Debates of Sept. 26th, 2016

Government Expenditures

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

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Infrastructure is no stranger to wasteful spending. First we had sky palace 2.0, and now we find out he has signed off on over $50,000 in moving expenses for one of his staff. Canadians are losing their homes and their jobs, but the Minister of Infrastructure is more concerned about making sure his staffer collects tens of thousands of dollars in so-called moving expenses.

How much of this payout was used as unaccounted for personalized cash payments?

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism]

Mr. Speaker, these are policies that were put in place in the 1970s. Our government recognizes that they need to be reviewed. That is why our Prime Minister has shown leadership and asked the Treasury Board to create a new policy to govern relocation expenses.

Let us talk about the good work that the Minister of Infrastructure and his team are doing. Our government has made significant investments that help create jobs while building a strong foundation for a sustainable economic future. We have also helped to develop a historic plan to invest more than $120 billion in infrastructure over the next 10 years, and this includes $50 billion in—

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

I remind members that one side talks and then the other side talks, not at the same time. Let us take our turns.

I am having a much easier time hearing the questions than I am hearing the answers, so I would like everyone to listen up.

The hon. member for Windsor—Tecumseh.

Foreign Affairs

[Cheryl Hardcastle, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Mr. Speaker, while the Liberal government opens the door to an extradition treaty with China, it seems someone forgot to tell the Minister of Foreign Affairs. On Friday, the minister angrily denied that any negotiations were taking place. He said, “There is no negotiation”.

Is the cabinet divided or is the minister confused? We just heard the Minister of National Defence, to make it worse, answer that regarding dialogue, it was about rule of law and human rights.

Canadians need and deserve a clear answer. Is the government in talks with China over a proposed extradition treaty, yes or no?

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

Mr. Speaker, our renewed relationship with China allows for dialogue on a range of issues, including human rights. We are engaging in a national security and rule of law dialogue as part of comprehensive discussions with China. Those discussions allow us to talk about very challenging things and very important things.

The member opposite is absolutely right. Canadians need to know that as a result of being at the table, we can talk about consular affairs, we can push our view of human rights, and we can talk about security. We are and have been very clear and very open with Canadians on this.

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

Mr. Speaker, if that is what it means to be clear, I have seen better.

Last June, the Minister of Foreign Affairs stood by silently as his Chinese counterpart chastised a reporter who had asked him a question about China's human rights record. On Friday, the same minister criticized a journalist who asked him about negotiations for an extradition treaty with China.

Did the minister learn his media relations skills from his Chinese counterpart? Why is there so much confusion surrounding these negotiations?

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

Mr. Speaker, in Canada we believe in a strong media and that journalists can speak for themselves.

Our relationship means that we can hear the views of China while allowing ourselves the opportunity to defend and uphold human rights. We announced this high-level security and rule of law dialogue precisely so that we can deal with some of the greatest challenges we face in a renewed relationship with China.

Justice

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that the Liberal minister from Kings—Hants is upset by the way the Prime Minister is treating Atlantic Canada, but that is no excuse for classifying Supreme Court justice appointments as cronyism.

Could he identify which members of the Supreme Court he is talking about, or better still, could he get up and do the right thing and apologize for saying that?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, I was referring broadly to the habits of the previous government in their appointments, not just of judges. I am not talking about Supreme Court judges, but some of the judicial appointments that occurred under the previous government, including the previous justice minister Peter MacKay's best man at his wedding and the best man's wife. These are not the kinds of appointments that actually should be occurring within a government.

We respect the Supreme Court, but the previous government's appointments over the years to a number of posts were wrong.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure the Liberals think that Atlantic Canadians are flattered by the fact that someone from Mississauga is now running the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency. Maybe that is why they think Atlantic Canada does not need to have representation on the Supreme Court of Canada. But I am pleased that at least one Liberal member, the member for Central Nova, now agrees with the Conservatives here.

I would like to know about the other 31. Are they going to stand up and do the right thing for Canada and Atlantic Canada?

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the process used to appoint Supreme Court justices by the previous government was opaque, outdated, and in need of an overhaul. In the mandate letter from the Prime Minister to the advisory board, they were asked that when making their selections they consider the custom of regional representation on the court as being one of the factors to be taken into consideration. Therefore, the list of qualified and functionally bilingual candidates developed by the advisory board includes candidates from Atlantic Canada and they are perfectly capable of competing in a national competition.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Mr. Speaker, while the minister from Nova Scotia has been busy attacking the independence of the Supreme Court, the minister for Atlantic Canada, from Mississauga, has been silent in standing up for Atlantic Canadian representation on the Supreme Court, as have all 32 Liberal MPs from Atlantic Canada.

When will the minister for Atlantic Canada from Ontario break his silence and stand up for Atlantic Canada?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour and privilege to stand alongside 32 exemplary members of Parliament from Atlantic Canada. These fine individuals punch above their weight and they care deeply about the Atlantic Canada region. That is why we made historic investments into this region. That is why we unveiled the Atlantic growth strategy, which is an investment diversifying that region, creating jobs. Most recently we made an announcement on immigration. This is an example of how we work together to provide meaningful results for all Atlantic Canadians.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Mr. Speaker, just about everyone has criticized the Liberal appointment process to shut out Atlantic Canada, from academics and lawyers to the Canadian Bar Association, to first nation leaders, and the process is being challenged in court as we speak.

When will the minister get the message and reverse this objectionable constitutionally questionable appointment process to shut out Atlantic Canada?

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the process employed by the previous government for Supreme Court of Canada appointees was opaque and badly in need of an overhaul. That is the reason why there was a new process that increased transparency, that increased accountability, and that is why the advisory committee has been asked to identify suitable candidates. These will be jurists of the highest calibre. They will be functionally bilingual, and they will be representative of the diversity of our great country. That list will include candidates from Atlantic Canada.

Canada Revenue Agency

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

Mr. Speaker, the Canada Revenue Agency claims that it will show no mercy to the fraudsters named in the Panama Papers, but if the past is any indication, I will not be holding my breath.

In past leaks from Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Luxembourg, and the Isle of Man, the CRA was ineffective at recovering the money owed and relied heavily on voluntary disclosure, while often granting amnesty to the fraudsters.

How can we trust the minister when the agency she oversees has such an appalling track record?

[Diane Lebouthillier, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, our government understands that middle-class Canadians are paying their fair share and that some wealthy taxpayers are evading their obligations. This must stop.

The Panama Papers issue has a global reach. In April, I instructed officials to provide me with a complete list of the Canadian taxpayers who are implicated in this. I can announce that the agency is currently conducting over 2,500 audits and that it has identified 85 taxpayers who will be subject to further review. We will continue to work on this.

Indigenous Affairs

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

Mr. Speaker, we hear a lot about how the government is making historic investments for first nations. With reserves facing a serious housing crisis, this morning, the government announced funding to build just 300 new units this year and next for the whole country despite the fact that, according to its own department, more than 20,000 new units are needed to address the crisis.

Can the Prime Minister tell us exactly how funding for just 3% of the units this country needs is historic?

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, we are determined to address the shortage of acceptable housing. The 2016 budget includes an investment of more than $554 million over two years for the construction, maintenance, and renovation of 2,007 units. Agreements are already in place for two-thirds of the funding and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the CMHC, is investing in renovating and repairing 2,500 units.

Seniors

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I spend a lot of time talking with my constituents, and they have a lot to say about enhancing old age security and the guaranteed income supplement, so it is important to me to have a solid understanding of the situation. Can the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development update the House on initiatives to reduce poverty among Canadian seniors and provide them with a decent standard of living?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Minister of Families]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member for Vimy and thank her for her excellent work on behalf of seniors.

We restored the eligibility age for old age security to 65, which will keep 100,000 seniors out of poverty. We also increased the guaranteed income supplement by up to $950, which will help 900,000 seniors and lift 13,000 of them out of poverty. We invested $200 million in our seniors' housing needs.

I encourage the member for Vimy to keep supporting and contributing to the government's policies for seniors.

Foreign Affairs

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it has been obvious for some time that the foreign affairs minister is out of touch with Canadians on a range of issues, but it is now clear that he is not even on the Prime Minister's wavelength. The minister's emotional denial that Canada is discussing an extradition treaty with China was surprising given the PM's admission and the Chinese premier's urging.

Is the minister simply not paying attention, or is there division in cabinet?

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

Mr. Speaker, as I have said before, our renewed relationship with China allows for dialogue on a range of issues. I am not sure why the member opposite does not understand what dialogue means. It means that we are providing an opportunity for Canada to be at the table with China and express, uphold, and assert the extreme value that we put on human rights. It allows us to discuss difficult matters. It is a reflection of our policy of engagement.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this is not the way to set up convincing foreign policy.

A month ago, the immigration minister said Canada would never negotiate an extradition treaty with China while China maintains the death penalty. The Prime Minister then acknowledged that discussions on exactly that topic have begun. The foreign minister denied it, and then he pleaded with journalists to stop reporting the facts of the matter.

What is going on here? Who is in charge?

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

Mr. Speaker, the promotion and protection of human rights is an integral part of our foreign policy, and that is what is in charge. Both the Prime Minister and the foreign affairs minister, at every opportunity, raise this with their counterparts in China—this summer, last week. This reflects our government's policy of engagement, which is in stark contrast to the previous Harper government's policy of isolation and retreat.

We will continue to champion respect for diversity and human rights in our relations with China.