Debates of June 5th, 2017

Marijuana

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we have just learned that since the Liberals were elected, more than 15,000 Canadians have been charged for simple possession of marijuana.

The Prime Minister has admitted to smoking pot and recently said that his family's contacts helped get his brother off a possession charge. He said that they were confident that their resources and connections would be able to “make the problem go away.”

Would the Prime Minister be willing to share the contact information of those lawyers with the 15,000 Canadians charged with the exact same crime?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, again, we are committed to legalizing, strictly regulating, and restricting access to cannabis in order to keep it out of the hands of children and the profits out of the hands of criminals.

Simply decriminalizing at this time will not achieve those objectives. That is why we are committed to working very diligently, now that we have introduced legislation, with the provinces and territories so we can have a comprehensive regime in place in the country.

Public Safety

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Mr. Speaker, every parent deserves the right to know when a high-risk sex offender moves into his or her neighbourhood. However, unbelievably, the Minister of Public Safety is considering scrapping a publicly accessible sex offender registry out of concern for, get this, the rights of high-risk sex offenders.

How, in good conscience, can the Minister of Public Safety stand in the way of the right of parents to know when a high-risk sex offender moves in next door?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, that is entirely untrue, and unfortunately very histrionic.

Our government takes very seriously the safety of our children. It ensures that law enforcement and communities have the tools they need to keep our children safe. When a potentially dangerous offender is about to be released from prison, Correctional Service alerts police. If police agencies determine there is a danger, they alert the public. We ensure that everyone is kept safe.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Mr. Speaker, time and again, the Liberals place the rights of criminals first, whether it be opposing mandatory sentences for violent offenders or now putting the rights of sex offenders ahead of the rights of parents to know if one has moved in next door.

Instead of worrying about sex offenders, why will the minister not do the right thing for once and put the rights of parents and the rights of children first?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, the member can keep repeating the same nonsense, but it does not make it true. The reality is this, and it is important to state. Every single member in the House takes the responsibility of protecting children incredibly seriously. When the member stands in his place and casts aspersions that somehow we do not care as much as he does, it is unbefitting of this place.

I will say to you that we take the safety of our children, we take the safety of our communities, and the safety of our families with the utmost seriousness, and act every day and comport ourselves—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Order, please. I hope the parliamentary secretary is referring to the Chair when he uses the word “you”. Of course, he should be.

The hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman.

National Defence

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

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' partisan interim procurement to replace our aging CF-18s has turned into a full-on boondoggle.

First, experts told the government that we did not need an interim measure. Now the Liberals have suspended talks with Boeing to purchase 18 Super Hornets, citing that it is no longer a trusted partner because the Liberals want to protect Bombardier's bottom line. So much for the minister's fabricated capability gap.

Is the Minister of National Defence trying to protect his rich friends at Bombardier or is he looking for an excuse to get out of this terrible and ill-advised sole-source deal with Boeing?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the CF-18s, we have announced a number of measures to make sure we move ahead as quickly as possible with an open competition to replace the entire fleet. We are investing in the legacy fleet as well. We are also training new pilots. We are continuing our discussions with the U.S. government for the interim gap measure.

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

Mr. Speaker, for months, the Minister of National Defence told us that the government had urgent reasons related to national security for going ahead with its misguided plan to purchase 18 Super Hornets from Boeing.

Does the government really believe that we do not see through its tactic? Now the government just wants to protect the interests of Bombardier, to the point where it is putting those interests ahead of the safety of Canadians and our commitments to NATO and NORAD, if you listen closely to what the minister is saying.

Will the minister admit that he was the architect of a fake capability gap and finally agree to an open and transparent procurement process immediately?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the previous government believed that the risk management and capability gap between our NORAD and NATO commitments were adequate, but for us it is not. We will be replacing the entire fleet of fighters with an open competition. We will also be investing in the legacy fleet. Our discussion with the U.S. government will continue to have an interim gap measure as well.

The Environment

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today is World Environment Day. The Liberals promised to reinstate protective measures for all our lakes and rivers, but they are upholding the Conservatives' policies.

The current President of the Treasury Board described the previous government's changes as catastrophic and dangerous for our lakes and rivers. In my riding, the Noire, Yamaska, and La Renne rivers are suffering the consequences of this broken promise.

If the Liberals are so concerned about the environment, when are they going to reinstate the necessary measures to protect all our lakes and rivers?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, in fact, we intend to reinstate many of the protective measures that were removed by the previous government.

We recently received the report of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, which contained certain recommendations. We very much appreciate those recommendations. We will continue to work on this over the summer, particularly by consulting indigenous peoples. We will reinstate important measures for protecting navigable waters.

Labour

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

Mr. Speaker, last week, the government seemed quite content to hide behind the Chair to avoid answering the question. Now that you have ruled that the question was admissible, I will ask it again.

Given the labour dispute currently affecting the parliamentary protective service and the employer's refusal to negotiate, will the Prime Minister consider reforming the Parliament of Canada Act in order to guarantee the independence of the parliamentary protective service?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries]

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

As she is well aware, all members of the House, including the government members, are grateful to the men and women of the parliamentary protective service. They do a wonderful job of protecting members of Parliament, staff, and visitors.

The dispute that she is referring to is a discussion between the parliamentary protective service and the union representing the employees. The Board of Internal Economy believes that it is important to respect that process and to maintain our current approach to discussions.

Telecommunications

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Speaker, with the growth and importance of the digital economy and digital service in Canada, access to a reliable telecommunications service at an affordable price is essential for Canadians. However, Canadians currently pay some of the highest prices for wireless and Internet services compared to other developed countries. Many in rural and remote communities still do not have full reliable coverage.

Could the Minister of Innovation share with us what the government plans to do to ensure Canadians have access to a reliable, affordable, wireless Internet service?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely correct. In the digital and knowledge economy, we need to end the digital divide. That is why I announced this morning a set of measures that would help us enable technology to promote more competition and more investment in the telecommunications sector. This will provide better quality networks, broad-based coverage in our rural and remote communities, and affordable prices, which means lower prices and better choice for consumers.

This is part of our overall innovation and skills plan that will help the middle class.

Infrastructure

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, investors are being told that the infrastructure bank is the cornerstone of the infrastructure plan. Investors have access to the largest and most lucrative infrastructure projects in the country, but municipalities are being told by the Prime Minister that the bank is just a tool, just an option. Let us be clear. This bank is designed to give private investors a return as high as 20% on the backs of taxpayers.

Why are the Liberals telling investors one thing and taxpayers another?

[Amarjeet Sohi, Liberal, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Speaker, unlike the Harper government, we respect local decision-making and we allow local municipalities to determine which procurement model they want to use. The bank is an optional tool available to them, as the Prime Minister stated on Friday.

As a matter of fact, our plan is very much appreciated by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and many of other partners. They twice gave a standing ovation to the Prime Minister in recognition of the commitment we have shown to them.

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, “Are you negotiating with the bank or with cabinet?” It was the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan board that said that to the Senate banking committee on May 18.

How can Canadians have any confidence or trust in the government when even the investors who the Liberals claim will benefit from this bank are questioning its integrity?

[Amarjeet Sohi, Liberal, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Speaker, I am puzzled by the hon. member's question. On the one hand she accuses us of being too close with the private sector, with banks, and on the other hand she is telling us that government will have too much power in decision-making.

We have created the right balance. We will allow the bank to be an arm's-length organization and make decisions on its own, but it will still be accountable to Parliament. We want to make sure that we undertake projects that are in the public interest, that help grow the economy and create opportunities for the middle class, and also help—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for Richmond—Arthabaska.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, let me tell you a little story about the infrastructure bank.

Once upon a time, the Liberals announced the creation of a bank meant to help municipalities. Then, they took away $15 billion in subsidies that were supposed to go to the municipalities. At that point, people started to realize that the math did not add up, a bit like the deficit, and that only projects worth $100 million or more will be accepted. What did the Liberals do next? They asked their pals at BlackRock to decide for them.

Mark my words: this story will not end well. When will the Liberals finally decide to scrap this infrastructure bank?

[Amarjeet Sohi, Liberal, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Speaker, we have a tripled our infrastructure investments compared to the last government. FCM, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, calls budget 2017 “a game-changer for municipalities”.

We are committed to investing in infrastructure, and only a small portion, 10% of the entire infrastructure plan, will be delivered through the bank. We are committed to supporting every municipality, regardless of its size—big urban centres, mid-size cities, and small cities. We understand that diversity of—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for Richmond—Arthabaska.