Debates of Nov. 5th, 2018

Carbon Pricing

[Sean Fraser, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased the hon. member opposite contemplates that the Liberals will still be in power after the next election.

The fact is that we have been transparent from the beginning about our plan to protect the environment and grow the economy. Our national climate plan has been posted on our website since the day it was negotiated. Part of that plan, and I am proud to stand by it, is to put a price on pollution that will max it at $50 a tonne by 2022. We will conduct a review of the policy at that time.

If the hon. member is so concerned with transparency, I would suggest he looks inward and asks the hon. Leader of the Opposition why he deleted his plan from his leader's website in May of 2017.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there we have it. There will be a review of the price in 2022, after the election is over. Therefore, Canadians would have to wake up to that nightmare after having voted to choose the next to govern.

The government already broke its promises on the deficit, already broke promises on taxes for the middle class. Now it is setting up for yet another broken promise with a carbon tax on gas, home heating and other essentials that will be much higher than the government admits.

Will it rule out that the tax will be higher than it now admits, yes or no?

[Sean Fraser, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting now that the Conservative Party of Canada seems opposed to reviewing policies periodically. It seems to prefer basing their decisions on ideology rather than facts, science or evidence.

We campaigned on a commitment to protect our environment and grow the economy at the same time. I am proud that we have implemented a price on pollution that will leave middle-class families better off.

If there is a nightmare, it is going to be during the next campaign when the Conservatives are trying to take money from their constituents so they can make pollution free again.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pollution under the Liberal plan is absolutely free for any large industrial polluter that emits more than 50,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases. However, it is not free for a grandmother trying to heat her home in -30° weather. It is not free for a middle-class single mom taking her child to soccer. It is not free for a small business. They all deserve to know this. Will the tax go even higher after the next election if by some God-forsaken outcome that party wins that election?

[Sean Fraser, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.]

Mr. Speaker, just because the hon. member opposite has the ability to repeat a falsehood does not make it true. The fact is that we put a price on pollution, including a price for big emitters. There is a standard set in different industries and if the big emitters exceed that standard, then they pay a price on pollution.

Stephen Harper's former director of policy has indicated that families can expect to be better off. Doug Ford's chief budget adviser has advocated on behalf of putting a price on pollution. Even Stephen Harper back in 2008 suggested that the plan going forward should involve an effective price of $65 a tonne. The fact is that families will be left better off under our plan and it is—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for Carleton.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is suggesting that his own government documents are false. They indicate that not only will large industrial emitters get up to a 90% exemption on the carbon tax, but even if they exceed that 90%, they can use something called surplus credits or eligible offset credits to avoid paying any tax whatsoever.

Therefore, yes, pollution will be free for the large polluters, but how much will the average Canadian family have to pay?

[Sean Fraser, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's repetition does not make the falsehood true. Nor does his use of air quotes in this circumstance.

The fact is that we campaigned on a commitment to protect our environment and grow the economy at the same time. Part of our plan to protect the environment includes putting a price on pollution. This is going to leave middle-class families better off.

If members do not believe me, they can look to Stephen Harper's former director of policy. They can look to Doug Ford's chief budget adviser. They can look to the Noble prize winner in economics from this year. The fact is that we are moving forward with a plan that will protect our environment and leave families better off.

I am disappointed that the Conservatives want to take money from their constituents to make pollution—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.

Medical Assistance in Dying

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

Mr. Speaker, on the issue of medical assistance in dying, the government lacks sensitivity. It brought in a law that is too restrictive.

Denise Bégin, a constituent of mine who has a serious degenerative disease, is seeking medical assistance in dying. However, her request was denied because she is not on the point of death. The government should not make this choice for patients.

Will the Liberals respect patients' choices and the ruling handed down by the Supreme Court?

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

Mr. Speaker, medical assistance in dying is an incredibly complex, sensitive and deeply personal issue. Our government put forward legislation that we are proud forms the national framework around medical assistance in dying. It draws the correct balance between the autonomy of individuals and protecting vulnerable people.

We are continuing to have a discussion around medical assistance in dying. We have, according to the legislation, commissioned three reviews on highly complex issues that will be coming back in December. We look forward to having further conversations about it.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in 2016, Bob Hergott had to sign his request for medical assistance in dying in a bus shelter. Then, in 2017, Doreen Nowicki was forced to receive her assessment for ending her life on the sidewalk. Edmonton's Covenant Health hospitals, where these patients were treated, have banned these activities on their properties.

Enough is enough. Will the Liberals actually defend their legislation, show some leadership and ensure that the constitutional rights of terminally ill patients are upheld across Canada?

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

Mr. Speaker, again, medical assistance in dying is a deeply complex, sensitive and deeply personal matter for individuals who are seeking to access medical assistance in dying.

Our government introduced Bill C-14 in response to the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Jordan. We are confident that our legislation strikes the right balance between protecting vulnerable people and respecting the personal autonomy of individuals, as well as recognizing the conscience right of health care practitioners.

We will continue to have a conversation around medical assistance and dying. We have commissioned three reviews according to the legislation, which look at complex issues.

National Defence

[Colin Fraser, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, a month ago, in Halifax, was the naming ceremony of Canada's first Arctic and offshore patrol ship. It was the first naval ship built in Canada in 20 years and our government delivered it.

As part of “Strong, Secure, Engaged: Canada's Defence Policy”, we committed to building at least five Arctic and offshore patrol ships to bolster the Royal Canadian Navy's capabilities.

Shipbuilding is an important part of our local economy. Could the Minister of National Defence explain how our government is continuing to create significant opportunities for Nova Scotians while ensuring our navy has the tools it needs.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for West Nova for his tremendous and tireless work. As promised, our government is strengthening the capabilities of the Royal Canadian Navy.

Last week, I was proud to announce that we would move ahead with the acquisition of a sixth Arctic and offshore patrol ship. This will create good middle-class jobs for workers in Halifax and across Nova Scotia. This is a great day for Halifax and a great day for the Royal Canadian Navy.

Public Safety

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

Mr. Speaker, instead of stopping drug trafficking in prisons, the Prime Minister decided to institute a needle exchange program for prisoners. This is another asinine initiative that puts the safety of inmates and guards at risk.

The union is appalled by this decision and demands that the government reverse it immediately. Once again, the Prime Minister is demonstrating his partiality for criminals and dismissing the concerns of law-abiding citizens.

Will the Prime Minister acknowledge that his plan is jeopardizing the health of our prison guards?

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

Mr. Speaker, no, in fact, for quite some time now in the correctional system, Correctional Service of Canada has properly managed the use of EpiPens, for example, and insulin syringes.

There is well-established procedure for dealing with these circumstances in a safe way to prevent the spread of disease and to save lives. Public safety is what this is all about.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

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

Mr. Speaker, that is totally unrelated. It makes no sense to give needles to everyone in penitentiaries.

The Immigration and Refugee Board is sounding the alarm. It is saying that new asylum seekers will have to wait almost two years before finding out whether they will be able to remain in Canada or not. There will be an estimated 60,000 new applications this year. The Liberals have set aside $74 million for the backlog and the provinces are asking to be reimbursed more than $400 million. All this waste is the fault of a short-sighted Prime Minister who is engaging in propaganda at the expense of taxpayers.

Does the Prime Minister recognize that he has made a real mess of our immigration system?

[Bill Blair, Minister of Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction, Lib.]

Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear that after years of chronic underfunding and understaffing, we have been restoring the capacity of the IRB to deal with those who have come to our country seeking asylum.

It is also a good opportunity to remind all Canadians who these people are. They are families with children. Almost half of them are children. They are thoroughly vetted by the RCMP to ensure that they represent no risk to public safety or national security. I want to assure the member opposite that he has nothing to be afraid of.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, last week on CBC, the Minister of Immigration said that his Ontario counterpart's claims that 40% of Toronto's homeless shelter occupants were refugees and asylum seekers were “not based on facts”. The CBC fact-checked the minister and found out that Minister MacLeod's claims are, in fact, valid.

Was the minister intentionally misleading Canadians, or does he not know the basic facts of his file? In either scenario, why should Canadians trust him to fix his illegal-border-crossing mess?

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, I was on television to talk about our immigration levels, which Canadians have been asking us to increase in order to meet our employee shortages as well as skills shortages around the country. We have responded with an ambitious and well-measured immigration plan. We have done that after listening to Canadians. We have held hundreds of town halls across the country, something the party opposite has not done. In fact, the member opposite has just come around to the understanding that it is important to talk to Canadians about immigration. For three years, after blocking people on Twitter, that is the only way Canadians can actually get hold of her.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that Canadians taxpayers are on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars for the Prime Minister's #WelcometoCanada illegal-border-crossing program. Instead of trying to fix the problem, the Prime Minister is allowing his cabinet to attempt to bully anyone who questions whether we should pay for those thousands of people who are illegally entering Canada.

Will the minister apologize, for his bullying attempt, to Minister MacLeod?

[Bill Blair, Minister of Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction, Lib.]

Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the member opposite that we have been working very carefully with the Province of Ontario, the Province of Quebec and the City of Toronto. I have met and had a number of conversations with the minister and mayors responsible. We are working hard to ensure that Canadian law is upheld and that we uphold our responsibility to anyone who seeks the protection of the country and treat them in an appropriate way, according to our laws.

We are achieving significant success in reducing the number of people who have presented themselves—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Order. The member for Abbotsford seems to think he does not need to have the floor to speak in the House. I would ask him to remember that he does. He would not want to not have it.

The hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé.

Employment

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

Mr. Speaker, almost three years ago, my colleague from Windsor West asked the minister to ensure that Canadian jobs would be protected when Lowe's bought Rona. You can imagine how shocked employees were when they were told that their stores will close in January, leaving them unemployed.

Nine stores in Quebec and 31 stores across the country are closing their doors. The company has said that U.S. employees will be offered jobs elsewhere, but no such assurance has been given to Canadian employees.

Now that these jobs are at risk, what will the minister do to protect these workers?