Debates of March 22nd, 2018

Child Care

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Speaker, since first being elected in Vancouver Quadra, one of the primary concerns I hear from constituents is the shortage of quality, affordable child care spaces. For example, wait times at UBC Childcare Services can reach two long years.

With budget 2018, our government is making significant investments to address this shortage. We have committed $7.5 billion over 11 years to help fund early learning and child care in the provinces and territories. This much-needed investment will lower the cost for parents and create an estimated 40,000 new child care spaces.

Recently, I was honoured to host UBC professor and Order of Canada recipient, Janet Werker, at my “MP Breakfast Connections”, to discuss her brain research on early child learning. She spoke of how a rich early learning experience sets the stage for success in life.

This federal funding will increase parental options, help the economy, and improve the lives of many families in all our communities.

The Environment

[Tracey Ramsey, NDP, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Cape Town, South Africa is about to completely run out of water within the next several weeks. With 20% of the world's freshwater resources, we may not think in Canada that we would ever find ourselves in a similar situation, but this essential resource is under serious threat from both the effects of climate change and our irresponsible management of it.

In my region of southwestern Ontario, black shale, which can contain dangerous heavy metals like arsenic, has been tainting our well water. In Essex, extreme rainfall has been causing flooding across the community, and the growth of dangerous algal blooms on Lake Erie shut down Colchester Beach this past September.

Throughout Canada, pollution and toxic chemicals leach into our waterways, extreme weather overstresses our aging infrastructure, and drinking water quality varies from province to province, but is most appalling in indigenous communities.

Climate change will only make these current problems worse. We can no longer rely on our abundance of water resources as an excuse for our lack of action. Canada must become a better steward of this precious public resource.

Today, on World Water Day, we must recognize that Canadians deserve better.

Kidney Health Month

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Mr. Speaker, one in 10 people in Canada has kidney disease, but often patients show no symptoms until it is quite advanced. That is why early detection and prevention are so important.

In the month of March, we recognize Kidney Health Month as an opportunity to talk about the four million Canadians living with chronic kidney disease and to recognize the estimated 3,000 Canadians who die every year from this illness. Although there is currently no cure for kidney disease, the best chance for improvement is through transplant, which is why Canada needs a national organ donor registry.

I encourage all members of the House and all Canadians to recognize Kidney Health Month by speaking with their families and registering to become an organ donor.

Together, we can all give the gift of life.

The Environment

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we all recognize how important water is. We know that the most significant consequences of climate change will affect the world's water reserves. We also know that women and girls suffer to a disproportionate degree when water and sanitation facilities are lacking, since this affects their health and often causes them to miss school or work.

Canada is a water nation and we can help the world achieve water security. We have the scientists, the entrepreneurs, the engineers, and the experience in the shared governance of international waters, such as the Great Lakes, to be a global water leader.

World Water Day is an opportunity to reflect on the need to continue working on developing a multi-faceted vision for water that includes contributing to water security in the world, including through Canada's feminist foreign policy.

Public Safety

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to public safety issues, someone once said this in the House:

...being able to ask questions is essential in a democracy, even in difficult situations—especially in difficult situations.

Who said that? The Prime Minister when he was in opposition.

If asking questions is essential to democracy, why is the Prime Minister obstructing the democratic process by refusing to let Daniel Jean appear before the public safety committee?

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

Mr. Speaker, the central issue raised in the motion that is before the House today has to do with the invitation that was extended to a certain individual.

The MP for Surrey Centre has taken responsibility for putting that name forward. When that mistake was discovered, the invitation was immediately rescinded. Those are the facts.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, while I like the hon. member's tie, I do not like his response.

Jaspal Atwal, the convicted terrorist at the centre of the India scandal, dismisses the Prime Minister's claims of an Indian conspiracy. The Liberal MP for Surrey Centre refutes the Prime Minister's claims by admitting responsibility. The Minister of Foreign Affairs refutes the Prime Minister's claims by saying it was an “honest mistake”.

Only two people cling to the conspiracy theory, the Prime Minister and Daniel Jean. Which one will appear before the public safety committee?

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

Mr. Speaker, the implications of the hon. gentleman's question in relation to Daniel Jean are truly unfortunate.

He is in fact a public servant of 30, 35 years duration. He has held every senior diplomatic and national security post in the Government of Canada. He has served this country with distinction his entire lifetime. His only motivation in the public service is defending the national interests of Canada.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, enough with the denials from the government and that minister. He needs to be accountable. There is no elevator in this chamber to save him.

Members of Parliament deserve the same access to the national security adviser that the Prime Minister granted to the media. If the Prime Minister can send Daniel Jean to brief the media, why does he refuse to be transparent and not allow him to brief the democratically elected members of this House?

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

Mr. Speaker, when we read the motion that is before the House today, it focuses upon the invitation that was issued with respect to Mr. Atwal. In fact, the facts with respect to that invitation are abundantly clear.

The name was put forward by the member for Surrey Centre. That was a mistake. When that mistake was discovered, the invitation was rescinded. By the way, that is entirely consistent in every respect with the remarks of the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

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

Mr. Speaker, the crux of the matter is that there are two versions.

On the one hand, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Atwal, the Indian government, and the member for Surrey Centre say that the invitation came from us. On the other hand, the Prime Minister backs his national security adviser and claims that it was an Indian plot.

There are two versions. Canadians want to know which one is true. Mr. Jean must come to explain this himself.

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

Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. gentleman is misreading his own motion.

The motion zeroes in on the question of the invitation. The member for Surrey Centre has accepted responsibility for putting forward the name. The name was a mistake. When the mistake was discovered, the invitation was rescinded.

In the motion, there is a reference to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. That explanation is completely consistent with the position taken by the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

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

Mr. Speaker, the minister has a lot of experience. He likes to play with words, but facts are facts. Forget the motion, Mr. Minister. We want to know—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Order. The hon. member knows that he must always address his comments through the Chair.

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

Mr. Speaker, the fundamental problem is the Prime Minister himself. The Prime Minister does not want to let his national security adviser come and tell us the same thing he told reporters. The reporters got to hear what he had to say, but the members are not allowed to. Why is that?

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

Mr. Speaker, the national security adviser is a public servant of long service to this country. He is a person who has served Canada, always, with honour and distinction.

I certainly hope, in the remarks directed by the members of the opposition, that they are not impugning the integrity of Mr. Jean.

Canada Revenue Agency

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I asked the revenue minister to explain why the programs to fight tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance received only $15 million of the $1 billion she had promised. Her only response was to regurgitate the same old talking points. Today, we learn that not only has the promised funding not materialized, but the number of tax evasion cases being investigated by the Canada Revenue Agency has dropped from 167 to just 75 over the past six years.

How can she keep saying that fighting tax evasion is a priority when she refuses to invest the funding that she promised and the number of cases under investigation is dropping?

[Diane Lebouthillier, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's rhetoric does not match reality. I invite him to reread the last three budgets. It has always been made clear that our investments cover a five-year period, to ensure that we can combat tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance strategically and over the long term. We are not going on a spending spree, we are making smart, targeted investments. So far, over $100 million from the 2016 and 2017 budgets has gone to support this important fight against tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance.

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

Mr. Speaker, if they spent only $15 million in two and a half years out of the five-year period, then they have $985 million left to spend.

The Canada Revenue Agency operates in secrecy and shows no accountability, like the minister. For example, the general anti-avoidance rule committee decides what constitutes aggressive tax avoidance. It dictates what is right and what is wrong. We do not know who works on that committee, what it works on, or if it is accountable to anyone, yet we know this committee will shape Canadian tax policy for years to come.

How can the Canada Revenue Agency expect to be trusted when everything it does is done behind closed doors?

[Diane Lebouthillier, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I would invite my colleague to try again. The general anti-avoidance rule committee provides advice on how to enforce the legislation. It is an ad hoc committee that has the expertise to handle complex cases. Only the NDP likes to spend for the sake of spending. There is nothing wrong with having a committee requiring no additional funding. Our government's position is clear. We are giving the CRA the necessary resources to target tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance.

Taxation

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

What a ridiculous answer, Mr. Speaker. Quebeckers and Canadians were clear with this government. They expect the Liberals to apply the same tax rules to web giants as to other businesses. It seems that the Liberals are finally starting to get it as they recently said that they would raise the issue at the G7 meeting. The only snag is that our partners are already asking web giants to pay their fair share. Oops. Other than the United States, Canada is the only country that lacks the courage to do so.

How will the Minister of Finance explain this to his G7 counterparts?

[Bill Morneau, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, it is very important to have an economy that works, it is very important to have a tax system that works, and it is also very important to conduct studies to ensure—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Order. There seems to be a problem with the interpretation and the members cannot hear.

It is working again.

The hon. Minister of Finance.

[Bill Morneau, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, it is important to conduct studies to ensure that our system is working. That is our approach. We know that changes are happening in our economy and in digital businesses. That is why we are carrying out studies, to make sure our system is still working. That is the approach we have chosen.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, our partners, the countries in the G7, are moving to force the web giants to pay their fair share of taxes, yet the Liberal government still stands resolutely against a fair tax system. The finance minister just said that they will “study” the question. Canadians know what that means. For example, the Liberals have been studying pharmacare for 20 years. It means they will do nothing.

Why will the government not act in the best interests of Canadians and force the web giants to pay their fair share of taxes?