Debates of Nov. 23rd, 2017

Housing

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Order. The hon. member for North Island—Powell River has the floor and I will allow her to restart if she likes, without the applause.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Liberal government finally announced its national housing strategy, and you would be right to be confused, because earlier this month, when my bill on the right to housing was voted on, every single Liberal voted against it. In fact, the member for Cambridge called the right to housing a “legal risk”. The member for Spadina—Fort York called the right to housing a “slogan”.

For the NDP, the right to housing is never a partisan issue, so why did the government vote against it?

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families]

Mr. Speaker, we believe that every Canadian deserves a home that is safe, affordable, and adequate. We want every Canadian to live somewhere that feels like home, so everyone has an equal chance to succeed in this country.

Our $40 billion commitment over the next 10 years is historic. It is the longest and largest investment in public housing in the history of the country. It is framed in a human rights approach, which is now being praised by the United Nations as groundbreaking on the international scale.

I will read a quote quickly: “Congratulations and well done. Heck of an accomplishment on housing”. That was Joe Cressy, the NDP candidate I defeated to get into this place.

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

Mr. Speaker, the government did things backwards yet again with this new dog and pony show. The Government of Quebec is not too happy about it either.

When you cannot come to an agreement with partners as important as the provinces when you only shell out a quarter of the money that was announced, you do not go around bragging about how you invested $40 billion in housing. What a load of hooey.

Will the government listen and respect the concept of asymmetry, or will it just impose its own decision yet again?

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question.

Our department's first duty is to consult.

The NDP confuses me. The first question was that we are going too slowly, and now they say we are going too fast. I do not understand.

This is what we are doing. We are serving Canadians through a rights-based approach. There will be 385,000 people who will see their subsidies renewed. There will be close to 500,000 Canadians who will receive rent subsidies so they can now live in affordable and safe housing of their choice. There will be more than 100,000 people who will see new housing units built in the next 10 years, and close to 300,000 units will be repaired. This is the best policy a Government of Canada has ever produced, and I would be happy to walk her through her riding to show her where it is going to make real change.

Ethics

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Speaker, every day brings more bad news for the Liberals about the Minister of Finance and his conflicts of interest.

The greatest irony is that every time we ask the Minister of Finance any questions, he says that we are attacking him personally, which is absolutely false. What we want to know, and what Canadians want to know, is what other conflicts of interest the Minister of Finance might be involved in with his many investments in numbered companies.

Will the Minister of Finance disclose all of his assets? Canadians might then be able to trust him.

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

Mr. Speaker, the member for Beauce has been here long enough to know that the institution responsible for preserving the integrity of Parliament is the Ethics Commissioner.

Ever since he first arrived here in Ottawa, the Minister of Finance has always worked with the Ethics Commissioner and presented his situation. She advised him on how to proceed. He announced that he would go even further by placing his assets in a blind trust and selling his shares in Morneau Shepell to continue the work he has been doing for the past two years for Canadians, which is looking after those whom the previous government neglected for 10 years, lifting 300,000 children out of poverty, and introducing the national housing strategy. That is what the Minister of Finance has done for the past two years now.

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we all know that the finance minister works with the Ethics Commissioner after the fact, after he was caught. He forgot to disclose a villa in France, as well as shares in his family business, which he tried to hide in a numbered company.

Yes, the finance minister does work with the Ethics Commissioner, but after he gets caught, or after the fact. We do not trust the finance minister when it comes to his assets. That is why we tabled a motion in the House today to ensure that we know the full extent of the minister's assets and that there are no other conflicts of interest.

Could the finance minister disclose his assets to Canadians?

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

Mr. Speaker, as I said, the institution responsible for maintaining the integrity of Parliament is the Ethics Commissioner. The finance minister has always worked with the Ethics Commissioner to ensure that he complies with the rules governing the House and her recommendations, which he did by putting in place a conflict of interest screen, among other things. He announced that he would also divest himself of his shares in Morneau Shepell and place his assets in a blind trust. He is working with the Ethics Commissioner on this in order to continue the work he has been doing for Canadians for two years.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Bruce Wayne said, “It's not who we are underneath, but what we do that defines us.” The finance minister is defined by his conflict of interest. For two years, he held Morneau Shepell shares in a company that he both regulated and owned. There was no blind trust, no sign off from the Ethics Commissioner, and now he is under investigation yet again.

Will the finance minister finally open up the curtains and let the let shine in, or is he content to continue to keep Canadians in the dark night?

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

Mr. Speaker, if it is true that we are defined by what we do and perhaps by what we do not do, what the finance minister has not done is to mismanage the economy the way they mismanaged it for 10 years. What he has done is create half a million jobs in this country, most of them full time; grow the economy at a faster pace than they ever could; reduce child poverty by 40%; reduce taxes for nine million Canadians; go back on the regressive policies they put forward, such as doubling the TFSA limit that would benefit the three per cent of wealthiest Canadians, so we can give more to Canadians who need it the most; and yesterday we announced a national housing strategy they should have done a long time ago.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Bruce Wayne also said that everything is impossible until somebody does it. Right now, it seems impossible for the finance minister to admit he was in a conflict of interest. It seems impossible for him to even acknowledge he is under investigation by the Ethics Commissioner yet again.

Why will the finance minister not do what, up until now, has been impossible for him: be the hero that Canada needs now and reveal all of the assets he has been hiding in his other private numbered companies?

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

Mr. Speaker, what was impossible for them for 10 years was to grow this economy. Remember, two years ago we were debating if we were in a recession or heading into a recession. No one is asking that question now, because Canada's economy is growing at the fastest pace in the G7. It is putting other countries to shame, and they are looking with envy at Canada because of the work of this finance minister. He has done this while reducing inequalities in this country, a good thing that never occurred to them.

International Trade

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals completed three rounds of preliminary talks for a possible free trade agreement with China. The media is saying that the Prime Minister plans to go to China by the end of the year, despite serious human rights concerns, lax labour laws, threats to Canadian intellectual property, and the list goes on.

Why is the Liberal Party moving full speed ahead to enter into a free trade agreement with China?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, our government's progressive and strategically developed trade agenda draws on rules from throughout the Asia-Pacific region. Guided at all times by our values, it will eventually lead to new trade opportunities. Ignoring this market's tremendous potential for the middle class is neither realistic nor conducive to economic growth. Canadians expect us to engage in talks with China responsibly and in full knowledge of the facts. That is exactly what we intend to do for Canadians right across the country.

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, China has no free press, torture is widespread, workers do not have a right to collective bargaining, businesses are worried about their intellectual property rights, and hundreds of human rights defenders and dissidents have been detained. China does not even have market economy status, which means we cannot possibly have a level playing field in a trade deal.

The Liberals will not even stand up to unfair steel dumping by China that is costing jobs in our steel industry right now. How can Canadians possibly trust the government to defend Canadian values and jobs in any new trade negotiations with China?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, the world has seen that Canada will always stand up for Canadians when it comes to trade negotiations. They saw that in Asia last week.

Our government believes in a rules-based, progressive, and strategic trade agenda throughout the Asia-Pacific that helps create new opportunities for Canadians across this country. To dismiss the enormous potential this market represents for our middle class is unrealistic and is not a plan to grow the economy. We are engaged with the Asian region.

Farmers and workers across this nation expect this government to engage in trade in a progressive and inclusive fashion, and that is exactly what we are going to do.

Taxation

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, over the last few weeks as the chair of the all-party diabetes caucus, I have heard concerns from Canadians and stakeholders regarding access to the disability tax credit by type 1 diabetics. I appreciate the time the Minister of National Revenue and her parliamentary secretary took to meet with me to discuss the situation and to allow me to share the concerns I have heard.

Could the Minister of National Revenue inform the House on the steps she is taking to make sure that Canadians with disabilities have their concerns heard by the CRA?

[Diane Lebouthillier, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Brampton South for her question and for working so hard on behalf of her constituents. Our government pledged that the agency would administer measures for persons with disabilities in a fair, transparent, and accessible way. Today I am proud to announce that the disability advisory committee, which was disbanded by the former Conservative government, is being reinstated. By reinstating the committee, the agency will benefit from its advice about enhancing the quality and accessibility of the services it provides to persons with disabilities and their families.

Public Safety

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

Mr. Speaker, according to media reports, the information the minister shared yesterday about ISIS fighters is from late 2015. The minister misled the House. He said that our security agencies were monitoring terrorists who had returned to Canada, but that is not true. Our security agencies do not know how many of these traitors to the nation are roaming free or where they are.

Will the minister be honest with Canadians and give us the facts?

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

Mr. Speaker, indeed, the statistics that I gave were accurate.

Canada works constantly with all of our allies, the Five Eyes, G7, Interpol, and others to know as much as possible about every threat. Our Canadian agencies constantly assess and reassess all the data in order to be effective and current in keeping Canadians safe, and they respond with a suite of measures, including investigations, surveillance, marshalling evidence, lifting passports, no-fly listings, threat reduction initiatives, and criminal proceedings whenever possible.

Our agencies do their job for Canadians 24-7, 365 days a year, and they do it extremely well.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am not questioning the work our security agencies do. They are the best in the world. What I am questioning is what the minister told the House. The minister is an intelligent, well-informed man. Why did he mislead the House when he knows perfectly well that the information he provided yesterday is two years old? The numbers he shared were taken from statements made by the director of CSIS in March 2016. The minister needs to wake up, take this issue seriously, and give Canadians accurate information. We want to know where these traitors to the nation are and whether they are being monitored 24/7.

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

Mr. Speaker, for about the fourth or fifth time now, the fact of the matter is that the statistics I have cited in the House are accurate. The numbers today remain essentially the same as they were two years ago.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the minister said that anyone who needs to be under surveillance is indeed under surveillance. He then gave a number of 60. However, the minister's own office said that this number came from a two-year-old report. Therefore, I guess it is accurate as of two years ago. How can the minister claim to be surveilling all ISIS fighters in Canada if he is using two-year-old data and saying it is accurate? Is he claiming that no new terrorists have entered Canada in the last two years or is he admitting that there are terrorists here that he is no longer watching?

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

Mr. Speaker, the objective of the Government of Canada with respect to extremist travellers is to surveil them and contain them to ensure that they do not harm more people, and indeed—