Debates of March 29th, 2018

Justice

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, it begs the question, if the opposition Conservatives were so concerned about human trafficking, why did they make cuts to law enforcement? Why did they make cuts to the entire public safety apparatus to the tune of $750 million?

As I said, this government believes in combatting human trafficking. It is a very serious criminal offence. We have engaged with the chamber in the other place. We are listening to parliamentarians. We are listening to stakeholders right across the country. We will pass this law with the support of all parliamentarians.

Ethics

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

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister held a fundraiser yesterday in Montreal. Stephen Bronfman was there, but that comes as no surprise. Let us not forget that he was named in the paradise papers.

Who else was there? There was Mitch Garber, whom the Minister of International Trade recently named chairman of a new federal agency.

The Prime Minister thanked those in attendance for all the time they have devoted to their movement, but especially for all the money they pay to attend these galas.

Does the Prime Minister also thank his friends by giving them patronage appointments?

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions]

Mr. Speaker, we are taking concrete action to improve our already strong and robust rules around political fundraising events. That is why the Minister of Democratic Institutions introduced Bill C-50, which will give more information to Canadians than ever before by letting them know who is going to fundraisers, when they will be happening, and the amount required to attend.

Canadians have a right to know and understand, more than they do now, about fundraising events attended by the Prime Minister, cabinet ministers, party leaders, and party leadership contestants. We encourage all members in the House to join us in working to build a more open and transparent fundraising system for Canada.

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

Mr. Speaker, there was a lot of chortling and clanking of champagne glasses at the Prime Minister's latest fundraiser for the billionaires, when he said that he was not only there to get maximum donations but to get tough on the 1%.

Step forth exhibit A. Stephen Bronfman raised $250,000 for the Liberals in two hours. When Bronfman was named in the paradise papers scandal, the Prime Minister immediately intervened and said that no investigation was necessary. No investigation happened.

That is the power of who one knows in the PMO. Why is the Prime Minister using the highest office in the land to feather the nest of his Liberal donors?

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions]

Mr. Speaker, the truth is that this party is leading the way with openness and transparency in fundraising. We are a shining example for what all parties in the House could do.

It is very curious, in fact, that the party from which this question proceeds is itself still keeping its information about its fundraisers a secret. Will the member join our example?

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

Mr. Speaker, the idea that the Prime Minister is hanging out with billionaires to protect the hard-pressed middle class is like telling us that those billionaire Liberal turkeys showed up and asked for an early Easter.

This brings us to Mitch Garber. He is a mega donor, and the Liberals paid him back by giving him his own agency. They call it “Invest in Canada”, when it is really another case of investing in friends of the Liberal Party.

Does the Prime Minister not understand that the public service in this country needs to be more than a patronage smorgasbord for his friends, donors, and insider pals?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy that the member has given me the opportunity to talk about Invest in Canada, a new flagship investment and promotion agency in this country.

I was travelling the country to make sure that Canadians know about this new agency. I am very proud we have appointed Mitch Garber, the chair of Cirque du Soleil, as the first chair of this agency. We have also brought in Ian McKay, who is the director of the Vancouver Economic Commission. We want people who understand business to bring business to Canada, because that is the way to create jobs around this country.

Labour

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

Mr. Speaker, Air Canada flight attendants have filed complaints against the airline for sexual harassment and discrimination. Although the airline claims it has zero tolerance for harassment, it has outright denied these claims. Air Canada now asks female attendants to wear dress uniforms in order to show more cleavage and it told one gay flight attendant to stop prancing. Air Canada even dictates the colour and type of underwear flight attendants can wear. This is disgusting. This is unacceptable.

What is the government going to do to ensure that anti-harassment policies are both adopted and followed by Canadian industries?

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, the member well knows that all members in the House believe that harassment of any type is unacceptable in the workplace or anywhere. We put forward Bill C-65, which is legislation that would cover the Parliament Hill precinct and all federally regulated workplaces. The legislation is currently in committee and we are accepting some amendments from all parties. It is going to be a strong piece of legislation.

We committed to this in the past election and we are going—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill.

Public Safety

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, on March 1, when the public safety minister was asked why the Liberals will not let the national security adviser appear at committee, he said, “You are asking me to wade into a classified discussion. I can't do that.” Then he ran away from questions to the elevator, quite conveniently. Today and earlier this week, he said that none of the information given by the adviser to the media was classified.

On what day was he telling the truth?

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

All of them, Mr. Speaker.

I am very glad to have the question, because we will be happy to discuss all manner of House committee work through the House leaders, which we can advance just as soon as the official opposition is fully briefed on all of the facts, classified and unclassified. Those members just have to let us know when they would like to get started and all of that information can proceed.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians want to understand who trotted out the national security adviser to give classified or not classified information to the media, who did not know what was classified or what was not classified.

What we know here is that the government is trying to cover up the fact that it sent someone out to spin that it had a ridiculous conspiracy theory that somehow the Indian government was to blame for the Prime Minister's disastrous appearance. Why are the Liberals trying to cover this up? Why do they not just come clean?

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

Mr. Speaker, offering a full classified briefing is hardly covering things up.

The opposition has confirmed that it does not want to be encumbered by the truth when it is asking questions. Therefore, it is choosing to remain wilfully ignorant of the facts.

There are other consequences too, like the voting at the end of last week, which forced the opposition to vote against very good things that Canadians want. For example, the hon. member's party voted against the settlement of Yazidi women and girls in Canada.

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

Mr. Speaker, the minister is deflecting, but let us carry on—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order. The hon. member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles.

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

Mr. Speaker, the minister is trying to deflect, but the problem is that the Liberals think that it is entirely appropriate to offer a briefing to the media, but not to the representatives of the people, us, the elected members of the House. The minister himself said that the information was not sensitive or classified, but he refuses to share it with MPs.

Since the information provided to the media was not classified, will the minister confirm that the media that received the briefing from the national security advisor are free to report every word that they heard during that briefing?

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

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition complains that he will not be able to ask questions about classified information but that is exactly true already. What is classified needs to remain classified.

What is being offered to the leader is a full description of all the facts so that he can know what is classified and what is not, and then he will be fully equipped to discharge his responsibility, rather than just political gamesmanship.

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

Mr. Speaker, let's be honest. If the media briefing did not include sensitive information, there is no reason why journalists could not share it with Canadians. The minister seems to be caught up in the talking points provided by the Prime Minister's Office. However, to disentangle himself, could the minister confirm whether the media who were briefed are free to report every word that they heard during that briefing, yes or no?

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

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition, because he is a privy councillor, has been offered a full and complete briefing on all matters with respect to this situation, both classified and unclassified, so he can be fully informed. If he willfully refuses to be fully informed, it appears that his only objective is a political game that has nothing to do with the truth.

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

Mr. Speaker, we have been asking for Parliament to get the same briefing the national security adviser gave to journalists. However, we know the national security adviser is not the only person who the public safety minister and the government is muzzling. They are also muzzling journalists, preventing them from reporting on what they heard in the unclassified briefing.

When will the minister stop muzzling the national security adviser, stop muzzling journalists, stop the cover-up, and tell Canadians the truth?

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

Mr. Speaker, only the Conservative Party would consider and see offering it a full brief of both classified and unclassified information so they could know all the facts as muzzling. The fact is that the Conservatives are tying themselves into some strange knots, because they forced themselves last Friday to vote against some very good things that Canadians wanted. For example, they voted against the funding for injured members of the RCMP. They voted against benefits for veterans.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is a sad spectacle to see a member who has served the House for this long reduced to reading talking points from the Prime Minister's Office. It is also sad to see him continue to stand against a briefing for members of Parliament, asking simply to receive the same that briefing members of the media received. Now members of the media are confirming that the national security adviser told them they could not report everything they received, even though it was an unclassified briefing.

Why will the minister not simply do the right thing, stop covering up, and allow the national security adviser to appear before parliamentarians?

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

Mr. Speaker, as I said some moments ago, I am very glad to have the question. We can have a very good discussion about all manner of committee work, and that discussion will go on among House leaders.

Step number one is for opposition members to stop the political game and, in fact, inform themselves of all the relevant facts. The offer has been made for a full briefing, both classified and unclassified, so the Leader of the Opposition can have all that information and then base himself on the truth and not some silly innuendo the Conservatives have dreamed up for themselves.