Debates of Oct. 19th, 2017

Fisheries and Oceans

[Karen McCrimmon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to assure the member that our government is actively implementing a comprehensive strategy to address abandoned and wrecked vessels under the oceans protection plan. Budget 2017 invested in this priority.

Problems with these vessels have persisted for decades. The issue is indeed complex. The causes are multi-faceted and therefore demand a robust solution. We have studied the problem, worked with our partners and stakeholders, and are now taking meaningful actions that will make a real difference to our coastal communities.

This government launched two funding programs this year to address legacy abandoned, wrecked, and hazardous vessels. We have dedicated funds for these programs to support provinces, territories, indigenous organizations, local communities, and other partners in removing and disposing of smaller high-priority abandoned boats and wrecks. These programs were launched this year. To implement our comprehensive strategy, we are taking steps. These were just the first.

While this funding will help address the legacy problem, it is not enough on its own. We will need to take the burden off taxpayers. This is why we are also exploring long-term funding options financed by vessel owners to pay for any future cleanup costs.

However, cleanup efforts are only one element of our strategy. We cannot wait for problems to occur before taking action. We are also focused on prevention. We must turn off the tap and stop the flow of these vessels in the first place. We have modelled our strategy on leading international initiatives. We recognize that the majority of vessel owners act responsibly and, in fact, are among the advocates for action on this issue. Like all Canadians, boaters and commercial vessel operators expect our oceans and harbours to be clean and free of abandoned and wrecked vessels. It really is a minority of vessel owners who are creating this problem.

We are working on a comprehensive legislative solution, one that goes far beyond any previously considered by the House. There need to be consequences for owners who choose to walk away from their vessels. Gaps in our federal laws have encouraged the problem for far too long. Existing laws address some of the specific impacts of these vessels, such as pollution discharge and navigation hazards, but not the vessels themselves.

Our objectives are to strengthen owner liability for their vessels and wrecks, address irresponsible vessel management, and ensure the ability to take proactive action before problem vessels pose greater hazards and costs.

As members of the House are aware, the Nairobi International Convention on the Removal of Wrecks, 2007, was just recently tabled in our Parliament. This important step signals how serious we are in our approach to addressing this issue.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, these are all good words, but without any legislation to back them up, I am afraid that coastal communities are going to be asked to wait again. The money announced by the government for abandoned vessel removal is a drop in the bucket, given the scale of the problem. There are thousands of abandoned vessels. The number is growing as recreational and commercial fleets age, but the budget announcements were only, to Transport Canada, $300,000 for this year and, to Fisheries and Oceans Canada, $260,000 for this year. The price tag for the Viki Lyne II removal alone was $1.2 million.

Given the tiny budget announcement and the backlog of thousands of abandoned vessels, it will take multiple decades to deal with them all at this pace.

My legislation would get taxpayers off the hook by fixing vessel registration and creating a fee to help cover the cost of vessel disposal. In the absence of the government having its own legislation to offer the House, will it adopt my legislation, Bill C-352, to solve the long-standing pollution problem of abandoned vessels?

[Karen McCrimmon, Liberal, Kanata—Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we need a comprehensive approach to addressing this complex issue of abandoned vessels and wrecks, and it requires engagement with those most directly connected to the problem. We have established very strong working relationships with the provinces and territories on the issue. We continue to work with them on implementing a national strategy.

We have taken very meaningful steps to address the issue, including by providing funding for, and acting to deal with, legacy problem vessels. We are actively working to improve vessel ownership information and we have tabled the Nairobi convention in the House, demonstrating our commitment to ensure owners are strictly liable for remediating wrecks.

Our commitment is clear, our action has been meaningful, and we have not finished yet.

Taxation

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we learned this week that the Minister of Finance had been keeping a secret from the House. Since the last election, he has held in his possession stocks in Morneau Shepell, his billion-dollar family business. His holdings amount to tens of millions of dollars. The finance minister has vast powers and long, far-reaching tentacles into all aspects of economic and financial policy in our country. In short, his decisions can make a lot of money for financial companies, like the one in which he had invested tens of millions of dollars.

Morneau Shepell administers pensions. The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions, which reports to the finance minister, decides who will administer the pensions of bankrupt federally regulated companies. The finance minister sets policies to collect $300 billion worth of taxes. The specificity of these tax policies have the potential to help or hinder individual businesses. For example, one policy the government promoted under this finance minister would encourage small businesses to put their money in individual pension plans. Morneau Shepell, his family business, sells those pension plans. It is one of the unique companies that do so.

The finance minister proposed a bill creating something called targeted pension benefit plans. Morneau Shepell is one of the only companies in Canada that administers targeted benefit pension plans. For example, when these plans were created in New Brunswick, it was Morneau Shepell that set them up, and it would be Morneau Shepell that would profit from them if we did it at a federal level. We know this because Morneau Shepell has bragged about that fact on its own website. The finance minister spoke about it when he was the executive chairman of Morneau Shepell.

For these reasons, the minister was in an obvious conflict of interest, in a position that he was able to use his powers to profit a company that was paying him dividend cheques monthly. According to David Akin, a respected journalist, that company was paying him $65,000 a month in dividends, while he was finance minister regulating that same company. Worst of all, he did not tell anybody outside of the Ethics Commissioner.

When Paul Martin was the finance minister and he had vast holdings in Canada Steamship Lines, we all thought it was a conflict of interest. However, at least we knew about it so we could debate it. When he introduced bills that affected shipping lines, we knew what he was up to. The current minister told the media that he was putting his interests in a blind trust. He told Morneau Shepell that all of his holdings would go in a blind trust. He sent out parliamentary secretaries from the Liberal government on Twitter to claim that his holdings were in a blind trust. Only after the truth was uncovered by numerous investigative reporters did the finance minister finally admit he still held those shares and they were not in a blind trust. The minister always does the right thing after he is caught doing the opposite.

This conflict of interest allows the minister to enrich himself at the expense of everyone else. He has not lived up to the standards that are expected of someone with his authority. How does his parliamentary secretary defend the actions of the minister?

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is a man of great integrity who, even before taking office, took the initiative and contacted the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner in order to obtain her advice and recommendations. Following that meeting and the disclosure by the Minister of Finance of his assets and investments, she sent him the letter made public today, in which she does not recommend setting up a blind trust. She says that there must be a screen to avoid conflicts of interest and any appearance of conflict of interest, and it must be made public.

That is what the minister did. He followed to the letter the recommendations of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, who he has worked with since taking office. When opposition parties started raising questions, the minister, to avoid any distractions, contacted the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner proactively. He made a commitment today to put his assets in a blind trust and to maintain the conflict of interest screen, which is public and has been in place since he took office. He has also committed to divesting himself of his shares in the company in question.

This proves that the Minister of Finance has always been transparent with the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, in whom we have the utmost confidence and who parliamentarians and Canadians trust to ensure compliance with our laws and the rules governing all of us in the House. That is what the minister did and that is what he will continue to do in the interest of integrity and transparency.

The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner should enjoy the full confidence of Parliament. When her recommendations are followed, it means we are doing the right thing, and that is what the minister has been doing since taking office.

We could also talk about other things the minister has done. As soon as he took office, he kick-started our economy, helping create 400,000 jobs across the country over the past two years. He cut taxes for nine million Canadians and raised taxes for the wealthiest 1%. He reduced child poverty by 40% thanks to the Canada child benefit, which is much more generous and more progressive than the previous program and is definitely helping more people who need it most.

We could also talk about the infrastructure investment policies that have contributed to Canada's exceptional growth. The Minister of Finance, who has dedicated the past two years to serving Canadians, deserves to be lauded for leading Canada on the path to inclusive prosperity.

As for tax reform and our support for small businesses, the Minister of Finance announced this week that we are going to cut the tax rate for small and medium-sized business from 10.5% to 9% by January 1, 2019, as part of our ongoing efforts to support Canada's small businesses, SMEs, and entrepreneurs. He also announced a number of changes to our tax reform, because we are a government that believes in the importance of consulting and listening to people. We have faith not only in our caucus, but in Canadians from coast to coast as well. However, our goal remains unchanged: to improve tax fairness in certain areas.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member spoke about this ethics screen that was supposed to prevent the Finance Minister from involvement in any matters touching upon Morneau Shepell. He committed in writing to the Ethics Commissioner that he would do nothing that would affect the interest of his family business in which he continued to own approximately $20 million in shares.

Well, he has been involved in the Canada-Barbados tax treaty. Morneau Shepell has a subsidiary in the tax haven of Barbados. He was the person who introduced the target benefit pension plan legislation. Morneau Shepell is one of the very few companies that administers those plans. He introduced tax policies that would force small businesses to take their savings out of their companies and invest them in individualized pension plans. Morneau Shepell is one of the only firms that administers those pension plans.

Does the member believe that in those three cases the minister actually respected the ethical screen he committed to when he became minister?

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I believe in the integrity of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and her ability to indicate the right path to follow and to provide the right recommendations. The Minister of Finance followed her recommendations at all times and was very transparent with her.

Today, the minister even went above and beyond what was expected of him to avoid any distraction from the important work that he does by announcing that he was going to put his assets in a blind trust and divest himself of his shares in Morneau Shepell.

This shows that from day one the minister has always been proactive about co-operating with the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, whom we fully trust to ensure compliance with the rules and laws that govern us and that the Minister of Finance has always complied with.

Indigenous Affairs

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, back in May, I stood to reflect on an article in Maclean's about Canada's inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women falling apart before it had even begun. At that time, I asked the minister what she intended to do to help right the ship.

We continue to be very concerned. I will go over some of the things that have happened in the months since that original article came out that caused us great concern.

It is important, first, to point out that this was right after the last election. We were concerned about how the inquiry would move forward, what it would do in terms of supporting family members. We came on board and said that we would support it, that we wanted it to be successful. It must be successful because there can be nothing more traumatic for the families that have already undergone so much to have an inquiry that does not do what it needs to do. That is a big concern.

Since then, just last month there was another story that discussed the meltdown inside the inquiry. These two articles describe how it went off the rails before it even began.

Since then, we have had a commissioner resign. The executive director, two communications directors, the director of operations, and both the director and manager of community relations all resigned. Moreover, just a couple of weeks ago, the director of research and the inquiry's lead counsel resigned. If that is not a red flag to the government, I do not know what could possibly be a red flag.

It was in August last year that we welcomed the inquiry's moving forward. Most reasonable people thought it would take a few months, that they would get their offices set up, get their computers going, and create a plan that would see them on the road in January to hear the horrific, tragic stories from the families and to move forward. Instead, months and months went by with no move by the inquiry to even hear from the families.

We had a chance to talk to the commissioners when they came to committee. We heard a number of very disturbing things from them. They talked about their trouble with support from the PCO, the fact they have old BlackBerrys and computers that do not work. They did not even have the basic logistics in place.

This question is as timely as it was back in May. There are red flags. The minister is responsible. What is she going to do to ensure that the inquiry will be a success? It is very clear that some action must be taken.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for raising this issue. I know it is very important to all people in our country.

Our government is committed to ending the ongoing national tragedy of missing and murdered indigenous women and girls. We have launched a truly national independent inquiry, and we are going to make sure that the voices of families are heard. The important work of the commission is crucial to getting the answers for which families have been waiting for decades. The commission's mandate has been clear, that families must be at the centre of the commission's work. The Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs met with the commissioners over the summer and discussed directly with them the concerns raised by some of the families and survivors. They acknowledged those concerns and assured the minister that they have a plan and are dedicated to learning and adapting as the inquiry progresses. They are committed to finding solutions to address the families' concerns, and many family members who have participated in the hearings are now feeling heard. The families must and will get the answers they need.

The terms of reference authorize the commission to inquire into the circumstances of individual cases in order to identify systemic issues at play, be they institutional issues or otherwise. They are also authorized to examine and report on the root causes of all forms of violence that indigenous women and girls experience, and their greater vulnerability to that violence. The commission is looking for patterns and underlying factors that explain why the higher level of violence occurs.

Moreover, we are absolutely committed to ensuring that the commission has all the supports it needs to succeed. As announced previously, the federal government has provided the commission with more than $53 million over two years. The commission has full access to its funding and we are confident that it has the tools it requires. Furthermore, officials have been working with the commission to identify the bureaucratic processes that can be streamlined to better support them in achieving their mandate.

However, we know there are important initiatives that we can implement now, and without waiting for the commission to complete its work, our government is already taking immediate action with investments in women's shelters, housing, education, and child welfare. For example, we recognize the need for safe transport along B.C.'s Highway 16, known as the Highway of Tears. We have committed $1 million to B.C.'s transportation action plan for improvements that will keep those who use the road safe. These include additional transit, shelters, lighting, and support for community shuttles, which impact the nine first nations along that stretch of the highway. The government is also making investments in new initiatives, such as the family information liaison units, which assist families of missing and murdered indigenous women and girls to find the answers they need from government agencies, and with other help such as services to address the trauma they are experiencing. We are committed to helping ensure that all Canadians have the opportunity to live in a safe, supportive, and inclusive community.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on one very important point, which is that families must be at the centre and must be heard. This week in Winnipeg we heard the horrific story of a family who lost their daughter nine years ago on her 18th birthday. The family has a heartbreaking story. They had agreed to go to the inquiry. They wanted to tell their story, and then they had their time reduced to just minutes. I do not know how that is an example of hearing effectively from the families.

When we met with the commissioners, we said, “Listen, please, have a phone number so that if people come in from a remote community they can get a live person on the line.” I know we have been checking regularly to see if we can ever get a live person on that line, but it has never happened. If we cannot get through to the commission to a live person, how can individuals who have made a big effort to make that phone call, who might come from a community that has less access, get the access they need?

Again, the red flags are there. The minister must listen and, please, pay attention and make some changes that will create the success that families so desperately need.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to see that the member opposite supports the inquiry now, because families and survivors fought for a very long time against the previous government, which she was a part of, for this inquiry. In fact, at the Special Committee on Violence Against Indigenous Women, the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo actually dismissed the need for an inquiry at all and characterized it as just spending more time and money on another process. We never believed that, and we do not believe that today.

We believe that family members have to be heard, and we are giving them that opportunity. They wanted this inquiry and they want it to continue. We are absolutely committed to ensuring that the commission has the support it needs to make it a success.

The Government of Canada will also continue to work in partnership with the provinces and territories, indigenous governments and organizations, and other partners to develop more effective, appropriate, and collaborative solutions in responding to ensure the safety of women and girls in Canada. We know there is a lot to do, and we are prepared to do it.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7:34 p.m.)