House of Commons Hansard #45 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was medical.

Topics

The MonarchyOral Questions

Noon

Some hon. members

Hear, hear!

The EnvironmentOral Questions

Noon

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

Madam Speaker, today, April 22, is Earth Day, and the Prime Minister just signed the Paris agreement on climate change.

However, the parliamentary budget officer said yesterday that without a major change of course, the greenhouse gas reduction targets are unrealistic. What is worse, even the Conservatives' old inadequate targets are not being met, but the Prime Minister is giving his word to the entire world.

Does the Prime Minister realize that he will not be able to keep his word unless he puts an end to the energy east pipeline project?

The EnvironmentOral Questions

Noon

North Vancouver B.C.

Liberal

Jonathan Wilkinson LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Madam Speaker, let me once again say how proud I personally am that the Prime Minister of Canada is in New York to sign the historic Paris agreement.

Our government is also incredibly proud and I think Canadians are proud of the work that Canada has done with respect to climate change since coming into office.

The parliamentary budget officer's report discussed the pathway on climate change. It is one pathway. What we are focused on is developing a pan-Canadian pathway that is inclusive, that brings in the provinces, territories, and indigenous peoples to create a strategy that is a Canadian strategy that will allow us to manage our emissions down while concurrently creating a clean growth economy.

Economic DevelopmentOral Questions

April 22nd, 2016 / noon

Bloc

Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC

Madam Speaker, Quebec's entrepreneurial legacy is in jeopardy.

Federal law makes it more lucrative to sell one's business to a stranger than a family member. The difference can be equivalent to the price of a luxury home. That is unacceptable. The Government of Quebec has called for change.

Last week, I sent a letter to the minister. This morning, the president of CGI Group made a heartfelt plea. When will the federal government stop being indifferent towards Quebec companies?

Economic DevelopmentOral Questions

12:05 p.m.

Hull—Aylmer Québec

Liberal

Greg Fergus LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Innovation

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question.

Our government is committed to creating a positive economic environment that is conducive to helping businesses succeed across the country. We will continue to support innovative Canadian companies, so that they can prosper in this competitive global environment.

Then, we will do everything we can to ensure that jobs and innovation remain in our economy, through programs—

Economic DevelopmentOral Questions

12:05 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Order. That concludes oral question period for today.

House of Commons AdministrationRoutine Proceedings

12:05 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I have the honour to lay upon the table the 2016-2019 strategic plan for the House of Commons administration.

House of Commons AdministrationRoutine Proceedings

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Order. I would like to remind the hon. members that the House continues and proceedings continue. I am sure you all have some very important things to say to each other, but if you could just take the conversation into the lobby, that would be very much appreciated.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

Government Response to PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

12:05 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

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

International TradeRoutine Proceedings

12:05 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard—Verdun Québec

Liberal

David Lametti LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2) I have the great honour to enthusiastically table, in both official languages, the treaty entitled, “Protocol to the 2007 World Wine Trade Group Agreement on Requirements for Wine Labelling concerning Alcohol Tolerance, Vintage, Variety, and Wine Region”, done at Brussels on March 22, 2013, and entered into force on November 1, 2013. An explanatory memorandum is included with this treaty.

Employment InsuranceRoutine Proceedings

12:05 p.m.

Cape Breton—Canso Nova Scotia

Liberal

Rodger Cuzner LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the Employment Insurance Act, section 3, I am pleased to submit to the House, in both official languages, copies of the 2014-15 employment insurance monitoring and assessment report. I request that the report be referred to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Deb Schulte Liberal King—Vaughan, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the first report of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development entitled, “Main Estimates 2016-17: Vote 1 under Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Votes 1, 5 and 10 under Environment and Votes 1 and 5 under Parks Canada Agency”.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the second report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security concerning Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Public Service Labour Relations Act, the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board Act and other Acts and to provide for certain other measures.

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

Income Tax ActRoutine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-263, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (hearing impairment).

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou for the work he does in the House and his tremendous understanding of the challenges Canadians with disabilities must overcome. I would like to thank him for seconding the bill.

More than three million Canadians are deaf or hearing impaired. Unfortunately, the current regulations governing the tax credit are such that almost none of these people can access the credit. That has to change. That is why I am introducing this bill today.

I am presenting this bill because, quite frankly, when we see the millions of Canadians who are deaf, deafened, or hard of hearing, who are simply not able to access the disability tax credit because of regulations that are simply far too severe, there has to be change. I must say that the bill is supported by the Canadian Hard of Hearing Association and the Canadian audiologists association, and all the Canadians who are deaf, deafened, or hard of hearing who believe that they, too, should have access to the disability tax credit. I hope that all members of Parliament will support this important legislation.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Falun GongPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

NDP

Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition signed by hundreds of Canadians.

The petitioners are calling on Parliament and the Government of Canada to quickly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in China.

Indigenous AffairsPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Don Rusnak Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON

Mr. Speaker, boil water advisories in first nations communities have existed for a long time. In fact, well over 80 boil water advisories exist in first nations communities today.

Accordingly, I present this petition on behalf of concerned Canadians. The petitioners are calling on the minister to develop a plan, and implement that plan, to end the boil water advisories in first nations communities no later than by the end of calendar year 2020.

Federal Advocate for ChildrenPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure today that I table a petition that advocates for an independent office of the federal advocate for children and young persons.

Coming out of Manitoba where we do have a child advocate, these are individuals who truly believe that our children need to have a strong advocate. I think this petition is well worth supporting or at least considering.

International DevelopmentPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

12:15 p.m.

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition from the people of Victoria, calling on the government to allocate 0.7% of Canada's GDP to official development assistance by the year 2020.

I was pleased to meet last week with my friends at Results Canada, who are powerful advocates for this initiative. It was former prime minister Pearson who set that target way back in 1970, and we have yet to meet it. Indeed, we are falling far short of it today.

We can and must do more to achieve the UN sustainable development goals, and these petitioners ask us to begin that work today.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:15 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Air Canada Public Participation ActPrivilegeRoutine Proceedings

12:15 p.m.

Bloc

Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am raising a question of privilege in the House of Commons with respect to misleading information that the Minister of Transport and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport gave to the House about the litigation involving Quebec and Air Canada and arising from the Air Canada Public Participation Act.

Here are the facts. On Wednesday, the House made two decisions with respect to the Liberal government's argument justifying the rush vote at second reading on Bill C-10, the Air Canada bill. It was the same argument the government has been making for months, but the facts on which it based its argument are inaccurate. The Government of Quebec refuted them yesterday morning.

In question period yesterday, the Minister of Transport continued to supply the same false information that the Government of Quebec had refuted just that morning.

On Wednesday, the House made two major decisions, decisions that could lead to the permanent demise of 2,600 jobs in the aerospace sector, including 1,800 in the Montreal area, most of them in the riding represented by the member for Saint-Laurent.

First, we voted on a time allocation motion to end debate on Bill C-10. As a result, Quebeckers represented by Bloc Québécois members were silenced at second reading in the House, which is why I have chosen to speak up now.

Then, the House voted on the bill at second reading. The government claims that rushing the vote was essential because the NDP had moved an amendment to withdraw the bill.

We understand that the NDP tabled its amendment to demonstrate its opposition to Bill C-10. Government bills rarely receive unanimous support in the House of Commons. Does the fact that some members oppose a bill justify time allocation?

To answer that question in the affirmative would be to deny parliamentary democracy. We understand very well that fallacious arguments are part of the debate and that disagreements between members are to be expected and are fodder for debate. The House made those two decisions in good faith, and I have no doubt about that.

This brings me to the vote on Bill C-10 at second reading. The House voted based on two pieces of false information that had been presented by the Minister of Transport.

On Wednesday, at 4:25 p.m., he said, and I quote, “Air Canada, the Government of Quebec, and the Government of Manitoba have stopped their litigation”. At 4:30 p.m., he added, “the Province of Quebec...decided, after discussions with Air Canada, to drop the lawsuit”. At 4:35 p.m., he said, “the Government of Quebec and the Government of Manitoba have decided they will not pursue Air Canada”.

Then, at 4:42 p.m., during his very last intervention, the minister closed the debate saying, “the reason we have proceeded with the bill is very simple. It is because the provinces of Quebec and Manitoba have come to an agreement with Air Canada, and they are dropping their litigation.”

I want to emphasize the word “reason”. The minister gave the House false information. Quebec did not drop its litigation. Quebec never decided to withdraw from the lawsuit. Litigation between the Government of Quebec and Air Canada is ongoing.

That is essentially what Quebec's minister of the economy said during her status update on the issue, which contradicted the information presented by the minister and the parliamentary secretary.

In response to our question yesterday, the Minister of Transport decided to stay the course and keep contradicting what the Government of Quebec said, and I quote:

“We decided to amend the Air Canada Public Participation Act precisely because the governments of Quebec and Manitoba decided to drop their lawsuits against Air Canada.”

These are repeat offences of making false statements over the course of several weeks. In reoffending, it seems clear to me that the government deliberately misled and continues to mislead the House by providing false information.

The request that the Government of Quebec filed with the Supreme Court on February 23, is further proof of this, and I quote, “An agreement has been reached between the parties to postpone the decision on the application for leave to appeal until July 15”.

I am almost finished. I was told I should present the facts and that is what I am doing. I imagine that your ruling, Mr. Speaker, will be more informed if I complete my argument, even if you find that one of the arguments may not be the best.

Since the decision on the application for leave to appeal will not be rendered until July 15, 2016, the lawsuit is still ongoing. The Government of Quebec simply asked the court not to rule on the issue before mid-July, and with good reason. It wants to retain some bargaining power in order to negotiate Air Canada's purchase of Bombardier planes and its establishment of maintenance centres in Quebec.

That brings me to the second piece of false information. On April 15, at the beginning of the debate at second reading of Bill C-10, the government, or more specifically the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport, explained to the House that it was a good time to pass Bill C-10:

In light of Air Canada's investments in aerospace in Canada, including aircraft maintenance...

However, we learned yesterday morning that Air Canada still has not decided to invest in aerospace and aircraft maintenance. That is why the Government of Quebec still has not dropped its lawsuit and why this matter is still before the Supreme Court.

The government misled the House by providing it with false information. As a result, it is possible that, acting in good faith, the House was led to commit an error when it adopted the time allocation motion and supported the principle of Bill C-10. That is why, Mr. Speaker, I ask you to find that the government violated the Standing Orders of the House, which casts doubt on the legitimacy of Wednesday's votes.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, if you find that there is a prima facie question of privilege, I intend to move the following motion: “That the House acknowledge that the government deliberately misled the House and that it reconsider the vote on the NDP amendment and the vote at second reading on Bill C-10, An Act to amend the Air Canada Public Participation Act and to provide for certain other measures.”

Mr. Speaker, I rely on your good judgment to propose the best way to proceed.

Air Canada Public Participation ActPrivilegeRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

I thank the member for his comments. I think the Minister of Transport has something to add.

Air Canada Public Participation ActPrivilegeRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount Québec

Liberal

Marc Garneau LiberalMinister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, inside and outside the House, Quebec and Air Canada announced their intention to put an end to the lawsuit. As a result, Air Canada will help create a centre of excellence in Quebec. On February 17, the premier of Quebec himself said that the Government of Quebec planned to drop the lawsuit against Air Canada.

I want to clarify one thing: the Government of Canada is not part of these discussions. I therefore do not think that my colleague's comments truly constitute a question of privilege. I think he simply wants to debate this issue.

Air Canada Public Participation ActPrivilegeRoutine Proceedings

12:25 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the same matter of privilege, I want to advise you that we will be getting back to the House with further comments at a later point in time.