House of Commons Hansard #386 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was snc-lavalin.
Public Services and ProcurementOral Questions
Carla Qualtrough Minister of Public Services and Procurement and Accessibility, Lib.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, since January 2018, the backlog has gone down by 160,000 cases. We are doing whatever we possibly can to make sure our public servants are paid on time and accurately.
In May of this year, all the departments will be serviced by pay pods. Employees are satisfied by this movement. It was an employee-generated idea.
This will be resolved. We will stabilize the system. Yes, it is taking longer than we wish, but rest assured, this is my number one priority.
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
Mr. Speaker, Canadians living with disabilities face unique challenges when it comes to finding accessible, affordable housing. In my riding of Cambridge, there has been significant investment in projects targeted to help, like the new accessible, affordable housing at 175 Hespeler Road.
Could the minister responsible for housing tell the House how Canada's national housing strategy is helping people living with disabilities find places to call home that meet their unique needs?
Jean-Yves Duclos LiberalMinister of Families
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Cambridge for highlighting the challenges that people with disabilities in Canada face when it comes to finding an accessible home.
That is why we launched the first-ever national housing strategy a year ago. That is why the national co-investment fund requires 25% of the newly constructed or repaired units to be fully accessible. That is why we will continue to fight very hard so that every Canadian with a disability has access to a safe, affordable and accessible home.
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Mr. Speaker, Michael Wernick testified that on December 19, he met with the Prime Minister and immediately following this meeting he picked up the phone and called the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter.
What instructions did the Prime Minister provide Wernick to initiate this call?
Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, once again, we on this side respect the work of the justice committee. We on this side have increased resources for all committees, because we know that they do important work. We on this side will also defend and uphold the principles of judicial independence as well as the rule of law. We know that the matter is being looked at by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and the justice committee. We also know that we on this side will fully co-operate with these two investigations, because they are doing important work.
What is clear is that the member of the Conservative Party continues to undermine their work. We will not do that on this side. Canadians have confidence in their institutions.
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. Canadians deserve transparency. Canadians deserve answers about the Prime Minister's involvement in this sordid affair.
Again, what did the Prime Minister say to Wernick that prompted him to pick up the phone and call the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter? What did he say?
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
I must remind the hon. member for St. Albert—Edmonton to be judicious in his choice of words.
The hon. government House leader.
Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, that member just confirmed that the Conservative Party and its members will continue to speculate rather than look at the facts. That is something Canadians know very well and that is exactly why they are sitting on the opposition benches. That is the party that chose to undermine committees. They put out a rule book to make sure that they could undermine and destroy the work of committees.
We on this side will not do that. We are the government that increased resources to committees. We know that they do important work. We know that members on both sides are asking witnesses to appear and we know that witnesses are answering. Let them do their work.
John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON
Mr. Speaker, we know that Michael Wernick spoke to the former attorney general on the afternoon of December 19. He said he called her about the SNC-Lavalin file. Wernick also said the former attorney general advised the Prime Minister on September 17 that she was not going to intervene.
Why did the Prime Minister instruct the clerk to make the phone call if she had already made up her mind?
Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, that is speculation.
We know very well that the Clerk of the Privy Council confirmed when he was at the justice committee last week that at every opportunity, verbally and in writing, in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the Minister of Justice to take.
There are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee. They are working together to have witnesses appear. Witnesses are appearing and answering tough questions.
We, on this side, know that Canadians should have confidence in their institutions. We will not undermine that work because we know the committee is working hard. The Conservatives should stop their doublespeak.
John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON
It certainly is not speculation, Mr. Speaker, because those were Wernick's words.
Canadians need to know what is not being said by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. It is clear that there was a concerted and sustained effort by the Prime Minister and his senior operatives to make the former attorney general change her mind.
If we are not going to get answers in this place, will the Prime Minister appear before the justice committee and finally tell the truth?
Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, as I will continue to say, members of the justice committee from both sides of the House are working together. They are asking witnesses to appear. Witnesses are appearing and they are responding to questions.
We, on this side, will always have confidence in our committee system. It is important work that they do. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is also looking at this file. We, on this side, will not undermine that work.
That is a clear contrast between the Conservatives and the Liberals. We will not undermine committees. We will not undermine officers of Parliament. We will not undermine the independence of the justice system.
Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is now clear that Liberals have given up on GM workers and their families in Oshawa without even trying.
Do members know what the government did in the U.S.? U.S. representatives fought and succeeded in pressuring GM to extend the operation of the Detroit-Hamtramck plant for the life of the current collective agreement. That is the bare minimum that workers in Oshawa have been asking for and the Liberals did not even try to secure that with GM. Canadian workers deserve better than this. Layoffs start in two weeks.
Why will the Prime Minister not fight for their jobs?
Navdeep Bains LiberalMinister of Innovation
Mr. Speaker, we fight day in and day out for our auto workers.
Since 2015, we have seen historic investments of $6 billion in the automotive sector because our Prime Minister has made the automotive sector a priority for our government. We have seen significant investments in the auto supply sector, and this has resulted in thousands of jobs being created.
Compare that with the Conservatives. For the first three years of their mandate, they lost 50,000 jobs in the automotive sector and 20,000 before the recession even hit. We have seen thousands of jobs created since 2015. We will continue to fight for the auto worker.
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Mr. Speaker, last month the NDP secured a request to have General Motors CEO Mary Barra appear before committee to answer questions on the closure of the Oshawa plant. Instead, the Liberals cut a private deal to excuse her and now we get a lobbyist, and this is because the Prime Minister could not even get his own meeting. So much for not interfering with committees. Meanwhile, U.S. political pressure gets a new deal to extend plant operations and now Canada is left out in the cold. Why are the Liberals letting CEO Barra off the hook?
Would the Prime Minister care to explain to Canadians his failures for Oshawa versus the workers of Detroit-Hamtramck, who are getting a new life on their jobs?
Navdeep Bains LiberalMinister of Innovation
Mr. Speaker, I went to Detroit and met with Mary Barra just a few weeks ago and I made it very clear that they are making a big mistake by leaving Oshawa.
We as a government will not make that mistake and turn our backs on auto workers. We will continue to defend auto workers. We have been very clear, with Jerry Dias's involvement when it comes to Unifor that for any solution that it has between the unions and GM, we will be at the table as part of the solution. We will continue to defend auto workers and we will continue to invest in this very important sector.
JusticeOral Questions
Michael Barrett Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that Canadians should listen to the Clerk of the Privy Council. During his appearance at committee, the clerk said that cabinet never discussed SNC-Lavalin. However, the Minister of National Revenue said during a radio interview that the decision regarding SNC was made at cabinet.
I have a simple question. Who is telling the truth?
Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, there are members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle that sit on the justice committee.
That member, very new to this place, should also know that those members have come together to ask for a list of witnesses. It is also important to know that witnesses are appearing at the justice committee. Members of Parliament from both sides are asking tough questions. Witnesses are answering those questions.
That member also knows that the Conservatives had a rule book to undermine committees. We have not done such a thing. We have actually increased resources to committees to ensure that committees can do their important work and Canadians can have confidence in their institutions.
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Mr. Speaker, that was interesting and all, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the question.
The issue is this: last week, Canada's top bureaucrat testified that the Liberal scandal was never ever discussed in cabinet. That is what the top bureaucrat said last week, but two weeks ago, the Minister of National Revenue said on the radio that it had indeed been discussed in cabinet, and three weeks ago, when the scandal broke, the Prime Minister said nobody could talk about it because of cabinet confidence.
Which government member is telling the truth?
Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, our answers were indeed relevant.
What I said was that members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights asked questions.
They asked for witnesses. The witnesses are appearing. We know members are asking these questions. That is what I am saying. We need to have confidence in the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.
Those of us on this side of the House have confidence in them, but apparently the Conservatives do not.
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Mr. Speaker, it is true that just a few days ago, Liberal MPs described getting the former attorney general to testify at parliamentary committee as a witch hunt, a fishing expedition and a distraction.
However, if the minister and the Liberal government are so open to hearing from everyone at committee, will they allow the Prime Minister to have his say?
Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, as we said, we respect the work of the committees. We have confidence in the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and all the other committees. We will allow them to do their work, because we respect their work.
We can see the Conservatives feel differently.
Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, there is no more important job than to care for our loved ones. We welcome caregivers to Canada every year, mainly from the Philippines, to care for our children and our parents. However, as they care for our families they leave their own behind, often enduring a painful separation of years before they can be reunited. I have met these caregivers and heard their stories. Canada needs to do better.
Could the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship tell us what the government is doing to reunite caregiver families?
Ahmed Hussen LiberalMinister of Immigration
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her tireless advocacy on behalf of caregivers.
Thousands of families rely on caregivers to care for their loved ones. Caregivers have often faced too many barriers to reuniting with their own families. Our government is introducing a program that will provide a faster path for permanent residency, better protections against abuse, and for the first time, we will allow caregivers to bring their own spouses and children with them.
Our government has eliminated the caregiver backlog left behind by the Conservatives, from five years to 12 months. We will always stand for family reunification.
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Mr. Speaker, after the Prime Minister moved the former attorney general out of her position, she wrote a letter to the public saying that she had spoken “truth to power”. She rose recently and said that she would like to speak her truth to all Canadians.
So far, the Prime Minister has been silencing her, invoking solicitor-client privilege, real or imagined. Today, he says that he will finally allow her to speak, but only to say things that he considers relevant.
Will the Prime Minister remove these obstacles to the former attorney general's free speech and let her speak?