House of Commons Hansard #264 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was peoples.
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, part of our framework for the sale of marijuana and associated investments involves extensive screenings and background checks of everyone who works in the marijuana industry, including investors. Yes, we will ensure that no one involved in organized crime invests in the sale and production of marijuana.
Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Mr. Speaker, tax haven is synonymous with Liberal haven. The former national director of the Liberal Party of Canada, the former chief financial officer of the Liberal Party, former Liberal ministers of health, justice, and national revenue, and major Liberal Party donors are all involved. What do they have in common? They are all affluent Liberals, people the Prime Minister knows personally, and they are all going to get richer with the legalization of cannabis.
Is this another sponsorship scandal?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, again, the Conservatives are trying to divert attention from their own failure on this file. The Conservative government perpetuated a system that made it easier for young people to access marijuana in Canada than in 29 other countries in the world. Their system was a total failure. We want to better protect our young people. We want to keep profits out of the hands of organized crime. That is exactly what we are doing and they have nothing to say about it.
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Liberals voted down an NDP motion that would have taken real action in fighting tax havens. Why the Prime Minister will not stand up to tax cheats and the unaccountable leadership of the Canada Revenue Agency is beyond me.
What is clear to me and what is clear to Canadians is that highly connected Liberal insiders are not shy about exploiting Canada's weakness on tax havens to invest in cannabis production. Why is the Prime Minister so slow in acting on the unaccountability of the CRA, so slow in acting against tax havens, and even slower in addressing the critical issue of anonymous tax haven investors in cannabis production?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, it is nice to see the NDP and Conservatives working together for once.
The Minister of Finance recently reached an agreement with his provincial and territorial counterparts to ensure that we know who owns which corporations, which will prevent Canadian or international companies from facilitating tax evasion, money laundering, and other criminal activities. There will be background checks on significant investors in any marijuana organization. That is the kind of framework that we are putting in place to protect Canadians, to reduce the profits of organized crime, and to protect our communities.
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, the problem is that under the tax agreements that this government has signed we cannot find out who is part of those tax havens.
Automatic information-sharing agreements do not work. We still do not know who owns these corporations and who is investing in tax havens. How do we know whether they will invest here next?
Oddly enough, we learned today that friends of the Liberal Party, including a former treasurer and a former advisor, are using these tax havens to invest in the production of cannabis, just a few months before it is legalized. We are understandably concerned.
This is a wake-up call the Prime Minister is ignoring. When will he wake up and realize that the involvement of these Liberal friends is just the tip of the iceberg?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, we are going to continue to crack down on tax evasion and tax avoidance by making investments. We invested nearly $1 billion in the Canada Revenue Agency for that very purpose. I am also pleased to repeat the announcement that was made today. Across the country, 30 CRA investigators are taking action in Vancouver, Calgary, and Toronto to ensure that we are continuing to crack down on tax evasion and tax avoidance.
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
Mr. Speaker, the number of ties between the Liberal Party of Canada, companies that produce cannabis, and investments from tax havens is simply mind-boggling.
On top of that, the secretive operations of shell companies in tax havens really raise concerns about who is ultimately making money from those companies.
The government simply failed to establish strict rules governing the financing of that industry, and the proposed regulatory framework is a smokescreen.
What are the Prime Minister's real intentions in legalizing cannabis? Is it simply so that friends of the Liberal Party of Canada can make more money?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, with regard to tax information, we are focused on transparency and increasing and expanding the sharing of information.
Canada has a vast network of treaties and a number of tools that enabled the Canada Revenue Agency to share 2.2 million pieces of information last year. Thanks to our historic investment of $1 billion to combat tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance, the CRA will be able to recover over $5 billion in federal revenues over the next six years. We will continue to work hard to combat tax evasion and tax avoidance.
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Mr. Speaker, simply there is no due diligence. We are talking about $277 million coming to Canada from secret tax havens benefiting from the poor management by the government of cannabis. We do not even know who is involved. Is it Liberal insiders again, is it organized crime, or is it both?
The Prime Minister's willingness to sign anything with overseas tax havens and poor fiscal rules means these secretive funds do not even have to report their capital gains in Canada. Perfect for money laundering. Why is the Prime Minister being so utterly irresponsible?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, protecting the health and safety of Canadians is a top priority for our government, and that is why we are moving forward on a legalized regime for the sale of marijuana.
Under our proposed regulations, security clearances will be mandatory for individuals who occupy key positions in any organization, as well as background checks on significant investors to any marijuana company. In addition, the Minister of Finance recently reached an agreement with his provincial and territorial counterparts to ensure that we know who owns which corporations, which will help prevent Canadian or international companies from facilitating tax evasion.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, on the subject of ministers receiving valuable and improper gifts, the Liberal vice-chair of the ethics committee, a Liberal member of the Prime Minister's caucus said, “I do think repayment of the reasonable value of an improper gift that one receives is prudent and reasonable under the act.”
Does the Prime Minister agree with the Liberal vice-chair of the ethics committee that ministers should return the commercial value of any improper gift they receive?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, immediately after the Ethics Commissioner released her report, I accepted the findings of the report, took responsibility, and am following up on every single element of her advice or recommendations.
That is what Canadians expect, and that following of the Ethic Commissioner's advice and recommendations is exactly what Canadians expect of any of us.
EthicsOral Questions
The Speaker Geoff Regan
Order. Do members not think that Canadians have the capacity to judge the quality of questions and answers? I think they recognize that is the case. I think members know that Canadians, the public, have the capacity to do that. They do not need assistance from this chamber.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am glad the Prime Minister mentioned the Ethics Commissioner, because his vice-chair asked the Ethics Commissioner if he agreed that a minister should return any improperly received gifts. The commissioner said, “Of course it would be—”.
Does the Prime Minister agree with the Ethics Commissioner on that?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, what is interesting is that we have the best economic growth numbers in years, the lowest rate of unemployment in 40 years, the fastest growth rate in the G7, and the members opposite spend their time slinging mud, making personal attacks, and trying to stir up stories that have already been dealt with.
I took responsibility. I accept the full recommendations and advice of the Ethics Commissioner. They do not have anything else to criticize us on.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, we are just trying to help Liberal cabinet ministers understand what the rules are. That is why I am asking the Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister's cabinet is here and they are listening. He has an opportunity to inform them. If a minister, for example, got a $200,000 gift from someone who is lobbying that minister, would the Prime Minister take action? What action would he take? Would he fire the minister? Would he force them to give the gift back? Would he refer the matter to the RCMP, or just shrug?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, as has been the case for previous prime ministers, and as the former commissioner herself stated, security costs are incurred whenever and wherever the Prime Minister travels.
Moving forward, of course, I am happy to follow all the advice and recommendations that the commissioner had made, including those surrounding personal and private travel.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am not talking about the cost of the transportation and security. I am talking about the commercial value of a gift. I never actually mentioned the Prime Minister, by the way. I just described some conduct and he immediately attributed it to himself. It is funny.
An island like the one on which he vacationed is advertised for, and they cost a lot of money, approximately $200,000 for the amount of time and the number of people the Prime Minister had vacationing as part of this gift.
Does he believe that a minister, any minister, should repay an improper gift of that size?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, Canadians watching question period could be alarmed at the tone and the attacks that go back and forth in this place, but they should be reassured that above the partisanship, above the mudslinging, we have an Ethics Commissioner who looks into allegations and looks into behaviours, and makes determinations on what happened and what needs to happen going forward.
I am actually pleased that the Ethics Commissioner made clarifications, significantly put forward recommendations. I accepted responsibility and have endeavoured and will commit to following all the recommendations of the Ethics Commissioner.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, paragraph 121(1)(c) of the Criminal Code says it is an offence for a government official “to accept from a person who has dealings with the government a commission, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person”.
If the Prime Minister learned that one of his ministers had accepted a benefit from someone who had dealings with the government, what would he do about it?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, Canadians understand and appreciate that the function of an opposition in this parliamentary system is to ask tough questions and challenge the government. What is important to know, however, is that we have a system that goes above the partisan attacks and the personal mudslinging and actually charges the Ethics Commissioner with looking into issues and allegations of this, making findings of fact, and making determinations on the path forward.
I have fully accepted all the findings, all the advice, and all the recommendations by the Ethics Commissioner. I thanked her for her work and will keep going—
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, once again I merely quoted sections out of the Criminal Code without referring to the Prime Minister. He instantaneously assumed that I was making a personal attack against him.
This is a Prime Minister who accepted a gift that is worth approximately $200,000 from someone who was seeking a $15 million grant from the Government of Canada. Does he dispute these facts?