Debates of Feb. 7th, 2018

Canadian Armed Forces

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

Mr. Speaker, I could not be clearer on this matter. We are going to stomp this problem out. Operation Honour was created on this matter, and our defence policy is going to make sure that we create the proper environment to allow any Canadian who wants to join the Canadian Armed Forces to be able to pursue a career and develop to his or her full potential.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the most tawdry part of all this is that the litigation committee of cabinet, which is charged with overseeing how lawyers are instructed, has five women sitting on it. Do any of those five female Liberal ministers want to stand up and let us know exactly why they think it is okay that they have protection in the workplace and yet women in the forces do not? Will they pull this brief?

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

Mr. Speaker, we have zero tolerance for any type of sexual misbehaviour—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Order. Yes, it is Wednesday, but the rules still apply. Members are familiar with the Standing Orders and the rule against interrupting.

The hon. Minister of National Defence has the floor.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me be extremely clear. We have absolute zero tolerance for any type of behaviour like this, and that is exactly what we are going to do. We have committed to this in our defence policy, and we are going to get the job done.

Taxation

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the European Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, Pierre Moscovici, wants web giants to pay their fair share of taxes in Europe. It seems logical to have companies pay their fair share of taxes, but the Canadian government is taking a step backward. It is going in the opposite direction and allowing web giants to forgo paying their fair share of taxes.

While companies here are charging sales tax on every transaction, why is the government showing favouritism to web giants such as Amazon, Netflix, and Facebook?

[Mélanie Joly, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister was very clear on this. We made a promise and we plan to keep it. That being said, we recognize that in the long term we need to develop a comprehensive solution for taxing digital platforms. We are not going to take a piecemeal approach.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today the Prime Minister is travelling to Silicon Valley to visit Amazon. Will he be asking it to impose taxes on the products it sells in Canada, as it should, or will he be negotiating a cozy deal?

What we are asking for is simple fairness. When a company is exempt from collecting taxes on its sales, it is being given an unfair 8% to 15% advantage. If we do not ensure the same rules apply for everyone, then we are playing favourites.

Why does the government have one set of tax rules for web giants and another one for everybody else?

[Mélanie Joly, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been clear. We have made a commitment and we will keep it.

That being said, we recognize that in the long term we must look at finding a global solution to addressing the entire question of taxation over the digital platform. We will not have a piecemeal approach.

Canadian Armed Forces

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

Mr. Speaker, victims of sexual assault and harassment in the Canadian Armed Forces launched a class action lawsuit in May.

On January 29, in response to my question on sexual violence and harassment, the Prime Minister said, “This is a problem that has gone on for far too long, and it is time we dealt with it, particularly here in Parliament, where we set an example for the rest of the country.”

However, by attempting to quash the lawsuit, the example the Prime Minister is setting is completely irresponsible and reprehensible.

Will the Prime Minister withdraw the government's attempts to discredit these victims?

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for her passion on this issue.

As I stated, we want to be able to work with the opposition on this issue, because this is an important issue that impacts all of us. We need to make sure that we have a harassment-free workplace, especially in the Canadian Armed Forces, and with our new defence policy and with Operation Honour we are going to get the job done.

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

Mr. Speaker, whether here on Parliament Hill or in the forces, the days of sexual harassment, bullying, and inappropriate behaviour are done. The women and men who have served our country want to know what their government plans to do to change the culture within the Canadian military. These women and men expect more than just a discussion with the minister. They want meaningful action today.

What is the government's plan?

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

Mr. Speaker, as part of Operation Honour we are going to get the job done. Every person who willingly serves our country despite the many dangers and sacrifices of military service deserves a professional environment in which he or she is treated with respect and dignity. That is the type of path that we are going to go on and we are going to get the job done.

Ethics

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

Mr. Speaker, as I am sure everyone knows by now, the Prime Minister was found guilty of violating the Conflict of Interest Act not once but four times. He accepted a free trip to the private island of a billionaire who solicits money from the Canadian government. He went with his family, his friend the Minister of Veterans Affairs, and the president of the Liberal Party. The trip cost Canadian taxpayers $200,000.

I wonder if the government House leader is able to turn around and convince the Prime Minister to do the right thing, if he has the slightest bit of honour, and pay back the money he took from Canadians.

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism]

Mr. Speaker, the security agencies make determinations on what is needed to protect the Prime Minister, as they have done for previous prime ministers. We follow their recommendations. The former commissioner has acknowledged that these costs were incurred as part of the Prime Minister's duties. The Prime Minister will continue to work with the commissioner to clear future family vacation plans.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is always the same old story.

When Liberal ministers had illegal expenses, they had to pay them back. When some of the Prime Minister's staff had illegal expenses, they had to pay them back. When Canadians do not pay their taxes, public servants go get the money with interest. When Canadians want to take a vacation, they pay for it themselves.

The question that everyone is asking is the following: is there one law for the Prime Minister and another law for the other members of the House, regardless of political affiliation, and the rest of Canadians?

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism]

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, it was the former commissioner who decided that these expenses were incurred as part of the Prime Minister's duties. It was the opposition that asked for an investigation. Now that the report has been tabled, it refuses to accept the findings.

We on this side of the House respect the work of the commissioner and will accept the findings. The Prime Minister already accepted responsibility.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal House leader answering for the Prime Minister says that he accepted the Ethics Commissioner's recommendations. The Ethics Commissioner made no recommendations. The Ethics Commissioner found that the Prime Minister broke the law.

The health minister paid back her inappropriate travel expenses, because the Prime Minister made her pay them back. Now with a clear finding that he broke the law, why will he not just pay it back?

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism]

Mr. Speaker, as I just said in French, I shall repeat in English. The former commissioner has acknowledged that these costs are incurred as part of the role of the Prime Minister. It was the Conservatives who demanded that an investigation take place. Now that the investigation has taken place and the ex-commissioner has submitted her report, they refuse to accept its conclusions.

We on this side respect the work of officers of Parliament. We thank the ex-commissioner for her important work. The Prime Minister has accepted responsibility. The Prime Minister has accepted its findings. There were recommendations that were put in place, which is exactly why the Prime Minister put a screen in place. It is exactly why he will ensure that future family vacations are cleared ahead of time.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, a big part of the $200,000 wasted on the Prime Minister's illegal trip was generated by the security detail that must accompany him wherever he chooses to go. Canadians accept that for working trips to the UN, the G7, or perhaps even the Davos celebrity fest. However, after the Prime Minister dragged his security detail along on his illegal vacation, and it had no choice but to accompany, the Prime Minister owns those wasted dollars. Therefore, why will he not do the right thing and pay it back?

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism]

Mr. Speaker, there are security agencies that are tasked with the responsibility to provide their expertise to ensure that the safety of the Prime Minister is ensured. Whenever and wherever the Prime Minister travels, there are costs related to security. We always accept the advice of our security agencies as to how to best ensure the safety of the Prime Minister, as was the case for past prime ministers.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the former ethics commissioner released her report over a month ago.

Since then, the Prime Minister has repeatedly said that he takes full responsibility and accepts the recommendations, but he has shown no leadership on this front. As head of state, he should lead by example, be proactive, and stop lowering the bar.

The commissioner cannot force him to pay back the taxpayer dollars he spent on an illegal vacation, but nothing is stopping the Prime Minister from reimbursing the public for his extravagant spending. Why won't he do that?

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism]

Mr. Speaker, immediately after the report was released, the Prime Minister took responsibility and accepted the commissioner's findings, as any prime minister should do.

The leader of our party, the Prime Minister, accepted responsibility and accepted the findings. The difference between the Conservatives and the government is that Conservatives have never accepted the work of senior public servants. We on this side of the House respect and appreciate the work they do.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister was found guilty of improperly arranging his personal affairs, found guilty of accepting illegal gifts, found guilty of accepting a ride on a private aircraft, and found guilty of conducting illegal discussions about government business. However, the Prime Minister did not just take an illegal trip, he sent taxpayers a $200,000 bill for it.

When other Liberals have been found ripping off taxpayers, they have been forced to pay the money back. Why is the Prime Minister held to a lower standard? Why does he not do the right thing and pay it back?