House of Commons Hansard #151 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was troops.

Topics

Air TransportationAdjournment Proceedings

6:15 p.m.

NDP

Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech and her detailed response. It seems to me that we got more answers this evening than in other adjournment debates, so I thank her for that.

She clearly understands the issue, which is that there is very little chance that an airline will decide to establish an air link between a non-designated airport and a designated one. That is the main problem for Sherbrooke. We have had difficultly getting air links for a long time because the airlines are not interested in landing in Sherbrooke, as my colleague said.

I am therefore wondering why the government did not decide instead to reassess the risk associated with each airport and rework the designations accordingly, since the easiest way to get air links is to be one of the 89 designated airports.

Why did the government not reassess the risk associated with each of those 89 airports and rework the list accordingly?

Air TransportationAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

Karen McCrimmon Liberal Kanata—Carleton, ON

Mr. Speaker, our government recognizes the need to support the economic growth of Canadian communities and the important role that small airports play in that regard.

A mechanism has been put in place to allow non-designated airports to pay to obtain security screening services. Last year, Transport Canada and the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority talked to many small airport operators, including that of Sherbrooke, about how to implement security screening services on a cost-recovery basis in their airport.

We will continue to work with small airports that want to have security screening services.

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

NDP

Sheila Malcolmson NDP Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am once again standing in the House to talk about solutions to deal with Canada's long-standing problem of abandoned vessels in our marine environment.

The imperative we have talked about many times. There are hazards to navigation, visual pollution impacting tourism, a very strong threat of oil spills that can impact local jobs in the area of aquaculture, oil spill risks that can affect the marine environment and sensitive coastal ecology, and the fact that there is no government in Canada that will actually take ownership. This is a hole in jurisdiction that is recognized by all parties that we are working very hard to fix. It will make it easier for coastal communities if we do.

I also want to salute the patience and persistence of coastal communities. They have been trying ad hoc solutions one vessel at a time in the absence of the federal leadership that we are seeking. There are costs. I note it was picked up in the media just a few weeks ago, where a member of the legislative assembly in British Columbia, Andrew Weaver, who is the Green Party representative, quite improperly scolded the municipality of Oak Bay, saying that it should do what the municipality of Saanich has done. In fact, we cannot pit one community against the other.

His criticism also reveals a misunderstanding of the fact that if we leave this to the high-capacity municipalities to deal with issues in their own harbours, that squeezes problem vessels out into unincorporated areas or more remote regions, which is why, again and again, we have been calling for a comprehensive coast-wide solution to the problem of abandoned vessels.

Let us talk about solutions. My private member's bill, Bill C-219, proposes to make the Coast Guard the go-to agency on abandoned vessels. The men and women of the Coast Guard are already doing a good job. They are doing it off the side of their desk, but they do not have clear authority. My bill proposes to give them that authority, to make the Coast Guard the receiver of wrecks. We are also pushing very hard for full resources for the Coast Guard, so it can do that job as one of its central responsibilities, one that is well funded.

Other solutions that I have been proposing that the government supports are fibreglass recycling; finding new markets for these materials; boat amnesty, where people can bring in their boats; fixing vessel registration, which has really fallen into disrepair; and mechanisms to take a load off taxpayers, such as sending vessel registration funds to a fund, as Washington state has done, to deal with vessels on an emergency basis.

Just this past week, I sat down with some local community leaders. We are planning our presentation to the AVICC convention, which is a local government association that represents the Vancouver Island and Sunshine Coast local governments. On April 8 we are presenting together on solutions to deal with the abandoned vessel problem. This includes Ladysmith Mayor Aaron Stone, Stz'uminus Chief John Elliott, and one of the operators of the local marina, Rod Smith from Ladysmith Community Marina. They are asking what the details are of the coastal protection plan, and I am really hoping to be able to bring that to the convention April 8, so I can give some good news.

It was announced four months ago by the government that it is reopening a Coast Guard station in St. John's. I wish it was reopening the Comox Coast Guard station on my coast that the Liberal government closed. There were very few details otherwise, so I am hoping that the representative for the Minister of Transport can tell us when the legislation is coming, when the funding is going to be available to coastal communities, and what the specific mechanisms are that the government is proposing. I am concerned the only one that it has raised is criminalizing vessel abandonment, and I surely hope that is not a path the government is going to go down. We are looking for solutions on the ground.

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

6:25 p.m.

Kanata—Carleton Ontario

Liberal

Karen McCrimmon LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, I share the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith's concern about the need to systematically address the problems of abandoned, derelict, and wrecked vessels, and the impact they present for our coastal communities in particular. This is a problem that has been building for a long time.

Over the past year, our government has taken direct action to address several of these problem vessels. For example, our government has proceeded to the removal of the Viki Lyne II in Ladysmith harbour in British Columbia, and the dismantling and removal of the MV Kathryn Spirit in Beauharnois, Quebec. Both are under way.

However, this alone cannot be a vessel-by-vessel approach. We are committed to a broad, comprehensive strategy, and I am proud that our Prime Minister announced plans for this strategy on November 7, 2016, as part of our oceans protection plan. The cornerstone of our strategy is vessel owner responsibility. We believe that those who act irresponsibly when it comes to end-of-life vessel management should be held accountable. We know Canadians share this view. We heard it loud and clear in our national consultations.

Our government intends to table new legislation in 2017 that would prohibit the act of vessel abandonment while also enabling a more proactive approach to vessels before they become a bigger problem and more costly to remediate. Vessel owners would be responsible and liable for the costs associated with vessel cleanup. Alongside this new legislation, we will strengthen systems that allow for the identification of vessel owners so that we can hold to account those who act irresponsibly. We will also join 30 other countries and move to adopt the Nairobi International Convention on the Removal of Wrecks. This would ensure vessel owners are fully liable and responsible for the costs of removal of a wreck resulting from a maritime accident or an act of nature. These new measures would mean that vessel owners would no longer be allowed to walk away from a vessel they do not want or do not properly maintain without the possibility of sanctions.

Finally, we cannot ignore the suite of legacy vessels that are already affecting our coastlines and communities. While developing a longer-term solution, which I have already laid out, in the short term our government will support the cleanup of priority small vessels in our coastal communities, and assess the requirements for larger priority commercial vessels. Transport Canada is working closely with the Canadian Coast Guard and other federal partners so that we can leverage each department's expertise and make the most efficient use of our resources. We are also actively engaged with concerned governments, communities, and stakeholders across the country as we develop our plan, and they will be important partners moving forward.

The challenges and therefore the solutions are complex, but our government is demonstrating leadership on the issue, and we are confident we have the right approach.

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

6:25 p.m.

NDP

Sheila Malcolmson NDP Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the minister's representative, the parliamentary secretary, echoing back our shared commitment to find a solution to this, but I am very concerned that the headline is the prohibition of vessel abandonment.

Such laws exist already, and the government should be enforcing them. Owners are already responsible and liable. Boat owners can already be taken to court to remove a vessel. We have examples right now, such as the MV Farley Mowat in Shelburne. The feds went to court to force the owner to pay fines, and to be arrested or imprisoned. That is happening already. The problem is that we cannot fine an owner who himself is derelict, unable to pay. Part of the problem is the great financial insecurity of people who just cannot keep up their vessels anymore.

Also, we cannot fine an owner that we cannot find. Vessel registration is a mess. I really want to have the government's assurance that this is a priority, that it will fix vessel registration, and make every owner pay into a fund that would then be available to deal with vessels on an emergency basis so that it is not paid on the backs of taxpayers.

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

6:30 p.m.

Liberal

Karen McCrimmon Liberal Kanata—Carleton, ON

Mr. Speaker, I again take the opportunity to mention that in our efforts to restore and protect marine ecosystems and habitats as part of our $1.5 billion oceans protection plan, we will be taking measures to address abandoned and derelict vessels in Canadian waters. This will include the introduction of new legislation to prohibit vessel abandonment, and based on a polluter pays principle, increase vessel owner responsibility and liability for derelict and wrecked vessels. We will work with other levels of government to clean up priority smaller legacy vessels posing risks to our communities.

We recognize the threats that abandoned, derelict, and wrecked vessels pose to Canadians and our environment. We are taking a responsible approach to address this very complex issue, and we are doing it in collaboration with our partners and stakeholders. Our government is committed to improving marine safety and responsible shipping, and to protecting Canada's marine environment.

Public Services and ProcurementAdjournment Proceedings

March 9th, 2017 / 6:30 p.m.

NDP

Erin Weir NDP Regina—Lewvan, SK

Mr. Speaker, the Phoenix payroll system started as an ill-conceived Conservative scheme to cut corners and cut costs by replacing complex federal payroll systems with off-the-shelf software from IBM. However, it was the Liberal government that rushed ahead with the implementation of Phoenix despite many warnings of problems and deficiencies with the system. The result is that many thousands of federal employees, delivering important public services across the country, have not been paid the money they have earned.

The question I posed on February 23 was about inaccurate information on T4 tax slips sent to employees who had been incorrectly paid by the Phoenix system. The government has assured us that it is on the verge of correcting those T4s. Therefore, I take the government's word at face value. Rather than questioning whether it will meet that objective, let us wait and see.

I would instead like to use this adjournment debate to update the House on some of the work my constituency office is doing to assist people who have fallen victim of the Phoenix pay system.

Also on February 23, while I was asking a question in the House, my casework assistant in Regina was hosting a conference call of all the caseworkers among NDP MP offices across the country to educate them on how to deal with Phoenix problems and to share best practices between offices. Of course it was through my constituency office that I first became aware of problems with the Phoenix pay system. Employees of the RCMP depot in Regina phoned to complain they were not receiving the pay they had earned.

I know one of the great frustrations experienced by my own casework assistant and by caseworkers in MP offices across the country is that they really do not have the tools to assist people who are not getting paid by Phoenix. One of the constructive proposals they came up with through this conference call on February 23 was to establish an MP phone line, a dedicated line, to the Phoenix pay centre in Miramichi. We have these dedicated lines for employment insurance. We have had them in the past for passports. We have them when we recognize that sometimes people will have problems with federal programs and services and may need their member of Parliament's office to assist them. I would argue that the Phoenix pay system is certainly a large enough problem that a dedicated line would very much be justified in this case. It has been more than a year since Phoenix was implemented and it is still a huge problem.

The deputy minister of Public Services and Procurement came to our committee today and stated that we had now reached the important tipping point where we were starting to process more transactions than we received. Therefore, it may be that the government is finally starting to reduce rather than increase the size of the Phoenix problem. However, if it has taken a year to even get to that tipping point, it suggests that it may take a great deal longer to get to a point where the problem is actually resolved. In the meantime, it would make a lot of sense to provide a dedicated phone line so MP offices and our staff are able to provide tangible assistance to constituents who have fallen victim to the Phoenix boondoggle.

Public Services and ProcurementAdjournment Proceedings

6:35 p.m.

Gatineau Québec

Liberal

Steven MacKinnon LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement

Mr. Speaker, I thank my honourable colleague. As the member from the National Capital Region representing the riding of Gatineau, I do not have much to add to what my colleague just said. I can only say that we have experienced the same type of situation and the same frustrations over the past year as a result of the implementation of the Phoenix pay system.

I thank my friend for the constructive tone of his questions and his statement tonight. I want to assure him that resolving the ongoing public service pay issue is not only a priority of the government, but a personal priority. I take these issues very seriously.

I know he would want to stand with me and my government in supporting the hundreds of public servants who are working across the country to resolve pay issues.

With tax season upon us, our focus has been to address potential tax implications, particularly as they relate to overpayments. Employees are being reminded to call the Phoenix call centre to ensure that any overpayments are handled as a priority. Employees have been provided access to detailed information online about all payments they received in 2016. This will help them verify whether the taxable earnings stated on their tax slip are correct.

Public Services and Procurement Canada is continuing to make prompt processing of pay requests a key priority. The goal is to process pay requests within established service standards, which for most transactions is 20 days from the time they enter the public service pay centre.

Here is what is being done. As we get to the end of the backlog, and we are thankfully getting to this situation, compensation advisers at the pay centre are being reassigned to deal with new incoming requests. With this realignment of resources, pay requests will be handled more quickly, wait times will get shorter, and late payments will be cleared out. A particular focus is being put on parental and disability leave requests, which I stress our partners in public sector unions have worked with us and have asked that those categories in particular be prioritized.

Technical enhancements to Phoenix also will allow for faster processing of pay transactions. Calculation of acting payments will soon be automated, which we hope will reduce the workload to a great extent. With more resources and increased efficiency at the pay centre, pay transactions are being handled faster.

We will be more transparent in order to keep employees apprised of progress being made. A new public service pay dashboard will let employees see whether we are meeting service standards and the estimated maximum wait times for different operations.

As always, we continue to work closely with all our partners at the Canada Revenue Agency and the Treasury Board Secretariat. Our government recognizes the serious repercussions that the Phoenix pay problems have had on the lives of public service employees and workers.

As I mentioned, we are making progress toward solving current problems and avoiding future ones.

Public Services and ProcurementAdjournment Proceedings

6:40 p.m.

NDP

Erin Weir NDP Regina—Lewvan, SK

Mr. Speaker, it is good to hear the government is working on this, although it has been very disappointing that the government rushed ahead with implementing Phoenix when there were all kinds of indications these types of problems would manifest themselves.

It has now been more than a year since that implementation was done and we are only just at the point where perhaps the government is starting to reduce the size of the problem rather than allowing it to increase. We are hopeful progress can be made, but we are also disappointed about the lack of progress up until quite recently.

Another constructive proposal that came out of this conference call of casework assistants among New Democratic MP offices was that the government should not put pensions under the Phoenix pay system. I wonder if during his final minute, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement could commit to the House that the government is not going to put public service pensions through the Phoenix payroll system, which has proven to be so problematic for normal and other types of pay and benefits.

Public Services and ProcurementAdjournment Proceedings

6:40 p.m.

Liberal

Steven MacKinnon Liberal Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, I will take what the member suggests under advisement. The IT transformation project, Phoenix, is a complex one. I stress it was compounded by the fact that we inherited a situation where all the compensation advisers, 700 of them, had been let go by the previous government. The accounting savings had been booked. This was an IT implementation that was botched long before we were able to commence the implementation.

Right now we are focused on fixing this situation. We will fix it. We are applying all the resources we can to be responsive to public servants, to solve individual cases, and to do the kind of work to free them up to do the great work they do for Canadians. I know the hon. member would join me in standing with them as they work their way through these problems, of which I know we will get to the end.

Public Services and ProcurementAdjournment Proceedings

6:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

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

(The House adjourned at 6:43 p.m.)