Debates of March 1st, 2018

Prime Minister’s Trip to India

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

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been pre-eminently clear in our trust for our non-partisan public service. We stand behind them, full force.

I do remember in 2010, if the member wants to talk about that date, watching the cuts that happened to our security and intelligence infrastructure of hundreds of millions of dollars. I do remember in 2006, Justice O'Connor's inquiry which was ignored. I remember Iacobucci in 2008, ignored. Important flaws in our security infrastructure that were not fixed. We are fixing it.

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

Mr. Speaker, the answers are always the same. They are devoid of meaning. Let us take it slow.

First, the Prime Minister believes that the Indian government plotted to undermine Canada-India relations. Second, he felt the need to punish one of his MPs for having invited terrorist Jaspal Atwal to the event organized by Canada's high commission in India.

Does this mean that the member and the government are plotting to undermine Canada?

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

Mr. Speaker, the same questions get the same answers. We have full confidence in the public service and in the work our public servants do every day. This is what the Prime Minister said, and this is still my answer.

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

Mr. Speaker, if I understand correctly, the parliamentary secretary is saying that India manipulated the situation in order to create problems between Canada and India. This is what he is saying. If that is the case, he should submit some evidence, because India is saying the opposite.

Does my colleague have any evidence to confirm that India actually did something to undermine Canada?

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

Mr. Speaker, I totally reject the assertions made by the member opposite. The invitation was sent, and when we received information that there was a problem, the invitation was immediately rescinded. We have full confidence in the public service.

[Bob Saroya, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we know two things. First, the Prime Minister believes the Indian government is responsible for a convicted terrorist embarrassing him on his trip. Second, the Liberal MP has been punished for inviting the convicted terrorist on the trip.

For the Prime Minister, how can these two things both be true? When will the Prime Minister stop hiding the facts, and show us the evidence?

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

Mr. Speaker, I know three things. First, when the individual in question was found out, and the information was there, the invitation was rescinded, and the member of Parliament apologized. Second, I know that this party always, in every way, makes sure that we respect our non-partisan, independent, phenomenal individuals who work within our public service. Third, I know the party opposite, the Conservatives when they were in power, did not.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians want answers, because the Liberals are just making no sense.

Why did the Surrey Centre MP apologize and resign his position as B.C. Liberal caucus chair, independently or otherwise, for something the Prime Minister himself said he believed the Indian government did?

This is all as ridiculous, damaging, and disastrous as the trip was itself, and these Liberals should be ashamed.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have answered the question very clearly. Once we found out that information, the individual's invitation was rescinded, and the member apologized, but I reject totally the assertion that was made about the trip.

More than $1 billion was achieved in cross-border trade, more than 580,000 good middle-class jobs were created for Canadians, and important frameworks were established to continue our trade with India. It was important work we are going to continue to build on.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister spends a week in another country, people expect him to come back with a lot of good things to show for it, ideally.

He has been back for almost a week now, and we still do not know what the purpose of the trip was. We need leaders who are 100% focused on Canadians' needs, not their own needs or those of their party.

When will we find out the true purpose of the trip?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Minister of International Trade]

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

The Prime Minister of Canada's trip was about strengthening Canada's cultural and economic ties. We announced over $1 billion in bilateral investment. Over a million jobs will be created. This was a follow-up to last November's trade mission. Prime Ministers are expected to bring home concrete results for workers and the economy. That is exactly what the Prime Minister did.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this morning I wrote the Prime Minister asking him to provide parliamentarians with a security briefing over his allegations about the alleged interference by the government of India, and how alleged convicted assassin and Liberal insider Jaspal Atwal was given access to the Prime Minister's delegation. Those allegations made in Parliament did enormous damage to Canada's credibility and to the Prime Minister's credibility.

Will the Prime Minister provide Parliament with the evidence in a briefing, or is this him using the Donald Trump damage control playbook of self-serving political Pinocchio-ism?

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

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, and I will reiterate, the invitation sent was rescinded when the information found out was that the individual should never have received that invitation. The member in question has apologized, and we have full and total confidence in our national security infrastructure and the non-partisan advice they give us. That is advice we take very seriously and listen to in all instances.

Agriculture and Agri-Food

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, agriculture, agriculture, agriculture, agriculture. In just a few seconds, I have spoken more about agriculture than the Minister of Finance in his 40-minute speech on Tuesday.

There is not a thing for dairy, egg, and poultry producers. There is no mention of managing the transportation crisis in western Canada. There is nothing on risk management. There was no mention of agriculture. The Minister of Agriculture was once again unable to rise and speak about agriculture.

Why is the Liberal government ignoring farmers?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, the budget builds on budget 2017 that identifies agriculture as a key sector. We invested $150 million in the protein supercluster. We invested $100 million in agricultural science after millions were cut from the budget by the previous government. We invested $75 million to promote Canada's trade with China.

We invested $350 million to make sure our dairy industry remains stable, and to make sure it stays on the—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The hon. member for Prince Albert.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, for farmers timing is everything. There is a specific time to plant, to spray, to harvest, and in most cases, winter is the time to deliver, when the roads are frozen, so they can carry the weight. In the next few weeks, road bans will go in effect, making it impossible for farmers to move their crop from farm to elevator. The clock is ticking. Farmers are in a cash flow crisis, and time is of the essence.

When will the minister order the railways to do their job, and deliver this year's crop?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, we know this is a serious situation. That is why we introduced Bill C-49 to establish a strong, reliable, and efficient grain transportation system for the long-term.

The Minister of Transport and I have contacted CN to indicate how serious it is, and that it needs to move grain faster. I have spoken to grain farmers, and indicated to them that we are fully aware of the seriousness of the situation.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals ignored our advice to pass a separate grain transportation bill. When they failed to extend an important provision like interswitching, the Liberals allowed for this grain backlog crisis. We have seen the worst railcar performances of the year, and the numbers are only getting worse.

Yet, the Minister of Agriculture had the nerve yesterday to tell farmers that when it came to the backlog situation, “It's not real serious at this moment.” When will the Minister of Agriculture understand how serious this is, and start taking some action?

[Karen McCrimmon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, our government has proven time and time again that it is strongly committed to Canadian farmers and to the agriculture industry. Unlike the previous Harper government's band-aid solution with an expiry date, this government put forward a permanent and sustainable solution in Bill C-49 that would meet the long-term needs of farmers.

The Western Grain Elevator Association said, “...this bill is a significant improvement over the existing legislation and is a positive step forward for the grain industry.”

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have to stop blaming others for their mismanagement on the grain backlog issue. They can take definitive action now to address the situation but they refuse. The ones suffering the consequences are Canadian grain farmers. In some areas, railcar performance was 6% last week, and it is only getting worse. Our reputation as a reliable grain exporter is tarnished, and yet the Minister of Agriculture cannot even stand up and defend Canadian farmers.

How bad does this situation have to get before the Liberals stop defending the rail monopoly and start fighting for Canadian farmers?

[Karen McCrimmon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, both ministers are very well aware of the situation. In fact, both ministers had conversations with CN and CP about this issue. They have asked them for a plan. They need to see improvement on this issue. If there is not improvement, the ministers are willing to intervene. We are going to give the companies the first chance to improve this process.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Do something now.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I have to thank the hon. member for Foothills for apologizing for his short outburst there.

The hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.

Health

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

Mr. Speaker, this week the Liberals gave us hope that we would finally have a universal pharmacare program. However, 24 hours later, this false hope was shattered by the Minister of Finance, who revealed that coverage would not be universal, public, or free. Studies have made it clear and experts have already spoken about this. Establishing a national pharmacare plan would reduce inequality and ensure that Quebeckers do not have to pay for private insurance which is sometimes beyond their means.

Why are the Liberals not taking action right now?