Debates of March 23rd, 2021

Commissioner of Lobbying

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

It is my duty to lay upon the table, pursuant to section 10.5 of the Lobbying Act, a report on investigation from the Commissioner of Lobbying.

Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), this report is deemed permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

Interparliamentary Delegations

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, two reports of the Canada-United States Inter-Parliamentary Group.

The first report concerns the 73rd annual meeting of the Council of State Governments West, the CSG West, held virtually by video conference on July 29 and July 30, 2020.

The second report relates to the National Conference of State Legislatures, NCSL Base Camp, held virtually by video conference September 15 to September 17, 2020.

Finance

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Finance in relation to Bill C-208, an act to amend the Income Tax Act, transfer of small business or family farm or fishing corporation. The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House without amendment.

Criminal Code

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

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-277, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons).

Mr. Speaker, I am introducing this bill that seeks to combat the scourge of sexual exploitation of minors. The bill implements some of the recommendations of the Select Committee on the Sexual Exploitation of Minors, whose report was unanimously adopted by the Quebec National Assembly less than four months ago.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Civil Air Navigation Services Commercialization Act

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-278, An Act to amend the Civil Air Navigation Services Commercialization Act.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today. I want to thank my colleague from the west coast for seconding this important legislation.

Nav Canada right now is in the process of considering closure of traffic control centres in Whitehorse, Windsor, Regina, Fort McMurray, Prince George, Sault Ste. Marie and St-Jean in Quebec. The government has not been assertive on this. It has said that it has to wait for a study to take place, but through economic development and the changes that would take place with aviation, Windsor would see significant consequences and upheaval during the time of this pandemic, especially to keep regional airports alive. We are asking for a delay of the study and the closures.

The government has said that it cannot stop the study from taking place because of legislation, so we have proposed tools for the government to stop the study and support air traffic control towers in existence right now. The excuse the government has that it cannot act would be lifted by this legislation. It could also be done through an order in council or through the government taking this legislation, just as it has taken previous legislation of mine in the past. I would encourage it to do so.

In particular, I want to thank pilot Dante Albano. There are others, but he has been a coordinating person for this and was active in creating a petition that thousands of Canadians signed in support of this initiative. I also thank the Air Traffic Controllers Association.

This affects economic development and safety. The Windsor airport has five different competing traffic zones, including the United States, that complicate this airspace. This legislation would give the government the power to immediately stop this nonsense, which will continue to go on for months, if not a year, with studies causing upheaval in local economies, putting public safety in jeopardy and, more important, creating confusion.

We are hopeful that the Prime Minister will look at this and do it through an order in council or steal this legislation in a positive way and implement it. We need to ensure that when we build back from COVID. We have the proper tools to do so. I would argue that having the safety and protection at regional airports to do those things would be a net asset as opposed to the process right now , which is destabilizing our air industry.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Myanmar

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions to present.

The first petition is on the coup in Myanmar.

The petitioners call on the government to condemn the coup in the strongest terms. They call for the immediate and unconditional release of all elected officials as well as political prisoners. They want the government to take actions against the Myanmar military and call for the repeal of an unlawfully declared state of emergency and respect the November 2020 election.

The petitioners also call for an immediate law barring Canadian businesses from exporting arms and technologies to Myanmar and to put forward to the General Assembly of the United Nations a resolution calling for member states to address the long-term threat to peace and stability in Myanmar. They would like to see members of the Myanmar military and their families and associates barred from pursuing education or business opportunities in Canada as well as a draft resolution, a motion, to refer this matter to the International Criminal Court.

Rent Subsidy Program

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the next petition I am presenting is on the rental subsidy program.

The petitioners would like to draw the attention of the Government of Canada to the fact that many businesses are not currently eligible for the rental subsidy program because they are non-arm's length tenants. They draw to government's attention to the fact that for 22 years many businesses have been engaged in the tourism industry and are leasing or renting units. They would like the government to reconsider the rental subsidy program and ensure tenants who are currently excluded are included in this program. They request that the Government of Canada change the legislation so businesses are no longer falling through the cracks.

Conversion Therapy

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to present a petition regarding Bill C-6. The petitioners have serious concerns about the consequences of the legislation, including limiting the options available for LGBT Canadians to receive counselling and the criminalization of conversations between children, their parents and other mentors about sexuality.

A recent Nanos poll has found that 91% of Canadians agree that consenting adults should be free to get the sexuality counselling of their choice regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity. This is consistent across regions, age and gender. This is precisely what Bill C-6 would ban, counselling that Canadians may choose for themselves.

The petitioners want to see a conversion therapy ban but not this conversion therapy ban. Bill C-6 would ban more than conversion therapy. Let us fix the definition used in the bill so we can ban the harmful and degrading practices that have no place in Canada, while maintaining the supports available for LGBT Canadians.

Saanich Inlet

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise virtually in the House this morning to present a petition signed by many constituents. It relates to the Saanich Inlet. Those who do not live on Vancouver Island will not be aware that there is a small inlet, like the space between my thumb and my index finger, just above Victoria. In that inlet, there is a very significant risk of contamination from mostly recreational boaters.

The petitioners urge that the Saanich Inlet be declared a non-sewage discharge area. This has been done, as some of the members from Cape Breton Island will know, for the Bras d'Or Lake. They urge the government take action and work with the province to declare Saanich Inlet a zero-discharge area. It has very low flushing capacity, it is an area that has increasingly strong biodiversity, but it must be protected.

Human Organ Trafficking

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am presenting two petitions today.

One is in support of Bill S-204, which has just passed second reading in the Senate. That bill is on organ harvesting and trafficking.

Human Rights

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition calls the attention of the House to the humanitarian and human rights situation in the Tigray region of Ethiopia. It calls for a stronger response from the Government of Canada.

Questions on the Order Paper

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time.

Opposition Motion— Plan for Reopening the Economy

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

moved:

That, given that,

(i) COVID-19 restrictions have had serious economic and mental health impacts on Canadians,

(ii) COVID-19 restrictions have been advised by the federal government, including specifically by the Prime Minister on three separate occasions in November of 2020, as temporary measures to alleviate pressure on the public healthcare system,

(iii) public health tools, such as rapid tests, shared data on how COVID-19 spreads and vaccines, have not been positioned as permanent solutions to replace COVID-19 restrictions by the federal government, including in areas of federal competency like air travel and border restrictions,

(iv) the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom have both released public plans for economic reopening, while Canadian officials have not yet given Canadians clarity on when regular economic and social life will be able to resume,

the House call on the government to table within 20 calendar days, following the adoption of this motion, a clear data-driven plan to support safely, gradually and permanently lifting COVID-19 restrictions.

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Edmonton Centre.

Before I start, I want to tell Lynne Walker that this one is dedicated to her.

Yesterday in the House of Commons, I asked the health minister what I thought was a very simple, non-partisan question. I asked when fully vaccinated seniors could give their grandchildren a hug. The answer we got back from the health minister, a year into the pandemic, could be summarized like this: She does not know, is not sure she wants to tell us, and believes it is a provincial jurisdiction, but she will give the provinces advice.

That is not what Canadians want to hear. I think that answer encapsulates best the need for this motion.

We are a year into COVID‑19, and enough is enough. A year ago, Canadians from coast to coast pulled together to say we had to shut down the economy and undertake these restrictions in order to buy time for public health experts, all of us here in this place, provincial governments and municipal leaders to figure out what COVID‑19 was, how it spreads and who was most vulnerable, and to develop tools to permanently combat it, like therapeutics, rapid tests and vaccines. A year into the pandemic, those tools now exist. The problem is that in Canada, we have not had clear guidance from our health officials on the circumstances under which widespread mass lockdowns can safely end. That is a huge problem.

Those who are watching today need to understand that no level of government in Canada has issued any advice on what fully vaccinated people can do. The only thing the federal government has said to date, when asked, is that vaccinated people still have to go into controversial quarantine hotels. The federal government has to at least tell people what the plan is to develop benchmarks on how these tools are going to bring freedom, prosperity and normalcy back to the lives of Canadians. Today, we are calling on every member of this House to support the federal government in developing a plan within 20 days on the benchmarks by which these tools can be used in order to let life get back to normal.

We all acknowledge that it is important to combat the spread of COVID‑19, important to protect people from serious illness, important to prevent death. We have been doing that for the last year, all of us in this place. What is missing now is hope for the future. Canadians have no idea when lockdowns are going to end, and that has to stop.

Why does that have to stop? It is not just me asking for this. We have Unifor asking for “a national recovery plan to include adapting border restrictions to safely reopen borders”. There is the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. The Tourism Industry Association of Canada has stated, “The news of COVID vaccine distribution gives us reason for cautious optimism”, but said that we need to plan for the recovery of Canada's tourism industry now. The Fitness Industry Council of Canada is asking for a plan. Mayors are asking for plans. Everybody is asking for a plan. It is not just stakeholders who are saying this; it is also medical experts who are saying, “We can't just live in a bubble and have a life of no risk. Everything we do has consequences.” We need a better path forward that uses these tools to protect Canadians' health while also ensuring that life gets back to normal.

These are stories from the CBC.

The federal government has to deliver this. Probably the most critical thing the federal government could do right now is deliver a plan with benchmarks on how lockdowns can be gradually, permanently and safely lifted.

We do not have that. How can businesses plan to reopen if they do not know the circumstances under which they are going to do that? Can we imagine being a restaurant owner right now, when every day it says in the news that we might lock down again, or we might not?

Public Health officials have not even been clear on the data showing where transmission is occurring and whether we are applying these tools to the most vulnerable places. A lot of Canadians are saying that it seems like a lot of reactive measures and a lot of guesswork.

Canadians have pulled together and Canadians have sacrificed a lot, but the federal government has to stop asking Canadians to sacrifice normal life. It has to stop asking people to sacrifice hugs, their mental health, their safety at home. It has to stop asking people to sacrifice those things, and it has to start giving them a plan for hope: “This is how we are going to reopen. These are the benchmarks. This is what we are using and this is how we are doing it.”

Other countries around the world are already doing this. This week Iceland has said that if people are vaccinated, there is no quarantine for them, and they can just come on in. In the United Kingdom, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has issued a reopening plan with benchmarks. Under the Biden administration in the United States, Dr. Anthony Fauci and the CDC have issued guidelines on what vaccinated persons can do. They have set an aspirational target of July 4, Independence Day in the U.S., and Dr. Anthony Fauci has said that the United States is going to have a normal Independence Day.

Why can we not have that here in Canada? Why can we not have nice things too? I want to re-emphasize that the federal government has not told Canadians what they can and cannot do if they have received a vaccine. It has not told airlines any sort of plan for safe border reopening. This cannot be a taboo topic anymore. The federal government is spending billions of dollars on lockdown restriction measures, so it has a responsibility.

All of the Liberals who stand up to talk to this motion today are going to say that it is not the federal government's job, that it is the job pf the provincial governments. There is a big problem with that. We are in an emergency crisis situation, and it is the federal government's job to lead because it is spending billions of dollars, money that we do not have, to support continued lockdown restrictions with no plan to end them. To refute their talking points, that is problem number one.

Number two, Prime Minister has come out many times and asked for lockdown restrictions that are within provincial jurisdiction. On November 24, the Prime Minister said that the federal government is working with the provinces so that they can impose restrictions. He said that again on November 10 in a CTV article, and again in the Canadian Press on November 13. Those are just a few quotes from him that I pulled.

Yesterday in the House of Commons, to that question that I referenced around hugs, the health minister said that the federal government is working with provinces and territories to develop guidance, with support from the federal government, on restrictions. The Liberals cannot suck and blow. They cannot say that it is politically convenient for them, ahead of a potential election that no one but the Liberals want, to offload this responsibility to the provincial governments.

To the bureaucrats who are watching this speech, if bureaucrats in Health Canada are advising the minister that it is not her job to provide guidance, why are we paying your salaries? If the health minister is not asking her department, with its thousands of bureaucrats, for guidance on this, why are we paying your salaries?

We need hope. We are not saying that we should just willy-nilly do anything. What we are saying is that the federal government has to start issuing direction to the airlines, to hospitality and tourism, to retail, to marginalized communities, to women who are having domestic violence issues. We need this plan. It should be a no-brainer.

The motion we have in front of the House of Commons today is asking for a data-driven plan. This is what the ask is. It is that the House “call on the government to table within 20 calendar days, following the adoption of this motion, a clear data-driven plan to support safely, gradually and permanently lifting COVID-19 restrictions.”

I said I was dedicating this to my friend Lynne. Her husband passed away. She did not even get to see him when he went in for his heart attack. People should not have to say goodbye to their loved ones over FaceTime.

The federal government needs a plan. Every person in this House and every Canadian should support this motion.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, it is truly amazing how the member has a consistent attitude, and I believe it is misleading, of providing false information. Is the member trying to indicate to those who are following this debate that the federal government is responsible for lifting lockdowns or restrictions? My understanding, according to the Constitution, is that the provinces are responsible. Canada is a vast country with many regions, and it is the provinces that put in the restrictions.

Is it the Conservative Party's policy that Ottawa should start overriding provincial jurisdiction? Could she give a clear indication of her thoughts on that issue?

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

Madam Speaker, the federal government has full jurisdiction on the quarantine hotel debacle that has seen sexual assaults occur, so yes, that issue is its job.

Also, I want to quote the member of Parliament for Whitby, who tweeted that it was criminal negligence for provinces to not impose lockdowns. The federal government has been all over this. I ask members to think about how disgusting this is. After billions of dollars and thousands of bureaucrats, a year later the federal government is saying it is not its job. It is Legault's job, Doug Ford's job, or Jason Kenney's job. Liberals will not provide any support on this or any guidance. All they are going to do is have the Prime Minister come out of Rideau Cottage and say, “Well, I think you should lock down more.” Then Liberal backbenchers will tweet stuff like that. They cannot suck and blow.

Nobody wants partisanship. That is what we just heard from the federal government, and the Liberals are spreading misinformation too. What we need is a plan, and every person in this place should support it.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am reading the Conservative Party motion. I am not out of sympathy at all with the sentiments expressed by my hon. colleague. I read with great interest the feature in Maclean's magazine written by Stephen Maher. It is clear that mistakes have been made. On the other hand, I do not see how I can vote for a motion that calls for a plan within 20 days to permanently lift COVID restrictions.

I certainly agree with the hon. member that we should have good advice as to whether, when we are vaccinated, we can hug our grandkids, but that is not the motion before us. I ask the member to explain the difference between her speech and the actual wording of the motion?

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

Madam Speaker, I would ask the member to avail herself to read the ask. It is not saying to lift restrictions in 20 days. It is saying to have a plan for the benchmarks that would be used to lift restrictions. The member needs to read the motion.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I do want to remind the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands that she is not to use the mike for rebuttal, and I know that this has been mentioned on a number of occasions.

The hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. As a matter of privilege—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

On a point of order, the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I should have said point of order before speaking previously. I apologize.

When an hon. member impugns the thoroughness of the work of another hon. member, that is a point of order. The member for Calgary Nose Hill and I have worked together for many years. I think she knows that I am an honourable person and, if I said I read the motion and I do not think the motion accords with her speech, that means I have read the motion.

I do not need to avail myself of reading the motion. The motion does not say the things that the hon. member said we should vote for. That is my issue.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I appreciate the information provided. I think that most of this is a point of debate, so I will go to questions and comments.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am only stepping in here because we have had the Speaker rule a number of times on how people can use their mike in Zoom in a way that they cannot use it in the House. The member for Saanich—Gulf Islands just showed that abusive process.

Therefore, I think that when you are reminding people about the use of Zoom mikes, they need a reminder that they can actually override the ability of Parliament to do its work. I would caution the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands not to abuse that privilege.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I appreciate the information provided by the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay. I did raise this prior to the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands asking for a point of order thereafter.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.