Debates of Nov. 8th, 2018

Privacy

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, again, this is over-the-top rhetoric. Using the term “surveillance scheme” is completely inappropriate and unacceptable. When it comes to Statistics Canada, the chief statistician has been very clear. He will only proceed if he gets assurances and the support of the Privacy Commissioner, whom he proactively engaged to deal with the issues around privacy and data protection.

The members opposite have been fearmongering with over-the-top rhetoric to mislead Canadians. Enough is enough. Let us support Statistics Canada, and let us support good-quality, reliable data.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Privacy Commissioner said today at the Senate committee that he was awestruck by the revelation of the number of Canadians who will be under surveillance. It is ridiculous for the Liberals to say they are working with the Privacy Commissioner.

We also learned yesterday that despite promises to anonymize the data, Liberals will actually keep all the private information and have the ability to access it at any time. The government will be able to check every transaction and tie it to every individual.

Now that the scope has increased and the Liberals' plans to anonymize the data are gone, will the government finally put Canadians first and stop tracking their finances without their knowledge or consent?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, let us stick to the facts, because one falsehood after another falsehood is misleading Canadians. That is what the member opposite is doing. No personal data will be disclosed. All of that will be removed. All personal information that the members are talking about will be disclosed by the banks to their clients. No breaches of the Statistics Canada server have occurred.

Statistics Canada is proactively engaged with the Privacy Commissioner. As I mentioned, under subsection 17(1), no government, Conservative, Liberal or of any other party, can compel Statistics Canada.

Pensions

[Karine Trudel, NDP, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals refuse to amend the bankruptcy act and workers continue to be left with nothing but crumbs.

Sears Canada employees spent their lives working and paying into their pensions. Sears shareholders got $509 million, and what did the workers get? Nothing. Once again, the most vulnerable are footing the bill.

When will the government change the law to put an end to pension theft?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, we understand how difficult this is for the workers at Sears and the pensioners. Our government has been very clear about supporting pensioners. We brought in the wage earner protection program. We have also strengthened the Canada pension plan.

In the last budget, we indicated the desire to use a whole-of-government approach to make sure we provide additional security measures for pensioners. With respect to the particular issue the member opposite has raised, the CCAA process has made it very clear that there are some issues. The fact that it is addressing the issues the monitor has put forward indicates that the process is working.

[Scott Duvall, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about pension theft, not about CPP.

Today, we learned that the owners of Sears Canada are being sued in the hopes of recovering millions of dollars paid to investors while the company was in financial ruin. This is the same kind of corporate theft I was asking the Minister of Seniors about last week, when she accused me of providing misinformation.

The minister said consultations have and will continue to take place, yet we have not heard anything about these promised consultations. Who is misleading whom? Will the minister release a list today of all the people she has consulted, and a schedule for the formal consultations promised in the budget?

[Filomena Tassi, Liberal, Minister of Seniors]

Mr. Speaker, let me make it very clear that consultations have been taking place. That is a commitment we made in our 2018 budget, and it has been reaffirmed by the Prime Minister in his mandate letter to me. The consultations are taking place because this is a very difficult issue and we want an evidence-based solution. This is why these consultations are necessary.

We have the interests of pensioners at heart, and we are going to work hard to find the solution that is right for pensioners and that does not have unintended consequences for them. We are going to work hard to get the right solution.

Carbon Pricing

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister refused to tell us whether the GST and HST would apply on the carbon tax. I dug up documents directly from the Canada Revenue Agency that indicate that consideration payable for the supply of the gasoline upon which the supplier will calculate the HST does include the carbon tax.

Now we know there will be a tax on a tax. Based on these calculations of 13% in the province of Ontario, how much will Ontario taxpayers spend in a tax on the tax?

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

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by expressing my condolences to the hon. member for being left off yesterday's cover of Maclean's magazine alongside his colleagues.

With his question, the hon. member is trying to trick Canadians into believing that life will be made more expensive under our plan. That is simply not true. We are moving forward with putting a price on pollution that is actually going to make life more affordable for Canadians.

That collection of miscellaneous Conservative politicians was labelled “The resistance” on the cover of that magazine yesterday. From where I sit, all they seem to be resisting is progress on social and environmental issues.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

International Trade

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, through you, directly to President Donald Trump, I say, “This government may have backed down to you on buy American, on softwood lumber and on so much more, but I will have you know that if you do not back down on your steel tariffs, this Prime Minister will deny you a photo op.”

My question for the government is, will the Prime Minister go further and say he will not appear on the cover of a U.S. magazine until these tariffs are gone?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

Order, order. I will just speak to colleagues when I can get their attention. Order. It is good to see the House in a good mood, of course.

The purpose of the rule that you cannot say “you” in here unless you are speaking to the Speaker, is of course about not talking to someone on the other side and saying, “you, you, you”. Therefore, I guess this is a bit different. It is unorthodox, but I am going to allow it in this case.

[Andrew Leslie, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure how I can top that, but let us listen to a Conservative who actually knows what he is talking about when it comes to trade. I quote former prime minister Brian Mulroney, who said:

This agreement is a highly significant achievement for Canada...Canada appears to have achieved most if not all of its important objectives in this lengthy and challenging set of negotiations.

Carbon Pricing

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I report as well that the president has tweeted out a point of order that you will have to mull on after question period.

Going back to the issue of the HST, the government will collect $720 million of HST on the carbon tax, according to a basic calculation of that tax to the planned price on carbon use by Canadians.

My question is very simple. Were those numbers included in the calculation of the cost to the average family of this tax?

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

Mr. Speaker, again, the Conservative Party strategy seems to be to mislead Canadians on the cost to families.

We know that when we move forward to protect the environment by putting a price on pollution, we are actually going to leave middle-class families better off at the end of the year.

I look forward with great anticipation to the next campaign, when the Conservatives campaign on a commitment to take money from their constituents so they can make pollution free again.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly his policy.

The government is proposing to take money away from all of our constituents when they commit the crime of filling up their gas tank to drive to work or heating their home in temperatures of -40°, while making pollution absolutely free to large industrial corporations that emit more than 50,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases.

At the same time, the government then claims it can take $10 in taxes for every $9 in rebates, and that somehow taxpayers will be better off. Will the government drop the phony math and tell us how much the average family will spend paying the tax on the tax?

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

Mr. Speaker, over the last number of weeks I have watched the hon. member spin tales. He has suggested that large polluters are exempt. He has suggested that small businesses will be stuck with the bill. He has suggested that families will be worse off. These are all falsehoods.

We are moving forward with a plan that is going to make big polluters pay. We are going to give small businesses the tools they need to succeed, and we are going to make life more affordable for Canadians.

If the hon. member has the courage to ask one more question based on facts instead of falsehoods, I would be pleased to give him an honest answer. If he comes back again with these falsehoods and underlying assumptions that cannot be proven, I would be pleased to dress him down one more time.

Health

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

Mr. Speaker, the opioid abuse problem is so severe that life expectancy in Canada could drop for the first time in decades. Even President Trump has declared the opioid epidemic to be a national crisis in the United States.

The longer the Liberals wait to take action, the worse the situation in Canada gets.

When is the Prime Minister going to implement a national strategy to address the opioid crisis?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, we are facing a tragic opioid crisis. We have lost thousands of Canadians over the past few years. It is a real tragedy.

Our government continues to work with the provinces and territories. In budget 2018, we proposed an investment of $230 million to, first, increase services on the ground, and second, launch a public education campaign to address the stigma.

We recognize that, in many cases, Canadians do not receive the services they need because of the stigma that exists.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, for the first time in decades, life expectancy in Canada could decrease because of the ongoing opioid crisis. Canada is the second-largest user of opioids behind the U.S. Purdue Pharma was found guilty of misleading the public and downplaying the risk of addiction, and was forced to pay $830 million.

It is time for the Prime Minister to stand up to big pharma and seek justice for families. Will he launch a criminal investigation into opioid manufacturers and seek compensation for the costs of addressing the opioid crisis?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, we are in a national public health crisis when it comes to the opioid situation, and we are deeply troubled by the loss of life that we have seen.

In budget 2018, I am pleased to say that we invested over $230 million, $150 million of which is to provide emergency treatment for people on the ground. We have also made investments to put in place an anti-stigma campaign, as we recognize that many individuals do not receive the treatment they need because of the stigma that exists.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians know that diversity is our strength and that Canada's linguistic duality is at the heart of our identity.

Canada's francophone and Acadian communities are facing demographic challenges and we know that immigration plays an essential role in developing their vitality, as it does in my riding, Ottawa—Vanier.

We have set an ambitious target for francophone immigration outside Quebec of 4.4% by 2023 and we are working hard to meet that target.

Could the minister give us an update?

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

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

Our government is taking historic measures to attract francophone newcomers. Yesterday, I was pleased to announce $11 million to help francophone immigrants prepare for their new life in Canada. There will be a new service at Pearson airport to help newcomers. We will also make the French test more accessible and more affordable.

We understand the importance of francophone immigration.

Veterans Affairs

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, those who served our country deserve our utmost respect, gratitude and support. However, complaint after complaint rolls in about the Liberal government's neglect of veterans and their needs.

My constituent writes, “I am a military veteran...In mid April 2018 Veterans Affairs Canada received all my documents for a reassessment for my disability. And yet, almost 6 months later I still await a decision.... I have no way of knowing whether a decision is 2 months away or a year.”

Why the wait? Why does the government continue to fail our veterans?