House of Commons Hansard #101 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was pandemic.

Topics

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

The hon. member for Salaberry—Suroît on a point of order.

10:05 a.m.

Bloc

Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Salaberry—Suroît, QC

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 43(2)(a), I would like to indicate that all of the Bloc Québécois's speaking slots for today's debate on the opposition motion will be divided in two.

Citizenship and ImmigrationCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, entitled “Immigration in the Time of COVID-19: Issues and Challenges”.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.

I would like to thank all members of the committee for their collegiality and hard work in addressing this important issue and coming forward with comprehensive recommendations.

I thank everyone who addressed and wrote to the committee to share their difficult stories.

As well, I would like to thank our analysts, Julie Béchard, Madalina Chesoi, Martin McCallum and Graeme McConnell, for the many long hours spent drafting this report.

International TradeCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal Humber River—Black Creek, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the following two reports from the Standing Committee on International Trade: the sixth report, entitled “Trade Between Canada and the United Kingdom: A Potential Transitional Trade Agreement and Beyond”; and the seventh report, entitled “Canada and International Trade: An Interim Report Concerning the Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond”.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to each of these two reports.

International TradeCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Mr. Speaker, I will be responding to the Canada-U.K. report.

I would like to express my appreciation to the analysts, the clerk and my colleagues on the Standing Committee of International Trade for their work in preparing this final report on trade between Canada and the United Kingdom, and I want to thank them.

Attached to the report is the supplementary opinion of the official opposition Conservatives. In this report, we highlight that we are pleased to see the Canada-United Kingdom Trade Continuity Agreement come into effect on April 1, 2021, though we are disappointed that the government was not able to meet the initial deadline of December 31, 2020, when the CETA's application to the United Kingdom ended. It is truly unfortunate that the government left this critical trade agreement to the final sitting week of the final month of the final year the CETA's term no longer applied to the U.K., having to sign an interim memorandum of understanding to provide trade stability due to this delay.

The Conservative Party of Canada is pleased to see recommendations in the report on negotiations for a successor Canada-U.K. trade agreement, which we hope to see begin negotiations this year, including to address gaps raised by small businesses and those in the agriculture and agri-food sectors. Conservatives support the recommendations in the report and we look forward to the government's response.

Conservatives also recognize that we were in a unique situation where we did this Canada-U.K. trade study and we also had a separate study on Bill C-18,, the Canada-United Kingdom Trade Continuity Agreement Implementation Act, where we also heard from witnesses whose testimony is regrettably not included in this report. We, in the Conservative caucus, do hope that the government takes the time to review the input from stakeholders from the Bill C-18 study, including concerns around non-tariff barriers, as well as non-indexation of frozen British pensions.

Fisheries and OceansCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Liberal

Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, entitled “Implementation of the Mi'kmaw and Maliseet Treaty Right to Fish in Pursuit of a Moderate Livelihood”.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.

I thank all the witnesses and all the people who put a lot of hard work into this.

Fisheries and OceansCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

Richard Bragdon Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the communities across Canada that feel that the government has left them behind.

After extensive work at committee, we have issued a dissenting report here today in response to a report that perpetuates the neglect and indifference faced by communities across Canada by the current government and the fisheries minister. After nearly half a decade of mismanagement, fisheries in southwestern Nova Scotia are at a tipping point. As a committee and as elected representatives of these communities, we will not stand idly by.

Rather than inviting all parties to one table to build a common understanding of interests, rights and laws, the minister has failed to respond to escalating tensions and uncertainty that have developed under her leadership. The government's continued failures are eroding decades of relationship-building established with the Marshall decision and, to this day, are failing to maintain the important dialogue with everyone involved.

As the official opposition, we will continue to call on the minister to fulfill her duties and responsibilities as laid out in Marshall and take immediate action to resolve the current situation. From coast to coast, our communities are at stake, and we will not stop fighting for them.

Defence of Canada Medal Act (1946-1989)Routine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

NDP

Carol Hughes NDP Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-296, An Act respecting the establishment and award of a Defence of Canada Medal (1946-1989).

Mr. Speaker, the pandemic has offered us a view into other moments when Canadians came together to ward off a common foe. One of those was the Cold War, which lasted from 1946 until the dismantling of the Berlin Wall in 1989. That event signalled an end to the arms race and the anxiety that accompanied the period.

In order to properly acknowledge the work and sacrifice of those who protected us from within our borders during the Cold War, I am introducing an act respecting the establishment and award of a defence of Canada medal for the men and women who served Canada during the Cold War. These individuals served in the protection of Canada from threats posed by countries behind the Iron Curtain.

These Canadians were trained and prepared to defend their country by any means and, fortunately, they never had to intervene on our soil. This medal will be awarded to those who served in the regular force, the reserves, police organizations, the Emergency Measures Organization and civilian assistance organizations.

This act represents the vision of an Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing resident, retired Captain Ulrich Krings, and has widespread support across the country, especially from those who worked so hard to keep us safe and prepared during those unsettling times.

I am pleased that my colleague from North Island—Powell River, who is also the NDP critic for veterans affairs, is seconding my bill.

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

Parliament of Canada ActRoutine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

Liberal

Lenore Zann Liberal Cumberland—Colchester, NS

moved for leave to introduce Bill S-205, An Act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act (Parliamentary Visual Artist Laureate).

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to table Bill S-205, the national artist laureate act, an act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act. I wish to thank Senator Bovey of Manitoba and Senator Moore of Nova Scotia for creating this bill that brings us together from across the nation and reminds us that art is a shared experience. Bill S-205 would appoint a parliamentary visual artist laureate for successive two-year terms to promote the arts in Canada through Parliament by fostering knowledge, enjoyment, awareness and development of the arts.

Art speaks in a visual language and our own perceptions translate the stories. Whether it is a simple handprint on a cave wall 60,000 years ago, petroglyphs carved in the rocks, a sculpted form, a sketch, a cartoon, a photograph, art endures. Like the artists who enrich our lives, art strives, art inspires, art thrives long after we have shuffled off this mortal coil.

(Motion agreed to and bill read the first time)

Kindness Week ActRoutine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

seconded by the member for Saint-Laurent, moved for leave to introduce Bill S-223, An Act respecting Kindness Week.

He said: Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to speak today and introduce Bill S-223, an act respecting kindness week. The pandemic has reminded us of the need for kindness in our society, and when passed, this bill would designate that throughout Canada, each and every year the third week of February is to be known as kindness week.

I want to thank my friends Senator Munson, who ushered the bill through the other place; the member for Saint-Laurent, who is helping to usher the bill through this place; and Rabbi Reuven Bulka, the inspiration for this bill, having set out on this journey of kindness week 17 years ago here in Ottawa.

On the need for kindness, I think all members in this place can agree. I respectfully ask that members pass this bill expeditiously.

(Motion agreed to and bill read the first time)

OpioidsPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Mr. Speaker, the opioid crisis is one of the most deadly public health emergencies of our lifetime. Heartbreakingly, the death toll has soared in 2020 and 2021, with twice as many overdoses.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, Alberta has seen overdose deaths outpace COVID deaths. Overdose deaths are premature and preventable, and they are the leading cause of death in Alberta for 15- to 59-year-olds by a margin of more than 30% compared to any other cause.

Today, on behalf of many of my constituents, I call on the government to declare the overdose crisis a national public health emergency, and I ask that the government take the urgent steps needed to end overdose deaths and overdose injuries by immediately developing a well-funded and comprehensive pan-Canadian overdose action plan.

Travel AdvisersPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

Chris Lewis Conservative Essex, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition on behalf of Canada's 12,000 travel advisers. They earn through commissions only and can wait up to 11 months to receive their pay after booking a trip for a client. It has been over a year since these 12,000 Canadian travel advisers have earned any commissions, because of COVID travel restrictions.

With no plan in sight to reopen or lift these restrictions, the petitioners are asking the House to, one, extend the CRB for six months past the lifting of all travel restrictions and, two, keep the CRB at its current amount for sectors hit the hardest, like our travel advisers.

St. Lawrence SeawayPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:20 a.m.

Bloc

Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Salaberry—Suroît, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to present a petition to the Minister of Transport in the House of Commons today. It was initiated by Daniel Pinsonneault, a constituent in my riding.

This petition calls for the modernization of the St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation's website to improve the culture of communication between the St. Lawrence Seaway and its users, whether they be motorists, cyclists or recreational boaters.

Over 600 people signed this petition. That is in addition to the 12 municipalities in my riding that are also calling for these changes.

I encourage the St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation to take note of this. It is possible to do more. I thank the corporation in advance for making a genuine effort to build closer ties with our community.

EmploymentPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB

Mr. Speaker, I stand today in the House of Commons to present a petition on behalf of my constituents, who express their concerns about and their desire to immediately end the lockdowns.

Petitioners acknowledge that workers want to feed their families with paycheques and do not want government handouts. They acknowledge there are a variety of different opinions on lockdowns and approaches to scientific evidence and that the WHO admits lockdowns are needlessly destructive on both long-term health and the livelihoods of people.

Therefore, petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to work with all levels of government to immediately rescind harmful lockdown measures and reopen the economy so paycheques can feed families.

Wild Animal TradePetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am tabling a petition today on behalf of my constituents in Kelowna—Lake Country. To briefly summarize, animal suffering occurs at every stage of the commercial wildlife trade and Canada imported at least 320,081 wild animals in 2019. Over 75% of the imported animals were not subject to any import restrictions, and 80% were destined for the exotic pet industry.

The petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to commit to end the international and domestic trade in wild animals and their products, which causes immense suffering of wildlife globally.

The EnvironmentPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured today to stand virtually in the House of Commons to table petition e-3303.

The petitioners cite that Canadians care deeply about the health of the ocean and depend on a thriving ocean ecosystem. In 2019, over one million cruise ship passengers travelled along coastal British Columbia on their way to Alaska. These ships generate significant amounts of pollutants that are harmful to human health, aquatic organisms and coastal ecosystems.

Currently, Canada's regulations under the Canada Shipping Act that address the discharge of sewage and grey water are less stringent than those in U.S. Pacific coastal states. Petitioners cite that Canada has zero no-discharge zones off the coast of British Columbia. It does not require third party independent observers on board cruise ships, as are required by Alaska. Canada also has less stringent regulations encouraging cruise ships to discharge their waste off British Columbia.

The petitioners call on the government to set standards for cruise ship sewage and grey-water discharges equivalent to, or stronger than, those in Alaska; to designate no-discharge zones to stop pollution in marine protected areas, the entirety of the Salish and Great Bear Seas, and in critical habitat for threatened and endangered species; and to require independent third party monitoring while ships are under way to ensure discharge requirements are being met.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:20 a.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary 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 ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Opposition Motion—Elections During a PandemicBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Bloc

Alain Therrien Bloc La Prairie, QC

moved:

That:

(a) the House remind the government that a general election was held in October 2019 and sadly note that more than 1.3 million Canadians, including almost 360,000 Quebecers, have been infected with COVID-19 and that nearly 25,000 people have died as a result; and

(b) in the opinion of the House, holding an election during a pandemic would be irresponsible, and that it is the responsibility of the government to make every effort to ensure that voters are not called to the polls as long as this pandemic continues.

Mr. Speaker, it would be irresponsible to hold elections during a pandemic. I think that this word that we included in the motion, is appropriate. I repeat that it would be irresponsible to do so, when for the last 14 months we have been asking people to keep their activities to a minimum. They are making sacrifices and refraining from seeing their loved ones. Often, parents do not see their children and grandparents do not see their grandchildren. Nevertheless, we are telling people that they have to go vote in spite of all that because it is important to fulfill their civic duty.

Elections are important, but holding an election during a pandemic is like playing with fire. We do not need that. We are not suggesting the end of the pandemic is not in sight. Well, we hope it is, anyway, despite vaccination delays. We are on our way to putting this pandemic behind us.

Just to qualify what I said though, the situation has improved in Quebec, and we are all knocking on wood. However, the situation elsewhere in Canada is problematic. Last week, we had an emergency debate here about the situation in Alberta. Does anyone think Albertans want an election? I doubt it.

Ontario is in the grip of its third wave and is struggling with variants because the Liberal government did not close the borders, which is how those variants got in. The Prime Minister repeatedly said he closed the borders and was being really strict and so on, but 84% of the COVID-19 cases in Quebec are caused by variants. How did those variants get here? Did they leap the Atlantic?

No, they came through the airports because the government did not instruct workers to make sure travellers quarantined. Travellers did not quarantine, and now the pandemic is still here because of the variants. That is the truth of the matter.

After letting the variants in and failing to get vaccines until two months after nearly everyone else, the government is suggesting that holding an election might be a good idea. Of course, it has not explicitly said that.

Mr. Trudeau is going around telling anyone who asks that the Liberals do not want an election.

Opposition Motion—Elections During a PandemicBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands on a point of order.

Opposition Motion—Elections During a PandemicBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I am sure the very experienced member of the Bloc Québécois knows he cannot use the Prime Minister's name in the House. Perhaps he would want to retract that.

Opposition Motion—Elections During a PandemicBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Parliamentarians sometimes need to be reminded that they must not refer to other members, the Prime Minister or the ministers by name, but rather by their title or riding name.

The hon. member for La Prairie.

Opposition Motion—Elections During a PandemicBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Bloc

Alain Therrien Bloc La Prairie, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to apologize to the hon. member. I am truly sorry. I have indeed used someone’s name a few times. When I was in the Quebec National Assembly, members never referred to anyone by name. Here we do in some cases, for example during committee meetings. I will try not to do it again.

The Prime Minister keeps saying that he does not want to hold an election during the pandemic. He said on television that the government did not want to call an election, that that is clear and that he can be trusted. It is not clear at all.

Then, the Liberals held a convention, where everyone was celebrating. What were they talking about? All they talked about was an election. At some point, the leader of the government, who says that it is the opposition that keeps talking about an election, did a feature on Radio-Canada. All he could say was “election”. As he spoke about the election, he was as excited as a kid on Christmas morning. He says that we are talking about an election, but I think he is projecting.

Although he says he does not want to call an election, we think he does—maybe a little less now, because the polls are not looking as good.

The Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs worked on an election report during the pandemic. We met with dozens of witnesses, in particular public health officials, professors and people from various backgrounds. They explained that we should not hold an election during a pandemic but if we were going to, they had a few recommendations. Everyone said they did not want to trigger an election.

According to Professor Blais, there should not be an election during a pandemic, and the minority government should not call an election during the pandemic. He also said that a minority government should only call an election every four years. I found that interesting, but I am not saying that I agree. I am merely giving him a nod.

The leaders agree that we should not hold an election. The Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs looked at the possibility, and its members voted unanimously that they did not want an election. The Liberal members on the committee said that they did not want an election. If that is true, why do they not tell their leader? I have my doubts. The government’s good will is as short-lived as a balloon at a porcupine party.

The government says that it does not want to call an election, but that it will introduce a bill. If it does not want to call an election, why is it introducing a bill? I do not understand. We were told that it was just in case. Then, the government brought the NDP on side. When the Liberals asked the NDP members what they thought, they said it was reasonable. They do not want to call an election, but they are introducing a bill to prepare for an election during a pandemic. That is what they said.

The members on the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs were very upset. We worked very hard to issue a report. We wanted to release it quickly to provide clarity. We wanted our work to have a positive impact. However, the government introduced Bill C-19 before we could table our report. What does that mean? It means that we worked hard, but they did not care. They introduced their bill. We were upset and wondered why we were working so hard. Such is life.

I would now like to lend my voice to a few political analysts in order to show my colleagues that this does not come from the member for La Prairie or the Bloc Québécois party member, but rather from analysts commenting on the possibility of holding an election during a pandemic. Political analyst Emmanuelle Latraverse said that the government waited until December 10 to introduce a bill. When was the bill debated for the first time? In March.

They rushed to introduce a bill in December, but the bill was not examined until March. We wondered why they did not wait until March to introduce the bill. That way, we could have started working immediately, and we could have tabled our report. That appears to be too complicated, however.

They said that the bill was introduced on December 10 and never explained why.

Even if this is as important as they claim it is, they did nothing about it until March 8. In the past 51 days there have been only three hours of debate.

All of a sudden the government wakes up, realizes this has become a national emergency and imposes time allocation. Our constituents must be wondering what the motive is here. Why did the government not negotiate and find a compromise?

This type of mismanagement of the parliamentary calendar is what poisons relations between the parties. We are in this position because of prorogation, because of WE Charity. When the government prorogued Parliament, every bill on the order paper died. We had to redo the work and we lost a lot of days. We had to go back to square one because the government decided to prorogue Parliament. Suddenly the government hits the panic button and imposes time allocation.

This is a government of legislative chaos. The Liberals are scrambling. They do not know where they are going. There is not much on the calendar because the government does not know how to manage it. The fundamental problem is that the Liberals are increasingly using closure because they find it hard to manage their bills.

I like what Pierre Nantel had to say once. He said that to pass a certain bill, it seemed that the Liberal members were following a script written by a drama teacher.

Then, Pierre Nantel named the Prime Minister and said that the Liberals' handling of the bill suggested that their sole purpose was to show the Conservatives as always being opposed to everything.

I could go on and on, but, in closing, I would like to say that tinkering with the election law, especially during a pandemic, requires a consensus. We would have needed it, but we are dealing with a government of cowboys that likes to run roughshod over the House, unfortunately.

Opposition Motion—Elections During a PandemicBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary 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, if the opposition members are going to continue to vote non-confidence in the government, it is irresponsible for them not to have measures in place to protect Canadians. It is a minority government, which means that we do need to have support from opposition. That is one of the reasons that we were able to get it to the committee stage.

My question for the member is about consistency. Last year, the Bloc Québécois members were demanding and brought in a motion of confidence. They wanted a federal election unless the Prime Minister resigned. The Prime Minister did not resign. Have they changed and now does the Bloc fully endorse the current Prime Minister?