Debates of April 11th, 2017

Ethics

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Order. I ask members to settle down and listen. I encourage ministers not to say things that create disorder.

The hon. Minister of Science has a few more seconds.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, let me recount our accomplishments in science: $2 billion in research and innovation infrastructure; $900 million in the Canada first research excellence fund; $125 million on artificial intelligence; $117 million on the new Canada 150 research chairs; $80 million in the new plant facility—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that no research was done on Canada 2020. It is basically Liberal advertising that cost Canadian taxpayers $20,000.

Given that the scientific community has found that more funding is needed for research, how can we be sure that the Liberals are not wasting existing funding on the Prime Minister's friends?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Minister of Science]

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

Let me go over our investments in science: $2 billion for research and innovation infrastructure; $900 million for the Canada first research excellence fund; $454 million to retool on skills; $221 million for 10,000 new work-integrated learning spaces for Mitacs; $125 million for artificial intelligence; $117 million for the Canada 150 research chairs; $80 million for a new plant research facility.

Science

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the final report on federal support for fundamental science was tabled yesterday. The Naylor report challenges the government to take immediate action to reverse the decline of scientific research in Canada.

Will the government commit to enacting all recommendations in this report, including number 5.5, which calls for hard gender equity targets and gender quotas? Will this report be another Liberal shelf-bender, or will the government take action?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Minister of Science]

Mr. Speaker, the report will help our government continue to support fundamental science and to build on the investments we have already made: $2 billion for research and innovation infrastructure; $900 million for the Canada first research excellence fund; $900 million for superclusters to bring together research, government, and business; $454 million to retool on skills; $221 million for 10,000 work-integrated learning spaces for our—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for Saskatoon West.

Status of Women

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister says he is a feminist, yet when it comes to making real change happen for women in Canada, he is all talk.

Canada has the eighth largest gender pay gap among the 35 OECD countries, yet the government refuses to act, knowing the most effective way to grow the economy is to bring in pay equity legislation now.

Today is Equal Pay Day in Canada, because in 2017 women still have to work 3.5 months longer to earn what men earn in 12 months.

How much longer will the Prime Minister make women wait?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, we agree that equal pay for work of equal value is a fundamental right. That is why we are so proud to be bringing forward proactive pay equity legislation by 2018. We are in the process now of consulting with stakeholders. We want to make sure that we design a process that ensures women get the pay that they deserve and that the process is fair for all.

Public Safety

[Alaina Lockhart, Liberal, Fundy Royal, NB]

Mr. Speaker, every morning Canadians get up and start their daily routines. They take care of their kids, bid good day to their partners, and head to work. Every day there are those who do the same, but their work is our safety. They run into fire, perform CPR on our loved ones, and put their lives on the line for us and our families.

Considering the impact that these community heroes have on our lives, would the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness inform this House how the government is keeping its promise to support them and their families?

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

Mr. Speaker, I was proud to stand with the Prime Minister on Parliament Hill today with Canadian firefighters, to support the women and men who risk their lives to keep us safe and to support their families when tragedy strikes. That is why budget 2017 includes $20 million per year for the establishment of a new tax-free benefit for the families of public safety officers who fall in the line of duty. Our aim is to have this heroes benefit up and running by the spring of next year. We will continue doing everything we can to support public safety officers. They deserve the respect of all Canadians.

Standing Orders of the House of Commons

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

Mr. Speaker, in the last election the Liberals made only two promises regarding changes to the Standing Orders: to prohibit omnibus bills, and to prohibit parliamentary secretaries from sitting on committees. There was nothing about four-day work weeks. There was nothing about the Prime Minister turning up one day a week. There was certainly nothing about shutting down the opposition in committees.

Will the government therefore stop pretending it has a mandate to carry through election commitments that it never made, remove the gun that it has been holding to the heads of the opposition members in the procedure and House affairs committee, and start a real conversation?

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

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, we committed to modernizing Parliament and bringing it into the 21st century. I have been asking for a conversation and a dialogue this whole time. The discussion paper that was released was in addition to the work that the procedure and House affairs committee was already doing.

I know that all members believe that we probably could modernize and work better in this place. I am saying let us have that conversation. Let us share our ideas. Let us have constructive feedback so that we can bring this workplace into the 21st century.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals can continue to use all the buzzwords and spin that they like, but Canadians see through this blatant Liberal power grab. It is their democracy and they will not stand for this. Liberals cannot say they are having a conversation when they are ramming through substantive changes that would remove accountability. Canadians expect the government to be held accountable. They expect legislation to be properly debated. They expect their Prime Minister to show up and answer questions more than once a week. Why do the Liberals think they can make these substantive changes without the unanimous consent of all political parties?

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

Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect all members of Parliament to work better in this place. That is exactly why we would like to talk about some of these ideas, so that we can modernize the way this place works.

Last week, we saw the Prime Minister in question period answer all questions, not just in the leaders' round but from members of Parliament on both sides of this House. In addition, we saw that the Prime Minister was in question period on other days. There are no Liberal members suggesting that the Prime Minister attend only once a week.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

That was more Liberal spin and buzzwords, Mr. Speaker.

The opposition members are firmly against this Liberal power grab. The government House leader can try to call that a veto or whatever she likes, but Canadians see through this sham. Changes to the Standing Orders should be done with the unanimous consent of all parties, as was the case in the previous Parliament when the Liberal vice-chair on PROC used the veto on minor changes to the Standing Orders. That is right. None other than the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader understood the need for unanimous consent. Why was unanimous consent good for the Liberals then and not now?

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

Mr. Speaker, we are encouraging all members of Parliament to be the voice that Canadians expect them to be.

In the election campaign, we committed to Canadians that their voices would be heard in this place. That is why we committed to modernizing the way this place works. It is an important conversation to have. It is an important discussion to have. I am saying let us share our ideas. Let us have a constructive conversation, and let us bring this workplace into the 21st century.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, once upon a time there was a Liberal leader who made lovely promises of openness and transparency in order to get elected.

The fairy tale was short-lived because, behind the facade, the Liberals' true nature gave rise to enormous, uncontrollable budget deficits. So much for discussions. The leader, now the Prime Minister, wants to control everything without the unanimous support of members.

Before midnight strikes, will the leader of the government in the House bring this story that she herself has created to a close in order to protect our democracy and our Parliament?

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

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign we promised to modernize Parliament and to turn it into a 21st century workplace.

I encourage all members to take part in the conversation and to express their ideas. It is very important that we have this conversation.

International Trade

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, after a year of study and consultations by both the trade committee and the government, the Liberals still will not take a stand on the TPP.

Recently the minister met with TPP counterparts in Chile, which shows that the Liberals are actively pursuing this job-killing agreement.

Tens of thousands of Canadians have told the Liberals that they have deep concerns with the TPP. What else will it take for the Liberal government to stop pursuing this bad deal?

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleague knows well, because I reported to her when I came back from Chile.

As members know, the Asia-Pacific region is a priority for our government. We owe it to Canadian workers, Canadian families, Canadian exporters to look at expanding markets, because more trade equals more growth, and more growth equals more jobs.

We will continue to have an ambitious trade agenda when it comes to the Asia-Pacific region.

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the dean of Dalhousie University's faculty of management made it very clear that, if the Liberals really want to help the dairy industry deal with the breach they created with CETA, they must grant tariff quotas to Canadian processors.

Industry stakeholders have been waiting for months for an answer, but the Liberals have left them in limbo. CETA takes effect in less than three months.

Can the Liberals confirm today that they will grant tariff quotas to Canadian processors, yes or no?

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

As she knows, we are listening to people from the industry. I have met with people in the dairy industry from across the country. We are examining this issue with interest, and we will soon make a decision for Canadian dairy producers.