Debates of May 24th, 2018

Natural Resources

[Erin Weir, Independent, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the province of Saskatchewan is currently struggling with a weak economy and a lagging job market. Earlier this week, Statistics Canada reported that over the past year, Saskatchewan was the only province other than Newfoundland and Labrador to suffer from a drop in wholesale trade. A major component of wholesale trade in Saskatchewan and of employment in Regina is steel production.

Since being elected, I have advocated strongly for the use of Canadian-made steel in public infrastructure projects as well as in pipeline projects over which the federal government has regulatory authority. Canadian-made steel is much cleaner and safer than steel imported from offshore.

Thanks in part to political pressure, Kinder Morgan decided to build most of the Trans Mountain expansion using steel pipe manufactured in Regina. Of course, that project is now in doubt, which has put in doubt the largest contract that would keep Regina's steel mill operating for the coming months and years.

The federal government has tried to support that project by offering an indemnity for the Trans Mountain expansion, not just to Kinder Morgan but also to other potential investors in the project. A concern I have is that those other investors might try to cut costs and corners by instead building the Trans Mountain expansion with pipe imported from offshore. This would, of course, increase safety concerns about the project. It is also the case that manufacturing a tonne of steel and shipping it here from China emits five times as much carbon as manufacturing it in Regina.

For those environmental and safety reasons, as well as to support Canadian jobs, I have suggested that the federal government make its indemnity for the Trans Mountain expansion conditional upon any potential investor in the project honouring the existing commitment to use Canadian-made steel. When I put that question to the Minister of Natural Resources earlier this week, his response was to say, “Well, the contract for steel has already been signed, and that's a good thing for Regina.”

That answer certainly is correct if Kinder Morgan continues to complete the Trans Mountain expansion, but that answer does not address the scenario that the government itself has raised of other investors coming in and taking over the project. It is for that reason that I would like to see the federal government use its indemnity as leverage to try to ensure that any prospective investor in the Trans Mountain expansion would honour the existing contract with Evraz to build the pipeline expansion using steel manufactured in Canada, which of course supports Canadian jobs, gives us assurance about safety, and also emits far less carbon than bringing in the material from offshore.

I and the people of Regina are very curious to hear from the Minister of Natural Resources as to whether, in fact, he is prepared to use the indemnity in that way.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, this is both timely and important because, as the Minister of Natural Resources noted earlier this week, the contracts for this pipeline expansion have already been awarded, and the economic development benefits for the project will be felt right across the country, including in the member opposite's home province of Saskatchewan, which I'm sure he is very pleased to hear this evening.

It will include a contract that ensures that almost 75% of the steel, or about 250,000 tonnes of pipe, will come from Regina. This is one of the reasons this government decided that the Trans Mountain expansion pipeline is in Canada's national interest, as it will create thousands of good jobs.

However, this is not the only reason. As the Minister of Natural Resources has outlined on more than one occasion, by moving more Canadian oil to export markets, our producers will have greater access to new global markets and higher prices. That could add billions annually to the value of our oil exports.

In addition, the construction and operation of the pipeline is expected to generate billions in new federal government and provincial government revenues. Those are new tax dollars to pay for our hospitals and schools, to build new roads and safe bridges in our communities, and to fund our cherished social programs that extend to every Canadian in this country.

This is all while our government is also making unprecedented investments to enhance environmental protection and indigenous participation, investments that include the historic world-leading $1.5-billion oceans protection plan, which will strengthen the eyes and ears of the Canadian Coast Guard, enhance our response capabilities, and build meaningful partnerships with indigenous people.

The Prime Minister has called the TMX project a “vital strategic interest to Canada”, and he instructed the Minister of Finance to initiate formal financial discussions with the pipeline's proponent, Kinder Morgan.

Last week the finance minister updated Canadians on the status of those discussions by noting that our government is “prepared to indemnify the project against any financial loss that derives from [B.C.] Premier Horgan's attempts to delay or obstruct the project.” The finance minister also said that “The indemnification would allow Kinder Morgan to finish what they started, what they received federal and B.C. approval to do.” Furthermore, our government is prepared to extend the indemnification to another interested party should Kinder Morgan decide not to proceed with the expansion, and we will make sure that the support we provide is sound, fair, and beneficial to all Canadians.

We want and expect to see this pipeline built, and we are doing so with an approach that is sound and sensible for Canada and for all Canadians.

I want to thank the member for his question and I certainly want to thank the members of our government, who have worked very hard in leading this initiative to where it is today.

[Erin Weir, Independent, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I do appreciate the response from the parliamentary secretary. She made the point that the government views the Trans Mountain expansion as a major source of jobs in Canada and that it will create jobs in Regina to the extent that it is built with steel pipe manufactured at Evraz.

That is exactly what I am trying to ensure. The parliamentary secretary repeats the answer that the contract has already been signed for Regina steel, and that is true if we are talking about Kinder Morgan completing the project. However, the parliamentary secretary also raised the possibility of extending the indemnity to other investors that might take over the project.

In that scenario, would the government make the indemnity conditional on those other investors honouring the existing commitment to use Canadian-made steel?

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Mr. Speaker, as has already been indicated and as the member opposite knows, the contract for the pipeline expansion has been awarded, and it has included provisions that almost 75% of the steel, which I believe is equivalent to about 800 kilometres of pipe, will be produced right in Regina. I know that is good news for him, just as it is for us, and we share his enthusiasm in seeing the project proceed.

The Trans Mountain expansion pipeline is in Canada's national interest, and it is part of the sensible approach that includes diversifying our energy market, improving environmental safety, and creating thousands of good middle-class jobs, including good jobs in indigenous communities as well.

What I would say to the member is that regardless of who develops this pipeline, we will always maintain that it will be done in the interest of Canadians and it will be done to the benefit of Canadians.

Veterans Affairs

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise tonight to speak on behalf of thousands of homeless veterans in Canada.

In February, veterans gathered in Ottawa for the “Left in the Cold” protest to raise awareness about growing levels of homelessness among Canada's veterans.

Just down the street, veterans Trevor Sanderson and Dick Groot, who drove all the way from Winnipeg, were protesting by sleeping outside in the cold. In testimony at committee, the co-founder of VETS Canada said the number of homeless veterans had grown to 5,000.

In fact, we just heard from Danny Lafontaine, a public relations officer with the aboriginal veterans' association, that when he was in Montreal one day in 2015, they met with 3,200 homeless people, and 6% of them were veterans. We need to bring that number to zero. It is totally unacceptable for any veteran who risked their life for our country to be left to fend for themselves on the streets.

Last November, 29,000 veterans were waiting for their applications for disability benefits to be processed. Nearly one-third of these applicants have been waiting for a response for four months or longer. According to Scott Maxwell, the executive director of Wounded Warriors Canada, the backlog “can mean the difference between being a homeless veteran and not.” These wait times are unacceptable, and they only continue to grow.

The government has now committed $42.8 million over two years to address the backlog in processing the increased number of claims but has not told us what it would cost to get that number to zero. It has to get to zero. That is what veterans deserve. The men and women who risked their lives on behalf of our country should be assured of economic security and assured that their needs, including the needs of their families, will be taken care of.

Many veterans are falling through the cracks because they are not aware of the various services that are available. In a recent news article, the same Trevor Sanderson, who also suffers from PTSD as well as physical injuries, said that he was unaware for two decades that he qualified for a payout. Unfortunately, he is not alone. He said that many veterans are unaware of the services that they qualify for and then face long wait times.

Why do they not know about their programs? The government that campaigned on doing more for veterans has failed at the most basic level. Clearly its actions are just for show and not for change. The government must do better to inform veterans of the available services and benefits they are entitled to.

Both Liberal and Conservative governments have failed to address the problem of homeless veterans. If veterans do not know about these services, it is impossible for them to take advantage of these opportunities. We must break this terrible cycle today.

This morning, Trevor Sanderson told me that he is going to Saskatchewan on Saturday to repair a roof for a secluded veteran. On June 27, he plans to go to Nova Scotia to help fix a PTSD retreat that was damaged by storms last year. This is the type of sacrifice our veterans continue to exhibit. Now it is our turn to do the same for them.

He told me, “The homeless vets that are living in Canada are the forgotten brothers and sisters that need to be found and that together as a country we should not forget the promise that we made to them for the service that they did and only working together can we find a way to help them find a place again to call home.”

To show veterans the respect that they deserve, we must address the root problem. The government continues to promise that veterans will be treated better, but its promises are falling short. The Prime Minister said veterans are “asking for more than we are able to give right now.” Veterans risked everything, and we need to make sure that we follow the sacred obligation we have for them.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I know that the member for Courtenay—Alberni is very passionate about this issue, as I have heard him speak to it many times in the House.

Homelessness is unacceptable in any state or form in this country, and one veteran being homeless is one too many. I would like to reassure this House that the government is taking action against the tragedy of homelessness. The people at Veterans Affairs Canada believe that veterans homelessness should be avoided wherever possible and that it is our responsibility to ensure that when veterans do find themselves homeless, they have the supports to ensure that it is a brief and non-recurring situation. We have heard the Minister of Veterans Affairs express that on more than one occasion. Through our increased focus on outreach, we are also identifying more homeless veterans and getting them the mental and financial supports they need. That shows serious action by the minister and his department to ensure that wherever possible, we are able to identify homeless veterans in this country and get them the supports they need.

Veterans Affairs Canada works alongside community organizations, local shelters, transition homes, and first responders. Our partnerships with organizations like these greatly enhance our ability to provide services to homeless veterans, as well as raise awareness about the services and programs that are currently out there. However, we also know that we need to continue to build on that community capacity at every level and that we have to continue to strengthen our partnerships with all of those groups who work on the front lines and are critical in providing for and addressing veterans homelessness in this country. Therefore, on June 7, the Department of Veterans Affairs will be hosting a round table on homelessness with organizations from right across the country to discuss how it can continue to better help Canadian veterans. The round table will bring together local, regional, and national organizations that work to reduce veterans homelessness. This conversation will inform the development of a national approach to veterans homelessness through exchanging information and coordinating outreach activities with all of those groups that are involved. We are proud to be taking a whole-of-government approach to addressing this issue on homelessness in Canada, and Veterans Affairs Canada is working closely with CMHC and Employment and Social Development Canada, which both have the federal mandate to address homelessness, to ensure that veterans remain a priority within our population.

As well, on April 1, new initiatives were specifically announced addressing the well-being of veterans and their families in Canada. The veterans emergency fund will help them address urgent circumstances that may put veterans at risk of becoming homeless. The fund will also support veterans and their families and survivors by providing them with short-term relief while they work to identify long-term needs and possible solutions. As well, the education and training benefit will provide up to $40,000 for veterans with six or more years of service, and up to $80,000 for those with 12 or more years of service to put toward post-secondary education and professional training.

We are taking concrete action to deal with this problem, and we will continue to work with all of those who want to work with us to ensure that no veteran is left without a home.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I know my friend and colleague cares, and I appreciate her roll-out of programs that are going to help veterans. However, if veterans cannot access these services, they are no good to them. Veterans fall through the cracks. They get their hopes up, and when they cannot access these services, they get disappointed and then lose hope. We cannot have that happen anymore. It is our duty to help veterans succeed now. Now that they are home, we must take action to ensure that no veterans are left homeless. At the very least, they deserve a home.

The third annual VETS Canada Coast to Coast Tour of Duty walk for homeless veterans is scheduled to take place in 17 cities across Canada on June 3. I encourage Canadians and members of Parliament to participate to convey their gratitude to the veterans who served by supporting them, standing alongside them, and bringing attention to this issue. However, it is extremely important to recognize that we should not have to have a walk to draw attention to this issue. Our veterans, as well as their dependants and survivors, should be treated with dignity, respect, and fairness. There should be no homeless veterans.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Mr. Speaker, members on this side of the House walk with veterans every day in our ridings and in many other regions across Canada. We walk with them and support them. We do so because we firmly believe that no veteran should be left homeless in Canada. We also believe that the programs and the supports we have brought forward as a government are done with the intention of helping veterans through what have been difficult times for them in this country, whether supporting those with mental health issues like PTSD, or supporting them and their families with living arrangements and financial support.

These are the programs and initiatives that we have implemented, and we have done so with their input and participation. We are going to continue on that path of supporting those in the country who have committed themselves to Canadians, who have served in uniform not only in Canada but all around the world. We will do what we need to do to ensure that no veteran in our country is left homeless and no veteran is left alone.

Pensions

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising in the House of Commons tonight on behalf of the over 3,000 employees of Canadian Nuclear Laboratories who are concerned about their pensions. These are skilled employees. They used to be employees of Atomic Energy of Canada, but under the former Harper government, a decision was made to privatize the management and operations of AECL assets, so that the employees are now employees of CNL.

In September, a three-year grace period in which they have continued to be included in the public service pension plan will end, and they will be thrown into some new plan, as yet undefined at the time the contract was signed, under the private operator. It has been of great concern to them that they are going to end up with an inferior pension plan.

I have asked in the House before if the government would intervene. The unions representing these workers and the workers themselves have asked the government to intervene and essentially just extend the arrangement that has been going on now for the last three years, wherein the employees would be able to continue contributing to that plan and the private contractor that has been hired to manage it would make the employer contribution. There would be very little cost to government to continue this arrangement, but the consequences for workers are potentially quite severe if they are kicked out of this plan.

It is not just the consequences for the workers. I have heard from the CNL employees who work in Manitoba at the Pinawa site, which some members may know is going to be decommissioned in the coming years. As employees realize they are going to be kicked out of this pension plan and will no longer be contributing to a good pension, and that extra years of service will not matter with respect to their pension, they are starting to look for employment elsewhere. These are highly qualified employees. In the case of Pinawa, these employees know that site very well, which is important for the decommissioning process. To have the people with the knowledge of that site looking at either retiring earlier than they otherwise would, or seeking employment elsewhere at this pivotal moment for the Pinawa site is a real mistake.

Those employees were surveyed just this past September. The survey indicated that 91.6% of the respondents felt that the changes to the pension plan had or would cause uncertainty for their future career at CNL. This is what I am talking about when I refer to people leaving. Ninety-two point three per cent said that the defined benefit pension plan of the public service was one of the motivating factors that attracted them to work at AECL.

An actuarial report commissioned by one of the unions representing these workers stated that staying in the public service pension plan for these workers would be the least expensive long-term solution for the employees and the employer. It provide superior benefits to CNL employees. It has the best human resource management for CNL or its successors, and it would provide better benefits to current mid-career employees, all else being equal. It would facilitate any future transactions involving CNL or AECL employees. It would eliminate the scheduled unfair reduction in the value of the accrued benefits for affected employees. It would reduce the pension plan's administrative and governance expenses for CNL. It would have the lowest immediate transaction costs for CNL and AECL, and would allow the employees of CNL to concentrate on their important work.

I have asked the government before if it has evaluated the cost to government of keeping those employees in the plan. It has not produced the numbers, despite a commitment by the Treasury Board president at committee in November. I want to know now if the government has those numbers and would share them in the House tonight.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, let me say that our government has great respect for the workers of Canada's nuclear industry. We are committed to doing everything we can to support the workers of our country's nuclear industry.

These employees do crucial work, helping to develop and deliver innovative applications for Canada's nuclear technology. They are nuclear scientists, operators, and engineers, just to name a few of their important roles. They deliver a range of nuclear services, from design and engineering, to research and development.

The Harper Conservatives' decision to outsource the running of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited's nuclear laboratories has had a lasting effect on these employees.

I should note that this is only one of a long list of ideologically driven decisions by the previous Conservative government that our government inherited. Conservative cuts led to the Phoenix pay system debacle, and were done just to create an illusory surplus on the eve of an election. Conservative cuts caused the closure of veterans' offices across the country, denying veterans access to important government services. They led to an under-equipped Canadian Coast Guard, and much more.

Our government continues to be committed to a new way of doing things, to treating Canadians fairly and with respect, making decisions based on facts and on evidence.

In terms of the situation at Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, the public service pension plan is not open to, nor intended for, people who are not employees of the federal government. Due to the action the Conservatives took to outsource the operations at CNL, those employees are not federal government employees.

In 2015, the Conservatives entered into a contract with a private company, and that contract stipulates that the private company will operate the nuclear facilities and will employ and provide pension benefits for the people who work at those facilities. Employees of private companies, such as CNL, are not and have never been eligible to participate in the public service pension plan.

I will note that we continue to be engaged with the employees and their unions on this issue, and we are committed to doing everything we can to offer pension protection for the impacted employees. As I said, our government has great respect for the workers of the nuclear industry. We are committed to supporting them.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, those workers have continued to be in the plan, despite working for CNL, for the last three years. It is also a fact that the government, in this year's main estimates, is requesting over $1 billion to fund the operations of CNL. Effectively, that money will go to AECL and then be transferred to CNL for the management and operations of those facilities, including paying those employees.

The fact is the government continues to pay the salaries of these employees. They are effectively working for the government. The government is asking for over $1 billion to pay those workers to do the good work they do. They deserve to be able to continue to have their pension.

What is the new way of doing things that the government is talking about? Instead of giving them a flat “no” on their pension, will it lead them on for over a year, with meetings with the Minister of Natural Resources, the President of the Treasury Board, and the PMO, just to to reach the same conclusion ultimately? If that is what a new way of doing business is, no thanks, we will wait for a new government that would actually do something for these workers instead of drowning them in platitudes when they are concerned about their pensions.

It is shameful that the government does not even have the decency to report what it believes it would cost to keep them in the plan. That means the government is making the decision without even bothering to have the information. We deserve to have that information here in the House. Those workers deserve to have that information. They deserve to get the pension they signed up for when they started working for AECL and the nuclear industry.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his intervention and his compassion on this issue.

As I have said, we are continuing to engage with unions and employees on this matter. As the member noted, the employees have been able to remain in the public service pension plan for the longest period allowable.

The Harper Conservatives decided to outsource the operations of AECL's nuclear laboratories. To do this, they established a long-term contract with CNL. A consequence of this contract is that these employees are not able to remain in the public service pension plan, as they are not employed by the federal government itself. As I said, we are committed to doing everything we can to offer pension protection for the impacted employees.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Pursuant to Standing Order 81(4), the motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been withdrawn, and the House will now resolve itself into committee of the whole to study all votes under the Department of Citizenship and Immigration in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2019.

I do now leave the chair for the House to resolve itself into committee of the whole.

(Consideration in committee of the whole of all votes under Department of Citizenship and Immigration in the main estimates, Mr. Bruce Stanton in the chair)

Department of Citizenship and Immigration—Main Estimates, 2018-19

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I have a few preliminary comments, a preamble, before we begin tonight's debate.

This will be a general debate on votes under the Department of Citizen and Immigration. The first round will begin with the official opposition, which will be followed by the government, and thereafter the New Democratic Party. After that, we will follow the usual rotation in proportion, as is usually the convention.

Each member will be allocated 15 minutes at a time, which may be used for both debate or for posing questions. Members wishing to use this time to make a speech have a maximum of 10 minutes, which leaves at least 5 minutes for questions to the minister.

When a member is recognized, he or she should indicate to the Chair how the 15-minute period will be used, in other words, how much time will be spent on the speech and how much time will be used for questions and answers. Members should also note that they will need the unanimous consent of the committee to split their time with another member. When the time is to be used for questions and comments, the Chair will expect that the minister's response will reflect approximately the time taken by the question, as that time counts toward the time allocated to the party.

On this point, while we generally recognize that the time taken to pose the question will generally be expected to see a response in around the same time, we will not accept that scenario with a question of complexity that may only take 10 seconds to pose. We will certainly allow sufficient time to address the complexity that is applicable to the question that has been put to the minister.

I also wish to indicate that in committee of the whole, comments should be addressed to the Chair in the usual fashion. I ask for everyone's co-operation in upholding all established standards of decorum, parliamentary language, and behaviour. In summary, we follow the same debate conventions that we follow in the House.

I will remind members that they are invited to use the seats in the chamber of their choice. They are not required to be in their own seat in the House to be recognized.

We will now begin tonight's session.

The House in committee of the whole pursuant to Standing Order 81(4), consideration in committee of the whole of votes under the Department of Citizenship and Immigration in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2019.

The hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill.

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

Mr. Chair, I intend to use my full time for questions.

Does the minister believe that once people have reached the United States of America, they are fleeing from persecution?

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Chair, under the safe third country agreement with the United States and the expert opinion of the UNHCR in Canada as well as our own analysis, the United States continues to meet its international obligations with respect to its domestic asylum policy.

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

Mr. Chair, will the minister take the Conservative Party's advice and ask the Americans to close the loophole in the safe third country agreement and concurrently explore legislation that would deem the entire Canadian border a technical official point of entry for the purposes of enforcing that agreement?

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, transforming the whole border into a port of entry would be impractical in terms of providing border and immigration services along its entire length, which is 9,000 kilometres.

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

All right, Mr. Chair, perhaps we should talk about impracticalities. Given the minister's responses, will the minister take responsibility for overflowing Toronto homeless shelters with illegal border crossers?

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, we work very closely with the provinces and municipalities through the intergovernmental task force on irregular migration as well as non-governmental organizations. That is the forum in which we address emerging issues. We are aware of the challenge faced by Toronto. I have spoken numerous times with the mayor of Toronto. We are working together with Ontario and Quebec on a triage system that is meant to relieve pressure from Toronto and Montreal with respect to the temporary housing capacity for asylum seekers.

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

Mr. Chair, will the minister take responsibility for the women who froze to death when illegally crossing the border into Manitoba last winter or for any illegal border crossers who might injure themselves from here on in?

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, this is precisely why we have embarked, since last year, on a very aggressive and sustained outreach plan to diaspora communities in the United States and beyond to ensure people are aware of the potential dangers of crossing our borders irregularly, to ensure they understand our asylum and immigration system, and to ensure they are not victims to misinformation by other parties.

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

Yet, Mr. Chair, the minister continues to refuse to close the loophole on the safe third country agreement, and the numbers of people illegally crossing the border into Canada continue to increase.

Therefore, will the minister take responsibility for spending billions of dollars to peddle false hope for tens of thousands of people who are illegally entering Canada from the United States, who have failed asylum claims in Canada?

[Ahmed Hussen, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, we are proud of the fact that we are making the necessary investments in more border security operations as well as making the necessary investments into the Immigration and Refugee Board to have faster processing of asylum claims so asylum claimants can have finality to their decisions. Those who are deemed to need Canada's protection get to stay and those who do not are removed from Canada.