Debates of Sept. 20th, 2016

Citizen Engagement

[Pam Goldsmith-Jones, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize how important public dialogue is for building public confidence and public trust. This summer, thousands of Canadians participated in town hall meetings on climate change, electoral reform, veterans issues, seniors issues, and national defence. Even more important, citizens stood up and offered their expertise in business and on the environment to help lead those discussions.

In my case, I would like to thank Tim Schoulz and Megan Dias on electoral reform; James Glave, Jim Pawley, Anna Stucas, David Hocking, Merran Smith, Peter Truheit, and Matt Rockall on climate change; Anne Titcombe, Sue Elliott, Pat Hunt, and Alison Leaney on seniors issues; and Harry Greenwood on veterans issues. It has been a remarkable summer of creating consultation and connection right across the country, and all parliamentarians are very grateful.

Foreign Affairs

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, I am deeply concerned about the Liberal government's motivation for deploying our men and women in uniform to sub-Saharan Africa. Our soldiers are not pawns on the Prime Minister's political chessboard to use as his fastest way to a UN Security Council seat.

There is no transparency about this dangerous mission. There is no commitment to a vote on it. Canadians deserve an answer.

How can they trust that the Prime Minister is not just using our troops as pawns to achieve his own political goals?

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

Mr. Speaker, we have been extremely transparent about my mandate letter on re-engagement in the peace operations of the United Nations. When it comes to our important part in the world, I made it quite transparent on the recent trip I took to Africa with retired general Roméo Dallaire and Madame Louise Arbour. We have been extremely transparent. We announced, in Canada, the number of troops we will be committing to peace operations before we actually went to the UN ministerial peacekeeping summit.

When we have more information and do a thorough analysis, we will communicate with Canadians properly and debate it in this House.

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, today we learned, through the media, that the Prime Minister has entered into negotiations with China on an extradition treaty.

According to Amnesty International, the Chinese justice system's use of torture is widespread and systematic, and the repression of human rights is a regular occurrence. Does the Prime Minister not understand that our openness to China should be about encouraging them to adopt our values for human rights, as opposed to us giving in to theirs?

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

Mr. Speaker, we announced our national security and rule of law dialogue during the Prime Minister's visit on September 12 as part of a comprehensive discussion on expanding our relationship with China. The U.S. and the U.K. had similar dialogues. Rule of law discussions included extradition and transfers of offenders, where we stressed that Canada is governed by very high standards.

The promotion and protection of human rights is an integral part of Canadian foreign policy and is a key priority in our relationship with China.

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, it seems like the Prime Minister's principles cannot withstand anything more than a stiff breeze. Back in August, his Immigration minister explicitly rejected a formal extradition treaty with China so long as China still had the death penalty, but today, the Prime Minister is at the table hammering out an agreement.

I follow the news. I do not recall any headlines that China has abolished the death penalty.

What has changed in China in a month to lead the Prime Minister to completely abandon Canada's principles on human rights?

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

Mr. Speaker, one thing for certain is that our government believes in dialogue, and through dialogue, we can have change. With this dialogue, we will be able to push human rights. When it comes to agreements like this, we will be pushing on the issue of the death penalty, because human rights are an integral part of our government's mandate.

Taxation

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, later today, this House will vote on the Liberal clawback of the tax-free savings accounts. Our party is standing up for the taxpayer and will vote against this unfair tax hike on retirement and retirees.

Conservatives believe in letting Canadians keep more of their hard-earned money and in giving them every possible opportunity to save it. Instead of expanding opportunities for Canadians to save for themselves tax free, why does the Prime Minister always think that he knows better than Canadians when it comes to their own hard-earned money?

[Bill Morneau, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, we want to be clear that we are working on behalf of middle-class families and those Canadians who want to get into the middle class. We are ensuring that we have a retirement system that works for Canadians. We focused on doing that by working in collaboration with the provinces to enhance our Canada Pension Plan.

We continue to see TFSAs as an important part of our retirement system and are continuing them along the path where they will be increased with the CPI. In total, we will have a strong retirement system for all Canadians.

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister unveiled his latest tax increase aimed at Canadian families and workers.

The analysis done by the Minister of Finance shows that the increase in CPP premiums will lead to job losses and a slowdown in our economy for the next 12 years.

Will the Prime Minister admit that this tax increase will make life more difficult for Canadians who are looking for work, paying their bills, and saving for retirement?

[Bill Morneau, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, we know that it is very hard for Canadians to save enough money to retire in dignity. That is why we found a way to work with the provinces to improve the Canada pension plan. This way, the situation for a quarter of the 1.1 million Canadians who are currently having a hard time retiring will improve.

The Environment

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Liberals have repeated across the country how much they hate Stephen Harper's targets on greenhouse gases. They even warned, in their platform, of the “catastrophic” impact of the Conservative plan.

We agree. It was inadequate. The Conservative plan was, as the minister said, “fake”, so why are the Liberals copying it?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, in the Vancouver declaration, we and all the provinces and territories agreed to implement GHG mitigation policies in support of meeting or exceeding Canada's 2030 target of a 30% reduction below 2005 levels of emissions, including specific provincial and territorial targets and objectives, and to increase the level of ambition of environmental policies over time in order to drive greater GHG emission reductions, consistent with the Paris agreement.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we need only to look at article 4 of the Paris agreement to see that they have yet to do anything to fulfill our international obligations and they know it.

It was the same thing with the Kyoto protocol. The Liberals did nothing and we had one of the worst records in the world on greenhouse gases. They were forced to admit that they had no plan to respect the Kyoto protocol. It was an exercise in public relations.

Why can the minister not admit that it is the same thing in this case? For the Liberals it was pretence. The Liberals were a bunch of phonies when they signed the agreement in Paris. They had no real intention of reducing greenhouse gases. For the Liberals, this is just another public relations exercise.

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, we are working together now to develop pan-Canadian solutions with provinces and territories, unlike the previous government.

We are taking action already on important issues, like clean electricity, reducing methane emissions from the oil and gas sector, and investing in public transit and green infrastructure.

Our government has been clear from the outset that we are taking a different path from that of the Harper government, which set targets with no plan in place to meet them and undertook no action on climate change.

Public Safety

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, while the Prime Minister is in New York trying to win a seat on the United Nations Security Council, allegations of torture against two of our intelligence agencies have resurfaced.

Torture is morally wrong. It is ineffective because information obtained through torture is unreliable. Torture violates all of our commitments. Nevertheless, the ministerial directive that allows the use of information obtained through torture is still in place.

Is the government prepared to repeal that directive?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, the reports conducted by Mr. Justice O'Connor and Mr. Justice Iacobucci are extremely important reports.

The core recommendation in both of those about additional scrutiny, particularly through a parliamentary process, is in fact a recommendation that we are moving on right now with Bill C-22 before this House.

More broadly, the fact is that the entire national security framework is under review. We are consulting Canadians; more than 7,000 are already participating in that process. We are determined to keep Canadians safe—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to know whether the directive that allows the use of information obtained through torture will remain in place.

Meanwhile, today we learned that the government is negotiating an extradition treaty with China. The justice department has always been against such an agreement because Chinese courts do not use the same standards as Canadian courts, torture and physical abuse remain prevalent, and the death penalty is still widely used, including against political dissidents.

Is this what the Prime Minister calls standing up for human rights?

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

Mr. Speaker, our government has been very clear. We need to start a dialogue, and we will be able to promote the objectives of the Canadian government.

We believe in human rights. It is through dialogue that we can actually start a conversation and be able to have those difficult conversations with nations where there are issues with human rights. Without dialogue, we cannot move the yardstick forward. Being loud from here in Canada does not help the people who are actually affected by human rights violations.

Forestry Industry

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since this Parliament began, I have been saying that the softwood lumber issue is urgent and that hundreds of thousands of jobs are at stake.

Trips to New York are all well and good, but nothing ever comes of them. This government is all talk and no action. It never delivers results.

Will the government let these workers keep their jobs? In 2006, Canada signed an agreement that worked quite well. Why is this government incapable of signing an agreement? Dialogue is a good thing, but a monologue where only the Americans are talking is not getting us anywhere.

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

Mr. Speaker, this issue is a priority for our government. We are in the midst of serious negotiations on this issue. This summer, we had a very productive meeting with industry producers and workers in Saguenay.

Even the spokesperson for Unifor in Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean praised the efforts of the Minister of International Trade. We do not want to reach just any old deal. We want a good deal for Canada.

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the president of a union affiliated with the FTQ, which received a larger tax credit than others from this government, will obviously agree and have nothing but good things to say.

The fact is that things are at a standstill. Sixty-five per cent of Canadian softwood exports go to the United States. In my riding, 70% of the economy relies on forestry, and these people have delivered nothing.

It is fine to say that discussions are ongoing. However, when the minister returned last week, she said that they would have to go to court.

Are we treating our American partners with respect by taking legal action against them?

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

Mr. Speaker, we held consultations across the country. We understand the differences in regional positions. We understand the nuances of Canadian industry. It is part of what we are doing to move things along with our American partners. We have not yet ruled out any options in this matter.

Government Expenditures

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we found out that the Liberals decided they were entitled to line their own pockets with so-called moving expenses for their own political staff. For instance, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change gave more than $20,000 to one of her Liberal staffers for the move, but documents reveal that money was not for movers or hotels at all.

If the total cost paid for services was over $20,000, but there were no costs associated with the actual move, exactly where did the taxpayers' money go?