Debates of June 17th, 2016

National Defence

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Madam Speaker, now that the Liberals have changed their minds and declared ISIL atrocities a genocide, they have triggered article I of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which requires member countries like Canada to use force to stop the crime. Training alone will not stop genocide. We need to strike from the air while our allies fight on the ground.

Will the Liberal government respect the law, support our allies, and reinstate the air bombing campaign to stop this genocidal death cult?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Madam Speaker, my colleague is wrong. The fact that the United Nations has recognized the genocide of the Yazidis does not change at all our tremendous commitment to fight this terrorist group and to eradicate it.

That is precisely why we improved the mission of Canada in this region of the world. We have tripled our efforts for training. We have doubled our intelligence capacity and we are improving our programs for development to rescue these populations.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Madam Speaker, the previous government demonstrated that we can simultaneously train our allies on the ground while we fight the enemy from the sky. That is precisely what we should be doing now to honour the convention on genocide.

However, the Liberal government has abandoned our allies in the Middle East in the fight against ISIL. Now our allies in NATO wonder if they will abandon our allies in Eastern Europe.

Will the Liberal government stand with our allies to protect eastern Europe against Russian aggression?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Madam Speaker, the premise of the question is wrong. In fact, our allies are very satisfied with the contribution of Canada to fighting ISIL.

It is an improvement compared with the past, since we have tripled our ability to train. We have doubled our ability to have intelligence capacity, and we have improved the support, not only for Iran and Iraq but also for Jordan and for Lebanon. We will be very strong at NATO with our allies for the east part of Europe.

Canada is back everywhere.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Madam Speaker, Canada has always supported its allies when they have been under attack, whether it was in World War I, World War II, or the Korean War.

At this time, our eastern European allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization are worried about Russian aggression. They have asked us to deploy 1,000 soldiers to the region as part of a NATO force for their protection. It is shameful to see the Liberals abandon our allies in order not to undermine future peacekeeping missions.

Is it the Liberals' position that abandoning our allies is the right thing to do?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Madam Speaker, my colleague's premise is completely false.

We are going to support our NATO allies, as we do our allies in Iraq and Syria and all around the world, and it is true that we will also strengthen our capacity to participate in United Nations peacekeeping missions. We will be present everywhere because Canada is back everywhere, including with NATO.

My colleague will be very pleased with our contribution to NATO. He will not say so for partisan reasons, but he will think it nonetheless.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Madam Speaker, the Liberals would rather save our resources for UN missions in Africa than defend our NATO allies who are concerned about Russian aggression.

While our brothers feel as though their very survival is threatened, Canada is making plans to win back a seat on the UN Security Council. That is shameful and the antithesis of what Canada is all about.

Will the Prime Minister confirm that Canada will deploy troops to support our allies?

[Karen McCrimmon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence]

Madam Speaker, our government is committed to actively contributing to greater security and peace throughout the world.

NATO is Canada's key collective defence alliance and we take our commitment to our NATO allies very seriously. NATO allies have now agreed to increase the alliance presence in the Baltic states and in Poland to face the changed security environment in Europe. As a committed NATO ally, Canada is actively considering options to effectively contribute to this effort.

Pensions

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Madam Speaker, Canadians are facing a retirement security crisis. The minister has been briefed on the fact that Canada spends significantly less on public pensions than other OECD countries. He has been briefed on the reality that young people today simply are not able to save enough for retirement.

When he meets with the provinces, will the minister make it crystal clear that the federal government believes CPP must be expanded so that Canadians can retire in dignity and security?

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

Madam Speaker, every Canadian shares the goal of a secure retirement. That is why our Minister of Finance, in one of his first acts, met with provincial ministers of finance in order to look at CPP enhancement.

I am proud to say that under his leadership, on Monday, provincial ministers of finance will meet with him in order to ensure Canadians can retire in dignity. This government is going to pursue that policy because retiring in dignity is one of our priorities.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Madam Speaker, vague answers about pensions are always worrisome.

Yesterday, the Minister of Finance tried to reassure us. The problem is that he finished his answer by saying, “I hope to have something positive to report to this House in the coming days.” No one can retire comfortably on hope.

Will the minister commit to end the meeting with the provinces with nothing less than an agreement to enhance the pension plan?

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

My colleague should be pleased because our Minister of Finance is dealing with the pension problem in Canada. It would be pretentious to make assumptions about the outcome of the meeting.

This government is open and co-operative. We invited the provinces in December. The Minister of Finance will be meeting with his provincial counterparts in Vancouver on Monday. We will continue to work hard to ensure that all Canadians can retire with dignity.

Canada Revenue Agency

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Madam Speaker, actions speak louder than words, so we will see after that meeting.

The fact is that while Canadians struggle to make ends meet in retirement, wealthy corporations continue to profit from generous tax loopholes. Offshore tax agreements signed by the government are allowing companies to stash away money offshore instead of paying what they owe in Canada.

Why are the Liberals pursuing even more of these agreements, when they should know full well that their government is allowing profitable Canadian companies to evade paying their fair share of taxes?

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

Madam Speaker, our government believes that all Canadians should pay their fair share of taxes in the jurisdiction in which they earned their revenue and profits, and the hon. member knows that.

The last agreement was signed by the previous government on June 15, 2015. International tax evasion and tax avoidance have been the subjects of discussions at the G7 and G20. We are going to continue to work with our partners to have co-operation internationally.

Let me remind the House that we invested $444 million to give the tools, the system, and the technology to the CRA to combat tax—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Madam Speaker, this government is combatting tax evasion with its eyes wide shut.

The Canada Revenue Agency is granting amnesty to fraudsters. The government is not doing anything to KPMG, the mastermind behind this tax evasion. The court cases keep getting delayed, and meanwhile the government is standing idly by.

All that is missing is an all-inclusive deal for the 1%. Funny, the Liberals promised to give back to the middle class, not the 1%.

Will there finally be a public investigation into KPMG? Will the government finally take tax evasion seriously?

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

The Liberal government made a commitment to combat tax evasion during the last election campaign. We have made historic investments in the Canada Revenue Agency, to the tune of $444 million, to outfit the agency with the tools, technology, and teams it needs to conduct investigations and put an end to tax evasion and tax avoidance.

The agency will take action to combat these crimes, and we will build on this.

Democratic Reform

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Madam Speaker, Liberals claim they are listening to Canadians, but all their actions point to arrogant Liberal political self-interest.

Changing the way we vote should not be about a committee of politicians, it should not be about the Prime Minister, and it should not be about the self-interest of political parties. It has to start being about what Canadians want.

Will they give each and every Canadian a direct say through a referendum, yes or no?

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Minister of Democratic Institutions]

Madam Speaker, it is a privilege to be here on this traditional Algonquin territory with my colleagues on this fine Friday.

I do believe that the member opposite and I agree that we need to listen to Canadians, that we need to hear from them. This is about them. This is their electoral system that we are trying to modernize. We will do that by leveraging the commitment and the options that the members in this House have to reach out to their constituents and bring their voices into this effort.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Madam Speaker, those are fine words, but it has to be more about the actions than the words, and we are not seeing it in the actions.

Liberals set up a committee that is made up of politicians, by politicians, and for politicians. That is all we keep hearing from them. We have actually seen them start to charge people entrance into their so-called open town halls.

A newsflash to the Liberals: this should not be about their self-interest; this should be about all Canadians and their interests.

Will they give Canadians, each and every one of them, a direct say in a referendum, yes or no?

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Minister of Democratic Institutions]

Madam Speaker, I thank the parties in this House which have brought forward the names of the individuals they would like to see represented on the all-party committee, to reach out to Canadians, to hear from experts and academics, to hear from those who have come before us in this place, and also to reach out to our constituents to make sure their voices are heard.

I hope that the party opposite has had the time to put the names of its representatives forward.

I look forward to the committee beginning its work as early as next week.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Madam Speaker, today I will quote a Liberal to the Liberals:

Our democracy belongs to its citizens, and it is the voters of this province that should decide how their representatives should be elected.

That was the Liberal minister for democratic renewal announcing, almost 10 years ago today, the Ontario referendum on changing the province's voting system.

After conducting a far more credible consultation process than that proposed by the Liberal government, those Liberals still had a referendum.

Why will these Liberals not hold a referendum?

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Minister of Democratic Institutions]

Madam Speaker, I note that the member is wearing a plaid tie on this very important day, raising awareness about prostate cancer.

I would like to assure him that the efforts we are about to undertake to reach out to constituents across this great country will involve listening and will involve reflecting their wishes in this process.

I am counting on the member opposite to hear from his constituents especially, and to bring all voices, a range of diverse opinions, into this conversation.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will continue with the same referendum announcement from June 20, 2006:

The adoption of a new electoral system would represent a foundational change to Ontario's democracy. This is an important decision that would require the support of a solid majority of Ontarians....

Holding a referendum is what we do in Canada before we change how the people get to exercise their franchise.

When the Liberal cabinet finally proposes its new voting system in 2017, will the Liberals allow Canadians to make the final say in a referendum, yes or no?

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Minister of Democratic Institutions]

Madam Speaker, if that is truly what the member opposite believes, where was this push for good process and referenda when his government pushed through the Fair Elections Act?