Debates of Feb. 1st, 2016

The Environment

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is quite incorrect. The ministers actually met in June 2015.

In the lead-up to the Paris climate-change conference, the Prime Minister dropped a bombshell on Canadians. He announced, without warning and without a climate change plan, that he would spend almost $3 billion of taxpayer money on his own vanity projects, not here at home but in foreign countries. In fact, last week in the House, the minister had the gall to crow about that.

Why is that money not being invested in Canada, and where is the promised accountability?

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for our shared concern about this global issue of climate change. As a global issue, it is important that Canada play a leadership role so we can invest in developing countries that share this problem and we can work together so we all have a better future.

International Trade

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this week the trade minister plans to sign on to the job-killing TPP trade deal, even though the government has admitted it has no economic impact study. Would the minister sign a mortgage without knowing the interest rate?

There are jobs on the line here and Canadians will pay the price. My former co-workers in the auto industry and tens of thousands of others stand to lose their livelihoods under this Conservative negotiated deal. Will the government produce an economic impact study before signing any deal?

[David Lametti, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, the TPP was negotiated in secret by the previous government. The NDP criticized that treaty without even having read it. We promised during the course of the election campaign that we would study it. We are signing the agreement precisely to study it.

We have consulted Canadians already. We will continue to consult through parliamentary processes. That is precisely the point of consulting Canadians.

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the economy is already in bad shape, and now nearly 60,000 good jobs are on the line if the trans-Pacific partnership is signed. Our dairy producers are already in limbo. The government did not do anything to protect our supply management system. Although the government promised to take action and address the milk protein problem, it still has not done anything.

In light of all this, why is the government planning to go ahead and sign an agreement that jeopardizes jobs and family farms here in Canada?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada fully supports supply management, and the government is engaged with stakeholders on the outcome of the trans-Pacific partnership. We understand the importance of compensation to the supply management sector. This government supports supply management.

Ethics

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

Mr. Speaker, last week, in the infamous story of illegal union financing, the government said that at the very moment that this was brought to its attention, the party followed the law. The problem is that it is leaving out one detail—

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

Order. The interpretation does not seem to be working. We will take a moment to ensure that it is working. Is it working now? Let us try again.

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

Mr. Speaker, interestingly enough, I was saying that last week, the government claimed that at the very moment that it became aware of illegal union financing, the party followed the law. The problem is that the government is leaving out an important part of the story.

In an internal union email that we received, we learned that the Liberal leader's team requested this event and the union identified 25 people to stand near the Liberal leader during the event. The government is leaving out an important part of the story.

Will the minister finally acknowledge that Bill C-4 is the government's way of thanking those who made illegal contributions—

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

The hon. Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour.

[MaryAnn Mihychuk, Liberal, Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-4 would reset labour industrial relations to a fair balance, one that did not require an attack from the previous government to make it imbalanced.

We are going to reset a fair balanced network. After that, our economy should see significant improvements.

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

Mr. Speaker, I cannot wait to see that, because there is no denying the fact that this illegal event took place and that there were others.

The Liberal Party organized events with unions on August 27 in Oakville and on October 8 in Vaughan.

Can the government assure us that there was no illegal financing in these two cases, as there was at the earlier event?

[MaryAnn Mihychuk, Liberal, Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that the case I am familiar with was immediately addressed. We worked with Elections Canada to remedy it.

In terms of Bill C-4, it would re-establish fairness and balance, as the members across the way understand.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it was immediately addressed because they got caught.

The government House leader said last week, when these illegal donations from big unions first came to light, that the Liberals followed the letter of the law. That is simply not the case.

We have a document from the union itself that states the Prime Minister's own campaign team asked specifically for union members to be props in this Liberal campaign event.

Could the jobs minister finally admit that her bill to gut transparency and accountability in a union bill is simply repayment for these illegal campaign contributions?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, as a number of ministers have said, when we became aware of this problem, we immediately contacted Elections Canada. The money was remitted to the Receiver General, which is required under law, and the union involved signed a compliance agreement.

I hope members might agree with me that it is somewhat ironic for the Conservative Party to be talking about election law compliance. At the end of this event, nobody left in leg irons.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

Order, please. Colleagues, we are going to hear things that are provocative. Sometimes it is hard to not react, but I know we can do it. Let us restrain ourselves.

The member for Foothills has the floor.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Mr. Speaker, they may have paid back the one, but did they pay back the other two? The Liberals did not just hold one campaign event; they held at least three.

On August 27, the Prime Minister held an event with the International Union of Operating Engineers in Oakville. On October 8, he held an event with the Carpenters' District Council in Vaughan.

In return for bringing forward a bill that would cut accountability and transparency in unions, could the jobs minister just say that this is repayment for these illegal campaign contributions?

[MaryAnn Mihychuk, Liberal, Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform the House that this was a campaign promise, that we would look to retract the two punitive political bills that were made to specifically attack trade unions. That is the purpose of the bills. That is what we are following up on.

Employment Insurance

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, thousands of resource workers have been laid off. The latest Statistics Canada report indicates that the monthly percentage jump in employment insurance claims was far higher in Saskatchewan than in other provinces.

Resource workers and their families need real assistance now. However, after years of Conservative attacks, our employment insurance system is broken.

What concrete changes will the Minister of Employment make to improve the accessibility level and duration of employment insurance benefits?

[MaryAnn Mihychuk, Liberal, Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt in the House that the employment insurance system needs modernizing. This was a commitment and our election promise. We are in the process of doing so. We will soon see immediate changes to parts of the EI system and longer-term systemic changes in the years coming up.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are struggling and just telling unemployed workers to hang in there is not going to cut it.

People who lose their jobs need help now, not in 2017, but the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour says that some things have to wait. That is unacceptable.

Can the minister confirm that she will immediately restore the 360-hour minimum for employment insurance, yes or no?

[MaryAnn Mihychuk, Liberal, Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, there were some measures put in that are extremely punitive, including an enormous amount of hours that are directed for new entrants like young people or immigrants, who can find it very hard to meet those thresholds. It is our intention to move on those provisions extremely quickly.

Finance

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, one of this government's stated priorities is to bring greater openness and transparency to government. An important area in need of review and reform is the supply process by which the members are able to scrutinize and review government expenditures and hold the government to account. Yet the present process has some important shortcomings.

Could the President of the Treasury Board please inform the House of his plans to address this problem?

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

Mr. Speaker, to make Parliament and government more open, transparent, and accountable, it is critically important that we reform and realign the estimates and budget process. We want to empower parliamentarians to once again be able to scrutinize spending and to hold government to account. That is why tonight we invite MPs and senators from all parties to join us for a briefing on the estimates process. We need to have a common understanding of the estimates process today and what it is going to take to fix it and to actually make Parliament work—