to make the details of these events public?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to indicate very clearly to the House that we do indeed have some of the strictest rules around fundraising of any level of government, and our party respects those rules.

The Chief Electoral Officer has stated that Canada's political financing laws are the “most advanced and constrained and transparent” in the world. We have been following the process. No rules or laws have been broken, and as such, no conflict of interest exists.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals again did not answer the question. It was a very simple question.

The Liberals claim they are following the rules. They claim they are open and transparent. However, they refuse to publicly disclose, for example, the dates and locations of these shady Liberal fundraisers.

If the Liberals have nothing to hide and they are indeed following all the rules, why are they now hiding the details of their cash for access fundraisers from the public?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the best thing I can do when a member repeats a question is to repeat the answer and assure the member that in fact we do have some of the strictest rules around fundraising of any level of government. Our party respects and follows those rules.

I will refer to the Chief Electoral Officer, who stated, when referring to Canada's financial laws, that we have some of “the most advanced and constrained and transparent” laws in the world.

We are following the rules and the laws. There is no conflict of interest. It is as simple as that.

Taxation

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

Mr. Speaker, nobody is buying their repeat, repeat, repeat lines. It is beginning to look very foolish for all the Liberals on that side of the House.

Over 30,000 full-time jobs have been lost, and the finance minister's own department is saying that things are only going to get worse. Yet today the Prime Minister is threatening Canadians with a punitive and ineffective carbon tax, putting even more jobs at risk and leading to the biggest increase in the cost of doing business in a generation.

Why does the Prime Minister insist on further hurting Canadian jobs and putting Canadian businesses at a competitive disadvantage?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, later today the Prime Minister will be meeting with the premiers. This will be the third time that such a meeting has taken place. That is refreshing for Canada, because for many years there were no meetings at all.

As some of Canada's largest employers have pointed out, putting a price on carbon pollution is not political; it is just good business. It will give Canada an edge in building a clean growth economy, and make Canadian businesses more innovative and competitive. That is why nearly 30 Canadian employers have come out strongly in support of a price on carbon pollution. They know that pricing pollution will bring new jobs—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order. The hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent.

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

Mr. Speaker, the situation is serious. Canada has lost 30,500 full-time jobs in one year. What is the Liberal government's game plan? It wants to impose more taxes on Canadian workers. It is increasing contributions to pension funds. It is inventing a tax on health and dental insurance benefits and a tax on carbon. Meanwhile, the U.S. president-elect is going to slash taxes.

Why does the government want to further tax Canadian workers?

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent.

He usually has a good memory, and he must remember that we are the government and that the first thing we did was cut taxes for Canada's middle class. Nine million Canadians are paying less taxes.

Moreover, confident nations invest in their economy and their people. That is exactly what we are doing. Our plan is to spur economic growth and create jobs, which the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent knows very well.

The government will continue to work for Canada's middle class.

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

Mr. Speaker, I do recall that 65% of Canadians have not seen any changes to their taxes under the Liberal government. Those that benefit the most from the government's measures are people who earn between $140,000 and $200,000 a year, so I do not want to be lectured about the middle class.

I have a good memory. In 2014, the Supreme Court said that the Consumer Protection Act was under provincial jurisdiction, not federal. Unfortunately, we are headed for disaster with Bill C-29 because it has a direct impact on consumer rights. That does not make any sense. The only thing the government is going to accomplish with this bill is to give thousands of dollars to lawyers, knowing that it will lose the case.

Why is the government prepared to lose millions and even hundreds of millions of dollars on a lost cause?

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

Mr. Speaker, rather than listening to overheated rhetoric, allow me to tell you what we are going to do.

We are going to continue working with consumer groups, stakeholders, and the provinces and territories to develop regulations and enforce the law. We are going to delay the implementation of some provisions of division 5 of the bill so that the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce can examine this important issue more closely.

The Environment

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, over a year ago, the Prime Minister signed the Paris agreement, even though his targets for fighting climate change are the same as Stephen Harper's.

Today, that same Prime Minister will be meeting with his provincial counterparts to come up with a plan.

We want to know whether the government intends to put forward a real plan that will enable us to keep the promises we made when we ratified the Paris agreement—or will he settle for Stephen Harper's approach and take the credit for the provinces' work?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, the Prime Minister will be meeting with the premiers today to talk about this very important subject, which is a refreshing change for Canadian federalism. We will all wait and be very optimistic about the results of that meeting.

The member also knows that we are committed to working with the provinces and territories to implement carbon pollution pricing as a central component of the pan-Canadian framework.

Canadians know that we need to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions to grow our economy in a sustainable way.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, so we get rhetoric and Stephen Harper's targets. It is not very impressive.

The Prime Minister is expected to announce a national climate change plan after meeting with Canada's first ministers, but today it was reported that the deal will not be unanimous and may require Ottawa to buy costly carbon credits from other countries to meet its 2030 targets.

The Liberal emission targets are already too weak to meet our Paris accord obligations. Are we really going to pay other countries to do the work the government has failed to do?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows this is an unprecedented conversation between the federal government and the provinces. We have taken international leadership. The Minister of Environment and Climate Change led in Paris. We have signed the agreement; unfortunately, not all members chose to sign the agreement. We understand very well that this government will lead the world in its commitment to clean technologies and greenhouse gas emissions while we sustainably develop our energy infrastructure.

Health

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, world-leading rhetoric, perhaps.

Speaking of Stephen Harper's targets, the Minister of Health set the end of the year as a deadline to finalize a new health accord, but all she has done so far is adopt Harper's cuts to provincial funding.

According to Newfoundland's health minister, the talks on the health accord have “gone silent”.

All provinces have confirmed that the Liberals' cuts to the health escalator will hurt Canada's health care services.

Will the Prime Minister honour his election promise to negotiate fairly, stop unilaterally dictating funding, and negotiate a health care accord that improve services for all Canadians?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear. There will be no cuts to health care.

Canadians are proud of our publicly funded universal health care system. It ensures that no Canadian has to make a choice between economic well-being and their health.

The Minister of Health met with her provincial and territorial counterparts in October. Next year, the Canada health transfer will grow by more than a billion dollars, to over $37 billion.

We will continue to work with them on how we can create a health care system that meets the needs of Canadians for years to come.

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the clock is ticking on the deadline for a new health care agreement, but we still have no news.

The provinces agree that the government's choice to maintain transfer payment cuts will hurt our health care system.

Philippe Couillard made it clear that Quebec would not agree to any conditions because the federal government has no right to impose conditions on the provinces for health care.

Will the Prime Minister keep his promise and negotiate with the provinces in good faith, or will he just do whatever he wants?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to a collaborative approach to health care. Next year, the Canada health transfer will grow by over a billion dollars, to over $37 billion.

The Minister of Health met with her provincial and territorial counterparts in October. We will continue to work with them on creating a health care system that Canadians can be proud of.

Ethics

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Mr. Speaker, no one is being fooled by the Liberals repeating these tired old talking points.

Canadians are sick and tired of seeing the Prime Minister and his ministers blatantly break ethical rules by attending these cash for access fundraisers. No one should have preferential access to the government simply because they made a large political donation.

Are the Liberals that oblivious to the fact that they are breaking ethical rules by asking and making Canadians pay $1,500 to have the ear of the Prime Minister, or do they think they are smarter than every other Canadian and will simply get away with it?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, if I may, I will just repeat what I said earlier in question period. We do have some of the strictest rules around fundraising of any level of government, and our party respects those rules.

The Chief Electoral Officer has stated that Canada's political financing laws are the most advanced, constrained, and transparent in the world. With regard to ticketed fundraising events, the Chief Electoral Officer has confirmed that every party in every campaign does them.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I understand the Prime Minister loves to quote the rule book, but knowing the rules and actually following the rules are two different things. We know the Prime Minister has been lobbied by people who can afford his company.

It has become clear: Liberal fundraisers are opportunities to lobby the Liberal cabinet. Access to the Prime Minister in exchange for donations violates the Prime Minister's own ethics rules, and possibly the law.

When will the Prime Minister stop this dishonourable practice?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I will continue to repeat. We have some of the strictest rules around fundraising of any level of government, and our party respects those rules.

The Chief Electoral Officer stated that Canada's political financing laws are the most advanced, constrained, and transparent in the world. In regard to ticketed fundraising events, the Chief Electoral Officer confirmed that every party in every campaign does them.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am going to give the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons a chance to repeat himself yet again.

For weeks now, the Liberals have been claiming that their fundraising activities involving privileged access benefiting the Liberal Party of Canada, not the needs of the state, are held in compliance with the rules. The state and the Liberal Party are two completely separate things.

Will the Liberals pull their heads out of the sand and admit that their activities are unethical, that they are undermining Canadians' trust in our democracy, and that they do not comply with the rules that the Prime Minister himself put in place?