Debates of June 12th, 2017

The Environment

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, all of this information is already in the public domain. Ninety-seven per cent of Canadians already live in jurisdictions that have either implemented a price on carbon pollution or are in the process of doing so.

Pricing of carbon pollution is a market-based mechanism that allows us to reduce emissions at the lowest possible cost, while stimulating innovation and job creation going forward.

Last week, I was very pleased to see that most members on that side of the House voted in favour of the Paris agreement. Given that most of those members now acknowledge the importance of addressing climate change, I would ask them to outline their plans for achieving the Paris targets if—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for Carleton.

Taxation

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, during the last election, the then-Liberal leader ran an ad of himself walking up a downward escalator, as he made promises to the middle class on taxes. After the election, we found out what this tax escalator actually meant. It meant that beer prices were going to go up, year after year, to fill government coffers. That is in addition to the tax escalator on home heating fuel, groceries, and everything else.

When will the government finally reverse the escalating cost of taxes on middle-class Canadians?

[Bill Morneau, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, we absolutely want to be clear on taxes. We lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians. We raised them on the top 1%. All I can say for sure is the people opposite did not vote for that. When we lowered tax on middle-class Canadians, we meant it.

What we are doing with this is making sure that the taxes on these particular issues stay even with inflation over time. That is appropriate. We promised we would seek to make sure our tax system was fair, and that is exactly what we have done for Canadians.

International Trade

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago, the President of the United States officially put on notice the renegotiation of NAFTA, meaning we are currently within the 90-day window of the process.

On July 17, the U.S. will reveal its final priorities, yet Canadians still do not know what the Liberal government will prioritize. Canadians workers are tired of being left out of the conversation when their livelihoods are at stake. They deserve to have their jobs clearly defended by the government, and the clock is ticking.

Will the Liberals stand up for good jobs and protect our labour standards that Canadians have fought to achieve?

[Andrew Leslie, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Canada-U.S. Relations)]

Mr. Speaker, simply put, yes, we will.

Trade agreements need to grow and mature, as the economy grows and matures. NAFTA has been tweaked, modified, and amended 11 times since its inception. We have invited Canadians to share their ideas and priorities on the modernization of NAFTA by going on to the applicable websites.

We will always stand up for our national economic interests, Canadian values, and Canadian jobs.

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

Mr. Speaker, the President of the United States has set NAFTA renegotiation in motion, but Canadians are in the dark about the Liberals' plan.

The Liberals broke their promise to protect our supply management system, so producers and Canadians no longer trust them. There is no meaningful compensation in CETA, the comprehensive economic and trade agreement between Canada and the European Union, for diafiltered milk, $131 million in goods will be imported duty-free, and the list goes on.

During negotiations, will the government finally take a stand and protect Canadian jobs in supply-managed sectors?

[Andrew Leslie, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Canada-U.S. Relations)]

Mr. Speaker, quite simply, yes.

As we have told Canadians many times, we are prepared to enter into negotiations at any time. Trade agreements must evolve in step with the economy. As everyone knows, NAFTA has been amended 11 times since its first iteration.

The Prime Minister has already spoken to the President of the United States about 10 times on this important issue. We will always stand up for our national interests and Canadian values.

Foreign Takeovers

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Mr. Speaker, from the health care sector to the tax sector, the Liberal government seems quite content to place Chinese interests ahead of the safety of Canadians, particularly when those Chinese companies have a bad track record.

Recently we learned that the Liberals approved the sale of Norsat, a high-tech firm, to Hytera Communications from China and that Hytera had been accused of large-scale international property theft.

Why are the Liberals content with selling out our Canadian businesses to companies that have so many skeletons in their closets?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, this question has been raised several times in the House and we have been very clear that every single transaction is subject to a national security review. We did our homework. We did our due diligence. We have followed the advice given to us by our national security agencies. We never have and we never will compromise on national security.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Mr. Speaker, nobody would buy a car based on what it looks like from the outside. They would look under the hood or even get in and take it out for a test drive. However, when selling out to the Chinese, the Liberals are approving the Hytera deal without any due diligence. The minister may have done a preliminary security review of the acquisition, but when it comes to the safety and security of Canadians, an in-depth review is necessary.

Why will the minister not commit to another review of this deal to make sure that Canadians remain safe?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, we will always stand up for our national interests. We will always make sure we advance the interests of all Canadians. The bottom line is that this is a multi-step national security review process, which is very rigorous. The question is this. Did Canada's national security agencies examine this deal? Yes, they did. Did the government follow the security agencies' recommendation? Yes, we did. We have done our due diligence. We have done our homework. We never have and we never will compromise on national security.

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. minister quite frankly is conflating an analysis memo with a full national security review. The two are very different. The hon. member knows that. When he says that in this House, he is seeking to deceive members of the House about what is actually going on.

Therefore, I will ask the hon. member again. Is this just an analysis memo? If it is not, when is he going to do a full national security review?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, we have been very, very clear that we have listened to and followed the advice of our national security experts. We listened to the advice of the national intelligence agency and security experts who actually reviewed the case and know the facts of this particular transaction. It was on their advice and recommendation that we moved forward with the transaction. We are not going to politicize the issues under the Investment Canada Act. We are going to make sure we follow the law, do our homework, and always protect Canada's interests.

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Speaking of doing homework, Mr. Speaker, funnily enough the U.K. authorities had a similar case involving the same investor. It did a full national security review. It added three pages of conditions to the approval of the investment. That is what our closest ally has done.

When will the hon. member listen to what our allies are doing and protect Canadian national interests?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, we have full faith and confidence in our national security agencies. That is why we followed their advice. That is why we made sure we did our due diligence. Every transaction under the Investment Canada Act is subject to a national security review.

The bottom line is that we are also investing in the economy. We are saying we are open to investments, open to people, and open to trade. That is why over the past six months there has been a quarter of a million good-quality, full-time jobs created in the Canadian economy. That is our number one priority.

Finance

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the buffet is open for Canada's big banks.

Since taking office, the Minister of Finance has met with lobbyists working on behalf of Canada's big banks twice as much as his Conservative predecessor. I am sorry, but I doubt that those meetings were really about discussing the middle class and those working hard to join it.

Who is actually running the Department of Finance? Is it Bay Street, the Liberals' friends who are part of the wealthiest 1%, or the minister, who happens to be from Bay Street and among that 1%?

[Bill Morneau, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has a banking system that works, one that is very important to our overall system and its balance, which is why we need to keep examining it to make sure that it works, both now and going forward. That is why I am always happy to meet with the banking community to make sure that it continues to work for our economy.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the minister needs to meet with Canadians so he knows who it should work for. It is not the banks; it is Canadians. It is clear the banks are forcing their employees to sell products Canadians do not need and sign on to loans they cannot afford. Essentially, they are setting them up to fail.

Guess what. The government has been lobbied by these banks hundreds of times. The government needs to force the banks to be honest with their clients. They need a moral compass. Canadians expect the finance minister to stand up for all Canadians and not just those at the top.

Will the government force the banks to stop fleecing and scamming Canadians instead of caving to its lobbyist friends?

[Bill Morneau, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I think the member is absolutely right in saying that we need to be very clear that we are focused on bank regulations so that we can protect consumers. That is critically important.

We will continue to focus on Canadians as we think about the banking system. We will continue to focus on ensuring we understand the risks. That is our absolute continuing goal. We are looking into banking practices. We have a process in place at the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada in order to make sure these banking practices are appropriate and do not treat Canadians inappropriately in any way.

The Economy

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, last week, the Statistics Canada May jobs report highlighted that three times as many full-time jobs were added to the Canadian economy than was predicted. That is 77,000 new full-time jobs. That is over a quarter of a million full-time jobs added to Canada's economy in the past six months. This shows that our plan of investing in the middle class is working, a plan that the leader of the opposition opposes.

Can the parliamentary secretary please tell the House how our plan to invest in Canadians is delivering results for the middle class and those working hard to join it?

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected this government to grow the economy and create good, solid, middle-class jobs. In the last six months, over a quarter of a million full-time jobs have been created. That is the best growth rate we have had in 15 years.

We have been working with businesses and innovators, and we have been giving the skills to young Canadians to make sure they are ready for the jobs of today as well as the economy of tomorrow.

National Defence

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister's plan to sole source Super Hornets is spiralling out of control and taking a nosedive. The former chief of defence staff Tom Lawson is stating that there is no one except the government that believes 18 Super Hornets will be useful for Canada. The defence minister says that Boeing is no longer a trusted partner and that he is looking at many different options.

What options is the defence minister talking about? The Liberals will not buy Super Hornets from Boeing, and their website still says that they will not buy F-35s either.

Are the Liberals going to sole source our fighter jets from their communist friends in Beijing?

[Jean Rioux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, as stated in our defence policy, we need 88 fighter jets in order to properly equip our soldiers so they can carry out their missions.

We currently have 76 aircraft. There is a capability gap, and we will do what it takes to have an interim fleet, which will allow us to carry out our missions.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is pretty obvious that the government has no idea how it is going to replace the CF-18s.

At first, the Liberals said they were ruling out the F-35s. Now, they are squabbling with Boeing, and on the weekend General Lawson said he did not need the Super Hornets.

Can the government get its act together and immediately launch an open and transparent process and stop doing useless political acrobatics that amount to nothing more than an exercise in partisanship?