House of Commons Hansard #67 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was industry.
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, what Canadians do know is that, for 10 years, the Conservatives completely missed the mark when it came to providing Canadians and our armed forces with the equipment they needed. The Conservatives threw their lot in with a plane that does not work and is a long way from ever working.
In the meantime, our armed forces are unable to keep Canada's promises to NATO and NORAD. We inherited this problem and we will solve it.
Rona Ambrose ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not understand our military and the dangerous world it operates in. He naively pulled our jets out of the fight against ISIS, then the Liberals cut billions from defence spending. Now the Prime Minister is choosing what kind of fighter plane our pilots will fly.
How can Canadians have any faith that he will pick the best plane for our men and women in uniform when he does not even understand the value they bring to a fight?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I find that a bit rich from the Conservatives who, when in government, completely botched their procurement process. They were unable to deliver the kinds of planes and equipment that the Canadian Forces needed and instead continued to play politics when what Canadians needed was the right equipment at the right price. They left us a mess that we are going to fix, because that is why Canadians elected us.
Denis Lebel Conservative Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, now the softwood lumber industry is paying the price of the Liberals' inaction.
We know that the former Liberal government and the United States ended up in a dispute that resulted in countervailing duties of 37%. Our government was able to bring those duties down to 10% on average, thanks to an agreement we reached in 2006.
Can the Prime Minister commit to securing an agreement that will be good for Canada's forestry industry, an agreement he will soon be signing with the United States?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, again, the Conservative government did nothing about the softwood lumber issue for years. We had to start by re-establishing good relationships with the U.S. government. Since forming the government, we have worked hard to deal with this matter. We continue to work hard on this because the previous government did not want to talk about softwood lumber. The only thing it wanted to talk to the Americans about was the pipeline. That was rather frustrating for the Americans and for Canadians.
Denis Lebel Conservative Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, I invite the Prime Minister to hit the history books and read about what happened with softwood lumber in the past.
The Liberals completely abandoned the regions, including my own region, on the softwood lumber file before 2006. We had an agreement that ended in October 2015. The former minister was already working on moving this issue forward. That is the truth. Yesterday, the Government of Quebec asked the federal government to consider the changes to the system that issues timber supply and forest management agreements in Quebec.
Will the Prime Minister commit to signing an agreement that will make Quebec happy and that will take into account the new reality in Quebec and the rest of Canada?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, Canadians know very well that the former Conservative government completely bungled our relationship with the United States. They did not agree on anything.
As we all know, our relationship with the United States is the Canadian government's most important international relationship, which is why we immediately started working on restoring a positive relationship with the United States, so that we can work on files that have a real impact on people's lives, such as softwood lumber, jobs, and innovation.
That is what we are working on for Canadians.
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, one of the most respected constitutional experts in the country stated that the bill on medical assistance in dying is unconstitutional.
He added his voice to those of the Barreau du Québec, the Alberta Court of Appeal, and the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. A lot of people are saying the same thing.
Why does the Prime Minister want to force people who are suffering to take their cases to court? Why does he persist when he knows he is wrong?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect the government to defend the rights and freedoms of Canadians but also to protect the most vulnerable.
Medical assistance in dying represents an important step in the evolution of our society, and it is important that it be done right. For that reason we tried to find the right balance and to introduce conditions and a responsible bill that will defend the interests and the choices of Canadians while protecting the most vulnerable. That is what we did.
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister raised a red herring there. Actually, it is entirely possible to protect vulnerable people and guarantee Canadians' rights.
The Supreme Court recognized a charter right: medical assistance in dying. The Prime Minister's law removes that right. It is as simple as that. For 10 years, the Conservative government trampled on human rights. Canadians expected better from the Liberals.
How can the Prime Minister justify the fact that his government is behaving exactly like the Conservatives?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, whereas the Conservative government refused to do anything about this important issue despite the Supreme Court's ruling, we got to work immediately.
We consulted Canadians and listened to their concerns. We sought to strike a balance between defending rights and freedoms and protecting the most vulnerable. That is exactly what we did with this bill. We recognize that this is an important stage in our society's development and that we have to travel this road responsibly. That is exactly what we are doing, and we are proud to have done it for Canada today.
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals did not take action immediately. They waited until April to introduce their bill.
Bill C-14 is unconstitutional. It would be challenged for years in the courts. The Carter family has said it feels betrayed by the government and by the Prime Minister. Here in the House, the Prime Minister refused to accept amendments that would fix the bill and make it charter compliant.
I have a simple question. Is the Prime Minister going to accept those exact changes if they now come from the unelected Senate?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, as we do in every situation, we listen to suggestions and amendments from all parliamentarians, including from the Senate. We accepted a number of amendments at committee from opposition parties and we continue to look forward to a fulsome debate in an informed way on this extremely important issue.
Canadians expected us to balance the rights of Canadians with the defence of the most vulnerable. That is exactly what we are doing. We look forward to seeing what suggestions the more independent and less partisan Senate has to make on this important piece of legislation.
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has just revealed that he is playing political games with a bill that is about reducing suffering. That is shameful.
The Prime Minister talks of a middle ground, but since when do we compromise on human rights, human rights which have been guaranteed by the Supreme Court when applying the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? For a party that loves to wrap itself in that charter, why is the Prime Minister pushing a bill which he knows goes against the charter?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I will let Canadians decide who is playing politics on this particular issue.
We are focused on putting forward a significant change in Canadian society that both defends Canadians' rights and freedoms while protecting the most vulnerable.
This is a big step in the course of our society, and this is one that we have made, listening to Canadians, listening to opposition parties, in the full understanding that this step will be followed by others in the coming years.
This step was an important one to get right. That is exactly what Canadians expected of us and we delivered.
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
I would ask the member for Timmins—James Bay to try to restrain himself.
The hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman.
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have broken their promise for a fair and transparent competition to replace our CF-18s and are sole-sourcing the Boeing Super Hornet instead.
Maybe we should not be surprised. Boeing officials have met 10 times since February with senior political staff, including Public Works, National Defence, Industry, and the PMO. Half of those meetings included the senior policy adviser of the Minister of National Defence.
Why have the Liberals rigged the process to replace our fighter jets and allowed Boeing to jump the queue?
Harjit S. Sajjan LiberalMinister of National Defence
As I stated before, Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to replacing our CF-18s because it is long overdue. They should have been replaced a long time ago.
In terms of meeting officials from various companies, the hon. member should also know that on our trip to Singapore the CEO of Lockheed was actually with us at that conference. I met with her and sat with her at that table as well.
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have invented an imaginary capability gap.
In 2014, Conservatives invested $400 million to upgrade our CF-18s.
Lieutenant-General Michael Hood, Commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, has said that the CF-18s' useful life has been extended to 2025 and they can do the job.
Meanwhile, the Liberals have fabricated a false narrative to sole-source the Super Hornet.
Canadians deserve the truth. So, who is telling the truth? The Royal Canadian Air Force or the Liberals?
Harjit S. Sajjan LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, we should have replaced those fighters long before, so we did not even have to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on extending the program. It has been close to 30 years that we have been flying these airplanes.
Our men and women deserve the right equipment, and our government will deliver on that.
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, the only gap here is on the government benches. The government seems to be suffering from an imaginary problem. Among their many gaps, the Liberals have a capability gap.
On April 14, General Hood, Commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, said that the CF-18s' useful life had been extended to 2025.
Can the minister confirm that this is a ploy to allow the Liberals to keep an election promise?
Harjit S. Sajjan LiberalMinister of National Defence
Yes, Mr. Speaker, the CF-18 will be extended to 2025. We do need replacements. They should have been replaced a long time ago. We have to start the process soon because our fighters have been flying for some time. They should have been replaced.
More capability gaps have been created, just like in the shipbuilding program.
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, the capability gap was created in collaboration with lobbyists.
Since February, Boeing had 10 meetings with senior political staff. More than half of those meetings were with the senior policy adviser to the Minister of National Defence and the Prime Minister. That many meetings with the same group smells fishy to me.
The government claimed to want to be open and transparent, but did it rig the process to replace our CF-18s to help Boeing jump the queue?
Harjit S. Sajjan LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to replacing the CF-18s. As I stated, they should have been replaced a long time ago. Maybe the hon. member should have been asking the questions when they were in government.
The capability gap took place in front of us, and in 2025, the CF-18s will not be able to fly, and it is important that we move very quickly in filling this capability gap.
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Hope, BC
Mr. Speaker, by appointing the Liberal House leader as the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, the Prime Minister has placed his part-time minister into a precarious position.
The minister is in a conflict of interest whenever he is dealing with the Irving family. They have numerous fisheries interests in Atlantic Canada, and Irving Shipyards is a key supplier to the Canadian Coast Guard.
Why did the Prime Minister put his part-time Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard into a full-time conflict of interest?