Debates of Dec. 9th, 2016

Infrastructure

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

Mr. Speaker, the Competition Bureau of Canada has clearly raised red flags for the Liberal government concerning the new infrastructure program. Of the 40 members of Quebec who, like us, heard the extensive testimony that came out of the Charbonneau Commission, how is it that nobody realized that this kind of all-you-can-eat buffet is dangerous and opens the door to collusion?

Will the Prime Minister take action or is he really waiting for Canadians to call for an inquiry?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear: we will ensure that our investments uphold the principles we hold dear, namely transparency, value for money and fairness. We expect our partners to ensure that their procurement processes are fair and transparent and provide Canadians with the best value for their tax dollars.

Our programs are subject to regular review, including independent audits by the auditor general.

It is Canadians’ tax dollars that we are investing, and we will invest them responsibility for the benefit of all Canadians.

Official Languages

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, around the world we are seeing that institutional bilingualism results in the assimilation of minority languages. This is what censuses in Canada have been showing for 40 years. What is the federal government doing? It is on a promotional tour in support of institutional bilingualism. They are strengthening English in Quebec while sprinkling a few services in French here and there in the rest of Canada.

Does the minister realize that, as is, the federal policy on institutional bilingualism is the grave of the French language in North America?

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for giving me this opportunity to talk about the government’s dedication to official bilingualism and linguistic duality.

The social contract we have in our country is based on the founding peoples, anglophones and francophones. We have built a pluralistic country on this foundation, and we are in the midst of reconciliation with indigenous peoples.

We will promote English in Quebec, and we will promote French outside Quebec. That is who we are as Canadians.

Health

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the premiers of Quebec and the provinces will be discussing health transfers. We know what the Liberals’ position is. What they are doing is cutting transfers, just like the Conservatives decided to do, with the conditions demanded by the NDP, the worst of both worlds.

Cutting transfers is an attack on patient services. Imposing conditions amounts to taking them hostage. With this meeting a few hours from now, will the Prime Minister finally admit that health is the exclusive jurisdiction of Quebec and restore funding with no strings attached? I would be thrilled with a simple yes to my question.

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

Mr. Speaker, as I said previously in the House, there will be no cuts to health care. Our government is committed to a collaborative approach to health care. Next year, the Canada health transfer will grow by more than 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 in creating a health care system that meets the needs of all Canadians, including in Quebec.

Consumer Protection

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government has finally admitted that it is embarrassing to let the banks get around Quebec law to rip off consumers. Finally! By splitting Bill C-29, the government is admitting that the part that amends the Bank Act is problematic.

Why will they not simply withdraw it?

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

Mr. Speaker, we are always listening to Canadians and to consumers.

As I have often said in the House, the Marcotte decision called on us to clarify the consumer protection framework with respect to financial institutions. That is exactly what we did. We took that opportunity to modernize it and provide a regulatory framework that is consumer-friendly.

I would remind my colleague that at each step in the process to amend the legislation, we kept in mind the best interests of consumers. This is what we announced this morning, and we will continue to do so.

The Environment

[Hunter Tootoo, Independent, Nunavut, NU]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Environment and Climate Change.

Lancaster Sound represents one of the most pristine and richest wildlife areas in the world. Its addition to Canada's national marine conservation areas is long overdue.

Last year, the minister received a detailed report from the Qikiqtani Inuit Association. The report outlined recommendations for larger conservation boundaries based on community consultations and Inuit traditional knowledge. Will the minister ensure Inuit traditional knowledge is included in the plan, and when can we expect it to be finalized?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, that is a very important question. Our government is committed to a national marine conservation area in Lancaster Sound. It will contribute significantly to our government's domestic and international commitments to conservation. We announced funding for the marine conservation area in Lancaster Sound in budget 2016.

Inuit traditional knowledge has been a major component of the feasibility assessment for the marine conservation area. I can also assure the member that Inuit traditional knowledge will be an important part of interim management planning, with the first formal management plan to be completed within five years of the establishment of the conservation area.

Government Response to Petitions

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(b) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to eight petitions.

Public Safety and National Security

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the seventh report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security concerning Bill C-22, an act to establish the national security and intelligence committee of parliamentarians and to make consequential amendments to certain acts.

The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House with amendments.

Veterans Affairs

[Neil Ellis, Liberal, Bay of Quinte, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs, entitled “Reaching Out: Improving Service Delivery to Canadian Veterans”.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.

Telecommunications

[Karen Ludwig, Liberal, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise today to submit a petition requesting that the government help preserve local telecommunications.

Dozens of residents of New Brunswick Southwest have signed a petition that asks the government to enable community-operated media centres to ensure the survival of community television. It calls for the availability of local media in small towns and neighbourhoods that are not served by private or public media.

The petitioners also call upon the government to ensure that Canadians have access to multimedia platforms, media skills training and content distribution capacity in the digital economy.

Electoral Reform

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to provide this petition signed by so many people in Elgin—Middlesex—London.

The petitioners request that the government and parliamentarians ensure that there is a referendum following any changes to the electoral system.

Canadian National Railway

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to present a petition signed by over 130 Mission Gardens residents just last weekend alone. I had the honour of going out with petitioners, and they want some fairness from CN.

Many have lived in the area for 30 years and never had a problem with the main line in their backyard, but CN has made unilateral changes to its operations and have essentially turned their neighbourhood into a marshalling yard.

The petitioners would like the Minister of Transport to intervene and ensure CN is not able to do this.

Freedom of Speech

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise today to present a petition signed by some of my constituents in Willowdale and, indeed, by other Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

The petitioners request that our government modernize our laws regarding blasphemous libel, the repeal of section 296 of the Canadian Criminal Code. Section 296 was first introduced in 1892, largely on the basis of British common law. Under this outlawed law, it has been eight decades since the last conviction under section 296, and 35 years since the last charge of blasphemous libel was laid.

Blasphemous libel serves no purpose in Canadian law or modern day society, and very likely contravenes section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which protects freedom of expression. Furthermore, blasphemy laws have been abused around the globe to suppress minorities and stifle inconvenient speech. Repealing Canada's blasphemy law would demonstrate, at home and abroad, Canada's commitment to the value of free speech for all.

Questions on the Order Paper

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

Mr. Speaker, the following question will be answered today: No. 577.

Question No. 577

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley—Aldergrove, BC]

With regard to the “Open and Accountable Government” guidelines for Ministers which was released on November 27, 2015, by the Prime Minister: (a) what is the job title of the employee in the Privy Council Office (PCO) who is responsible for investigating possible breaches of the guidelines; (b) what is the process by which the Prime Minister’s Office would refer an alleged breach of the guidelines to the PCO; (c) since November 4, 2015, how many alleged breaches has the Prime Minister referred to the PCO for investigation; (d) what are the details of each referral in (c), including, (i) date of referral, (ii) title of Ministers or Exempt Staff involved in alleged breach, (iii) summary of allegation; and (e) has the PCO recommended any possible sanctions regarding any of the breaches referred to in (c), and if so, what were the recommendations, and did the Prime Minister implement the recommendations?

[Celina Caesar-Chavannes, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a) and (b), the role of the Privy Council Office, PCO, is to provide professional, non-partisan advice and support to the Prime Minister, to ministers within the Prime Minister’s portfolio, and to the cabinet decision-making process. “Open and Accountable Government” serves as guidance set out by the Prime Minister for ministers and exempt staff. The Prime Minister expects all ministers and exempt staff to meet these expectations. Officials in PCO support each prime minister by providing guidance for their ministries. PCO officials may also support the Prime Minister in providing advice on how such guidance can be interpreted or applied, and how it relates to other documents or legal instruments, such as the Conflict of Interest Act and the Lobbying Act. PCO officials further support the Prime Minister with respect to Governor-in-Council appointment processes for senior government officials.

With regard to (c), (d), and (e), since November 4, 2015, no alleged “breaches” of “Open and Accountable Government” have been referred to PCO for investigation. PCO is not an investigatory body, but rather provides professional, non-partisan advice and support to the Prime Minister and the cabinet decision-making process.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

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

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that if a revised response to Question No. 550, originally tabled on December 2, 2016, and the government's response to Questions Nos. 575, 576, and 578 to 580 could be made orders for returns, these returns would be tabled immediately.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No. 550

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

With regard to personal styling and coaching, since November 4, 2015, broken down by department, agency, and crown corporation: (a) how much has the government spent on (i) makeup, (ii) makeup artists, (iii) hair products, (iv) hair stylists, (v) any stylists not covered by (ii) or (iv), (vi) personal coaching, (vii) media coaching, (viii) any other coaching not covered by (vi) or (vii); (b) what is the breakdown of each expenditure including (i) date of purchase or contract, (ii) duration of contract, if applicable, (iii) amount of contract, (iv) amount spent, (v) contract file number, (vi) vendor name; and (c) which of the expenditures referred to in (b) were for a Minister or Ministerial exempt staff?

(Return tabled)