Debates of March 23rd, 2017

Rules of the House

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, House Leader of the Official Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that he would not interfere in the work of committees, but that is exactly what he is doing. The Prime Minister's staff, over the last number of days, have been at the procedure and House affairs committee, telling the Liberal backbenchers to block the opposition's simple and reasonable request that we have collaboration and consensus on changes to the rules. Will the Prime Minister back off and let the Liberal members do their job, as he promised that he would do?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is this government that actually increased funding to committees so that they could do the important work that they need to do. We actually believe in the committee process because it is the committee that can actually study legislation and study ideas way better than we do in this place, and that is exactly what we have asked the committee to do.

With respect to the discussion paper, I have asked the committee to broaden the scope of the study they already have in place in regard to the Standing Orders. I believe it is a meaningful conversation that all members need to have. I encourage all members, as well as all Canadians, to participate.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, House Leader of the Official Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the House leader is in on this charade too, and the Liberal members even know it. They know this is not a discussion paper. They know this is an edict from the Prime Minister's Office. The House leader just said that she asked the committee; she is asking it to do her dirty work.

My question is for the Liberal members of Parliament. I know there are some hard-working people with integrity on that side. Will any of them stand up, show some independence, and say no to the Prime Minister and no to the House leader, who has completely botched this for all of you?

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I must remind all members to direct their comments to the Chair.

The hon. government House leader.

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

Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that this place needs to be modernized. We need to have this conversation. We need to have this discussion. Every single member of Parliament has a role and responsibility. I recognize that members on both sides of this place have responsibilities, and we want to ensure that we have important conversations.

Within this place, members of Parliament have the opportunity to hold the government to account. We believe that within the ridings, constituents have the ability to hold their members of Parliament to account, and that is why I believe that important work is done here in the House as well as in the ridings.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Since when does a cabinet minister or House leader give orders to a committee anyway, Mr. Speaker?

The government House leader is ignoring the long-held tradition of getting all-party agreement for an overhaul of the way that democracy works in this place. If the House leader's argument that the government of such a warm and loving Prime Minister could not possibly harm our democracy with the power grab now under way, I wonder if she might speculate with us what the majority government of a prime minister like, say, Kevin O'Leary would do with all that power?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is exactly these hypotheticals and these speculations that the committee has the ability to deal with. That is why we are saying let us have this conversation, let us have this discussion. It is because these are important concerns that Canadians are facing, and we are saying let us have this discussion. That is why I had introduced a discussion paper.

I know the committee members sat late once again yesterday. I did visit the members of the committee to thank them for their work. I believe that they are having a meaningful conversation and I think it is important that they continue that conversation. My door will remain open so that we can all work better together.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this goes well beyond an innocent discussion paper. The government House leader should not insult our intelligence by claiming otherwise.

However, if she is serious about that, if she is really truly sincere that her motives are pure, will she now stand in her place and tell this House that she accepts that her government has no mandate to change the rules of democracy over the united objections of the opposition? If she will not, then it is pretty clear that her protests of innocence are even more shallow than they sound.

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

Mr. Speaker, I really do believe that we can have more meaningful conversation and debate in this place. I believe that when it comes to challenging the integrity of individuals, that is for the member to choose to do. I believe that is not needed in the conversation that I would like to have, and that is why I am saying let us have a conversation, let us have a discussion.

The member knows very well, as I told him last night, that I actually appreciate a lot of the work that he does. I hope that we can continue working better together, because I believe this place needs to be modernized. It is a commitment we made to Canadians in the electoral campaign. It is something on which Canadians agree that all members in this place need to work better together.

The Budget

[Emmanuel Dubourg, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House, the Minister of Finance presented the government’s plan. It is an ambitious, visionary plan that makes middle-class families the priority, both in Bourassa and elsewhere in Canada.

Can the Minister of Finance tell us why he only chose certain sectors of the economy in his budget?

[Bill Morneau, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, it is very important to be an optimistic country and to make investments in the future, but we also need to know in which particular sectors we have a comparative advantage. That is exactly what we have done.

We decided to be the world leader in very important sectors where there will be high-quality jobs in the future. We chose six sectors that are key to our children’s and grandchildren’s future. We will consider ways of providing the necessary training for the good jobs of the future.

Democratic Reform

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I noted that the government's attempt to give itself carte blanche to unilaterally rewrite the Standing Orders is opposite to the practices of most recent Liberal and Conservative administrations, but the tradition goes back much further.

On December 28, 1867, our first set of Standing Orders was adopted by unanimous consent. Consensus for major changes to the Standing Orders was good enough for prime ministers from Sir. John A. to Stephen Harper.

Will the current Prime Minister not acknowledge that consensus is still the right approach even though it is 2017?

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

Mr. Speaker, this government and Prime Minister really does believe we can work better in this place. Just today, I have Sarah, who is my University of Toronto women in House program person, who is shadowing me on the Hill. She has seen a lot of the stuff that has taken place here. She has asked me some tough questions with regard to some of the stuff that went on yesterday and today.

It is important that we have this meaningful conversation. I am sure she, too, will be reading the discussion paper and be a part of it. I know many members have women following them today so one day they too can occupy even more seats in the House.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are trying to force changes to how the House operates through the procedures and House affairs committee without all-party support. This is wrong. I feel bad for the talented and principled backbench members opposite who are also uncomfortable with this.

Why is the Liberal backbench willing to watch the Liberal front bench betray years of tradition of the House and integrity of their party?

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

Mr. Speaker, as I have shared many times in the House, yes, a discussion paper was released to all members of Parliament, and it was also released to Canadians, so we could have a meaningful conversation, a substantial discussion on Standing Orders and how we govern in this place. It is unfortunate that a lot of the ideas within the paper have been misrepresented. This is why I encourage all people to be part of the conversation so we can find a made-in-Canada solution for Parliament and the House of Commons.

Privy Council Office

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the government House leader tried to defend the Prime Minister's use of the Privy Council Office to help him on a trip to Alberta for the Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner by-election. She claimed it was to help prepare the PM for government business, but that is complete nonsense. The trip had only one purpose: for the Prime Minister to appear at Liberal Party campaign events. There was no government business.

Why does the Prime Minister believe it is okay to use public servants to campaign for the Liberal Party?

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

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned events, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official duties.

As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided with briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business. The Prime Minister is the prime minister after all.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, documents show that in October, the Privy Council Office was directed by the Prime Minister to produce a regional backgrounder on Medicine Hat during the by-election. The Prime Minister had no government events in Medicine Hat. He was only there to campaign. The PCO was also ordered to provide tech support and uploaded a video from the campaign stop with the PM and the Liberal candidate.

In light of the actions of the Prime Minister in Medicine Hat, today, when the Prime Minister is campaigning in Markham—Thornhill, will PCO staff be ordered to campaign with him yet again?

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

Mr. Speaker, as I have just shared, the Prime Minister is prepared in advance of all events and is afforded the same support as previous prime ministers. Irrespective of his schedule or planned event, the Prime Minister must always be in a position to carry out official government duties.

As has been the case for previous prime ministers, the Prime Minister is always in contact with his office and is routinely provided briefing materials during all travel, domestically and internationally, and whether on personal or government business.

Seniors

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

Mr. Speaker, budget 2017 was an opportunity to meet the needs of Canadian seniors, but the Liberal government told them to keep waiting. The Canadian Medical Association said, “Budget 2017 fails Canada's seniors”. CARP said, “financial security for seniors not on the agenda”.

Divide and conquer deals with the provinces are not the solution. We need a national seniors strategy. Why did yesterday's budget leave Canadian seniors wanting and waiting?

[Jane Philpott, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for this question because it gives me an opportunity to talk about the fantastic news in our budget yesterday, as it relates to health, and that includes the health of seniors. We were able to announce additional investments in the order of $11 billion that would go to home care, including palliative care, that would go to mental health, and that includes seniors' needs, like dementia, so we would be able to support them. It included things like $11 billion for housing that would include social housing to support seniors.

There was so much good news in the budget. I look forward to working with colleagues to put that work into place.

Status of Women

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

Mr. Speaker, while the government's gender budget sounded good, the budget lacks real action for women: not a penny to legislate equal pay for work of equal value; not a cent for child care this year; zero new money for shelters for women fleeing violence; nothing to make birth control more affordable; and only a fraction of what is needed for a strategy to end violence against women. Once again, women are being asked to wait.

If gender equality really matters to the government, why were women shortchanged again?

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Minister of Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in the House on this traditional territory the day after a feminist budget was tabled in the House, with the first-ever gender statement acknowledging that our policies and our actions in the House affect women and men and people of different genders differently. One hundred million dollars was committed for the gender-based violence strategy, the first Canada has ever had; $7 billion for child care; $11 billion for affordable housing.

We have many priorities and much work to do. This was a great budget for women and girls everywhere and—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for Lévis—Lotbinière.

Ethics

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, while this Prime Minister is being paid to dig us deeper into debt and to go sunbathing with his family on the taxpayers’ dime, the Minister of Canadian Heritage is out in the cold launching the celebrations for the 150th anniversary of Confederation. Like the Prime Minister, she is favouring her Liberal cronies.

Can the Prime Minister, who has once again increased the tax burden of Canadians, justify spending $127,000 on a vacation paid for by taxpayers, who will be paying back his deficit for decades to come?