Debates of April 18th, 2016

Ministerial Expenses

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

Mr. Speaker, that is not quite the case. It is actually worse than that.

The minister travelled first class, scarfing down gourmet food, and then turned around and claimed per diems for the same meals. We all know that this is against the rules. She cannot charge taxpayers for this vanity trip. She double-billed them for meals.

Is the minister's integrity worth more than the $104.20 that she has taken from the taxpayers? Will she be returning the money to the taxpayers?

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

Mr. Speaker, all of the minister's travels are done according to the ethical guidelines and the guidelines with which we have to comply as members of the government. We will continue to do so in the future.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, concerns regarding the Liberal government's questionable ethics are piling up as fast as the deficit is rising. We have learned that the Minister of International Trade spent nearly $20,000 to appear on a Hollywood talk show. What nonsense.

Since she was not in Los Angeles to negotiate a free trade agreement with the Hollywood stars, can she explain why Canadians should have to foot the bill for her expensive side trip to California?

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

Mr. Speaker, the minister's expenses are public, published, and transparent. We are following the rules and will continue to do so.

National Defence

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Mr. Speaker, last week Canadians were alarmed to discover that the Liberals' defence review included consideration of privatizing search and rescue. Now we have learned the Liberals are also reconsidering Canada's participation in the Star Wars missile defence scheme.

I have a bad feeling about this. Canadians thought this debate was put to rest more than a decade ago. Would the minister tell the House, and this is a yes or no question, are the Liberals reconsidering Canada's participation in this dangerous U.S. missile defence scheme?

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

Mr. Speaker, Canada currently does not participate in the ballistic missile defence. No decision has been made to change this policy.

Through the defence policy review, the government is consulting Canadians on a wide range of defence-related issues in an open and transparent manner, including ballistic missile defence.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a trap.

The Liberals are full of surprises. One day they want to privatize search and rescue missions and the next they announce that they want to review our participation in the missile defence shield. Yes, Mr. Speaker, you heard correctly. They want to review our role in the Star Wars system that we rejected 10 years ago. Was seeing the Star Wars movie not enough for the Prime Minister? Why does he want to get Canadians involved in a useless scheme that is going to cost us billions of dollars?

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

Mr. Speaker, the government wants to ensure that Canada and North America are well defended from all threats.

We want to make sure that the defence review is open and wide. By not opening up the discussion on ballistic missile defence and allowing Canadians to have a say in this, it would not be an open defence review.

Ecuador

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we were saddened to hear about the tragic events caused by the earthquake in Ecuador on Saturday. Can the government update the House on recent developments and on the services for Canadians who are in the affected area?

[Pam Goldsmith-Jones, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, we send our thoughts and sincere condolences to all those affected by this earthquake.

We are working with the families of two Canadian citizens who were tragically killed during the earthquake. As a nation, we send our deepest condolences to their families, their friends, and their loved ones.

Consular officials in Ottawa have reached out to the family and are offering support and assistance. Canadian officials in our embassy in Quito are reaching out to Canadian citizens in that country to provide assistance.

We will continue to work with local authorities to assess the impact of this devastating earthquake and with what is needed on the ground.

The Environment

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the MP for Steveston—Richmond East wants to shut down the port of Vancouver and have it subject to an environmental assessment, the same environmental process that has tied up the Pacific LNG project in more and more red tape and has put the creation of thousands of well-paying jobs on hold.

How many more jobs are the Liberals willing to kill before they start approving the projects that Canadians depend on for their livelihoods?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if the hon. member knows, but the ports already have an environmental process through which they deal with ongoing projects. Projects that reach a certain threshold are reviewed by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.

As we move forward and we initiate the review of the broader environmental assessment processes in Canada, we will be looking at how environmental assessments are done generally, and these will be part of the discussion.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there are more and more verbal gymnastics from the other side.

The president of the Vancouver Port Authority said that they regularly engage with the community, but “it's kind of hard to know what a social licence is”. He is referring to the same social licence that is causing a delay in the Pacific LNG project, which would be the largest private sector investment in British Columbia history.

When will the Liberals stop using environmental buzzwords to kill Canadian jobs, and instead become a beacon of light in rough waters and start approving job-creating projects?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, in the modern age, Canadians expect that the environment and the economy work together hand in hand. They expect rigorous environmental assessments of projects so that people can have comfort that when projects proceed they are done in an environmentally sustainable manner. With respect to Pacific Northwest, the proponent provided additional information, which we are now reviewing. There will be a decision within the next few months, and it will be based on science and on data, not on politics.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Mr. Speaker, today and tomorrow, mayors from my riding and I are meeting with federal Liberals to discuss the benefits of the LNG industry. We agree with the minister that we want to grow our economy. Many residents and small businesses have been hit hard by low energy prices, but it does not have to end this way. B.C. projects will create thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in tax revenue while also reducing global emissions. When will the Liberal cabinet hear the voices of strong support for B.C. LNG and approved projects like Pacific Northwest LNG?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if the hon. member was not present, but the wood fibre project actually was approved. It went through a rigorous environmental assessment process, where we determined that the environmental impacts could be managed in a sustainable way. That project is going forward.

The same process will be used with Pacific Northwest and all other LNG projects to ensure that environmental impacts will be managed if in fact the projects are to proceed.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Mr. Speaker, one more time I will say that while we wait for the Liberal cabinet to make a final decision on Pacific Northwest LNG, Progress Energy is cutting investment as we speak. This is yet another blow to real families of northeastern B.C., where the unemployment rate is the highest in the province. There is now growing concern about further delays. What would that mean to our communities? When will the Liberal cabinet step up, support our families, and approve B.C. LNG and grow our economy?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, we very clearly understand that major resource projects are an important part of the economy, but they must be done in a manner that balances the environment and the economy. One of the reasons that this group is sitting on this side of the House and that group is sitting there is because Canadians lost faith in the ability of the previous government to manage the environment.

International Trade

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are gathering outside today's trade committee meetings in Vancouver, calling for the government to reject the TPP. They are not alone. Industry leaders from manufacturing and high tech have warned that this deal would be bad for Canadian businesses, and Nobel laureate, Joseph Stiglitz, called it the worst trade deal ever. The TPP would cost us 60,000 jobs and increase growing inequality.

The Liberals are barrelling ahead with this job-killing trade deal. Why is the minister finishing the bad work of the Conservatives?

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

Mr. Speaker, the TPP was negotiated in secret by the previous government. The member's party rejected it without even having read it. We said we would consult. We are looking at every corner of the agreement. There are those, as the hon. member has cited, who are against it, but there are many others who are for it and cite various positives for the Canadian economy. We plan to study it, put it before Parliament, and therefore put it before the Canadian people.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals committed to protecting supply management and dairy farmers. Six months later, their track record is dismal. The problem with diafiltered milk is still not resolved. There is absolutely no compensation in the budget for the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, and the government is going to move forward with the trans-Pacific partnership.

When will the Liberals keep their promises and stand up for Canadian dairy farmers?

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my hon. colleague's question and her concern. We, of course, support supply management and, as we indicated, we understand the importance of compensation in the supply management sector. It has been indicated by my colleague what will take place. We have fully consulted with the stakeholders across the country. There will be an open debate in this House, and then we will vote to see whether it will be approved.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

[Bob Saroya, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' fully costed campaign platform pegged the cost of their Syrian refugee program at $250 million. We know now that it will be several times that. Lack of advanced planning on behalf of the Liberals has resulted in millions of dollars being wasted on unused hotel rooms, staff overtime, and transportation. Do the Liberals have any idea how much the Syrian refugee program will actually cost?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, not only can I say that we are under budget, I can also say that I am extremely proud of our refugee program, which has brought 26,000 people to Canada. Yes, there were some hotel bills, but 87% of those refugees are now in permanent housing, and their hotels were a temporary cost only.

Therefore, the member should celebrate the success of our refugee efforts.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is easy to be under budget when one does not have one.

If the minister cannot tell the House what the final cost of the initiative will be, could he explain to the House why, after spending all this money, we still see Syrian refugees in hotel rooms? They do not have access to language training services, and they have to access food banks on a day-to-day basis.

Therefore, if refugees are not receiving the support they need, where is all of this money going?