Debates of April 27th, 2018

Natural Resources

[Kim Rudd, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources]

Madam Speaker, let us talk about capital expenditures in the energy sector. By NRCan estimates, there are approximately 140 oil and gas projects under construction or planned in the next 10 years, worth an estimated $400 billion in capital expenditures. When we consider the whole energy sector, including electricity, that number is nearly $530 billion.

The energy sector has hundreds of projects and hundreds of billions of dollars in planned investment. The minerals and metal sector has planned projects worth tens of billions of dollars. Planned projects in the forestry sector are worth billions of dollars. The member opposite—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Edmonton West.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Madam Speaker, the government claims it wants Trans Mountain built, and it claims it wants to help unemployed energy workers in Alberta, yet it funds a group that is committed to stopping all pipelines, especially Trans Mountain.

Do the Minister of Infrastructure and his colleague, the member for Edmonton Centre, support using taxpayers' dollars to fund protesters whose sole job is to stop the Trans Mountain pipeline?

[Kim Rudd, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources]

Madam Speaker, we are the party that stands up for Canadians and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Surely the member opposite is not saying that the work done by the organization they reference is the same as the work being done by the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform. We will always respect Canadians' rights to free speech, reproductive rights, and the rights of LGBTQ2 Canadians, which are enshrined in the charter.

Let me assure the member opposite: The pipeline will be built.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Madam Speaker, the Liberals made a political decision to veto the northern gateway pipeline. They made last-minute changes to kill energy east. Eighty-seven billion dollars in investment has been driven out. Now they are funding professional protesters to kill the Kinder Morgan pipeline. Is this just the latest step in the Prime Minister's plan to phase out the Canadian energy sector?

[Kim Rudd, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources]

Madam Speaker, we have been clear with Canadians. We will build this pipeline. We know that the environment and the economy go hand in hand, and that is the approach we are taking. Voicing opposition over an energy project is not comparable to the activities of organizations like the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, which works to undermine charter rights.

On this side of the House, we will always stand up for charter rights.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Madam Speaker, this week we confirmed what we always knew: The Liberals are opposed to building the Kinder Morgan pipeline. The Liberals' record is clear. They blocked northern gateway. They ran out the clock on energy east. Now they are actually funding protestors against the Kinder Morgan pipeline. Over $80 billion has been lost in the Canadian energy sector, along with all the jobs that go with it.

Will the Prime Minister admit that all his bluster is just a charade, and that his real plan is to phase out Alberta's energy sector?

[Kim Rudd, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources]

Madam Speaker, the Conservatives had 10 years to build pipelines to ship Canada's resources to new global markets; they built zero. The Conservatives had 10 years to consult indigenous and local communities; they ignored them. The Conservatives had 10 years to rally the country around the need for new pipeline capacity to end the discounted and landlocked Canadian crude; they did not do that. The Conservatives had 10 years to address environmental concerns; they failed.

We will take no lessons from the Conservatives.

The Environment

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Madam Speaker, the Liberals are arrogantly ignoring Saskatchewan's successful emission reduction plan and are forcing a carbon tax on us without consultation or approval. Just this week, the Province of Saskatchewan announced a court challenge to stop the Liberal carbon tax and protect Saskatchewan's economy. This challenge is overwhelmingly supported by the people of my province.

Why do the Liberals insist on inflicting their “Ottawa knows best” scheme on our Saskatchewan families?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Madam Speaker, I have had many conversations with the Premier of Saskatchewan. In fact, he was the former environment minister. I explained to him exactly why we need to put a price on pollution, because in Saskatchewan there are draughts impacting farmers. There are new technologies in Saskatchewan that are creating good jobs. We can still get our resources to market. We can protect the environment, and we can grow the economy.

The Government of Saskatchewan is well within its rights to determine how it wants to put a price on pollution and what it wants to do with the revenues. It can invest in innovation, or it can invest in putting money back in the pockets of Saskatchewanians.

Does the party opposite believe climate change—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. The hon. member for Sherbrooke.

Taxation

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Madam Speaker, with the G7 summit just around the corner, Canada continues to lag behind the rest of the group, and the government still has no plan to force multinationals like Netflix to charge GST—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I want to remind the member for Lakeland that somebody else has the floor, and she should ensure that she allows that person to speak.

The hon. member for Sherbrooke.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Madam Speaker, even a Liberal-dominated parliamentary committee has called for this. One of the only people in the entire world who is hesitant is the Prime Minister of Canada. That is unbelievable, more so because the issue is not that complicated. It is simply a matter of making the rules the same for everyone. Quebec realized this a long time ago, and Netflix announced that it will be charging QST.

Will the government finally wake up and force web giants to pay GST?

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Madam Speaker, we know that taxing web giants is a very important issue, but it is also a very complex issue. Argentina's finance minister and his OECD colleagues recently committed to taking a collaborative approach to reviewing the rules with respect to web giants. Our goal, as a government, is not to take a piecemeal approach, but rather a cautious approach that ensures we have a fair system.

Canada Post

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Madam Speaker, U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand announced that she would introduce a bill to reinstate postal banking services in all 30,000 post offices in the United States. Here in Canada, hundreds of municipalities and organizations support postal banking, because they know it is not only viable and profitable, but essential for smaller and remote communities abandoned by big banks. Because postal banking would also support local economic development, it is a real and positive step.

Will the government support Motion No. 166 and consider postal banking for Canada Post?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement]

Madam Speaker, our government has introduced a brand new vision for Canada Post. Unlike the old vision, it would serve us front and centre and fulfill its platform commitment. Part of that vision includes reinvesting profits in Canada Post services, innovations, and, of course, employees. We certainly encourage Canada Post to expand its partnerships for the benefit of Canadians. We have heard loud and clear from the Canada Post review that it is a cherished service, and we will continue reinvesting in Canada Post.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

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

Madam Speaker, the Prime Minister has no intention of fixing the gaping hole at the border in Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle. This explains why he and his government are working on settling people who cross the border illegally in different provinces. His plan is not very complicated. He hopes the provinces will manage the crisis so he does not have to.

Does the Prime Minister believe that our immigration laws should be obeyed?

Does he have the courage to enforce them, yes or no?

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Madam Speaker, the member opposite should not speak about courage and border security in the same sentence, because the Conservatives cut $400 million from border security. They did not respond to refugees and asylum seekers when they were in power. They did not invest in processing immigration cases. Families and spouses and children had to wait in line for years under the previous government.

It is very rich for the member and that party to talk about border security and immigration processing when they left us with an abysmal record in both those categories.

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

Madam Speaker, I would remind the minister that I was in the Canadian Armed Forces for 22 years, so I do not want to hear anything from him about courage.

The Prime Minister has suggested that Canada's treaties with the United Nations are preventing his government from enforcing our immigration laws. I would remind the Prime Minister that Canada has never relinquished its sovereignty to anyone. Canada has never abdicated its right and its responsibility to protect its borders.

Does the Prime Minister not realize that Canada has a Constitution, as well as immigration laws that he has a duty to enforce?

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Madam Speaker, the party opposite has no credibility on this issue. We have invested $117 million for more border security operations and we made a $74 million investment in the Immigration and Refugee Board for faster processing of asylum claims. The party opposite has absolutely no credibility on this issue.

What have the Conservatives proposed? They have proposed turning the entire 9,000-kilometre border into an official port of entry without extra resources. They have even suggested that we commandeer a barn at a port of entry. They are not serious.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Speaker, every day I hear from individuals in my riding who are trying to immigrate to Canada legally through the proper channels. These cases can take years.

Last week I visited an English as a second school in Owen Sound and heard first-hand from many of them how long the process can be. They are frustrated to see the Liberals allowing individuals to cross the Canada-U.S. border illegally.

Could the minister please tell me how it is fair for those who cross the border illegally to get priority processing, while those who follow the rules have to wait and wait?

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Madam Speaker, the member opposite is a classic example of that party's efforts to pit one group of immigrants against another. That is exactly what the Conservatives are doing.

The member opposite knows full well that refugees and asylum seekers are processed by the Immigration and Refugee Board, while other immigrants and resettled refugees, as well as family class immigrants, go through the regular immigration stream. To pit those two groups against each other is irresponsible and inflammatory, and that is precisely what they are doing.

Even when it comes to immigration processing—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Langley—Aldergrove.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley—Aldergrove, BC]

Madam Speaker, the Prime Minister has made a mess of the immigration system. The number of people crossing our border illegally has reached critical levels, and the Liberals have no plan. The fact is that it is the Prime Minister who has created this mess. Because of what he said, more people are crossing the border every day, and those who are trying to enter Canada in the right and legal way keep getting forced further and further back in the line.

Why is the Prime Minister showing contempt for good people who want to just follow the rules?