Debates of Nov. 1st, 2022

Northern Affairs

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Minister of Northern Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for that very important question. Concerning the first part of the question about the power outage, I will speak to my team at the end of this meeting and make sure we get those details and see what our role is.

We have a very good relationship with the Government of Nunavut, and we are very proud to support the Kivalliq community and the Government of Nunavut on the Kivalliq fibre optic line, which we are working on in partnership with all partners.

Public Safety

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have been shocked by allegations of political interference into an RCMP investigation. They want to know that the organizations that are protecting them are not serving a political agenda, but the archaic language of the RCMP Act is a recipe for disaster. It needs to be fixed. Today, I called for new measures to clarify what directions the Minister of Public Safety can issue to the RCMP and for them to be issued in writing. We need to see more accountability.

Will the Liberals support my proposal to help restore public trust in our institutions?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to work with my hon. colleague on the private member's bill he put forward this morning.

In the meantime, I want to update the chamber and say that my mandate calls for strengthened standards when it comes to the use of force, strengthening the role of the management advisory board, and finally Bill C-20, which will ensure there is an opportunity for Canadians who have concerns regarding the quality of service they are getting from the RCMP and the CBSA, for the first time. This is legislation that I hope we will pass with great haste so that we can raise the bar on transparency and accountability and ensure the confidence of Canadians in their law enforcement institutions.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

That is all the time we have for question period.

Before we go on, I want to remind hon. members that props are not allowed in the chamber and referring to them is even more frowned upon. I just want to make sure everyone is aware of that. It was very subtle. I am not going to point anyone out; they know who they are. Please do not do that again.

Lac-Mégantic Bypass

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you were to seek it, I believe you would find unanimous consent for the following motion:

That the House recall that almost 10 years ago, the worst rail tragedy in Canadian history cost the lives of 47 people and, therefore, reiterate its support for the construction of the Lac-Mégantic bypass and urge the government to carry out the project as a whole as soon as possible.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

All those opposed to the hon. member moving the motion will please say nay.

The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.

(Motion agreed to)

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been consultations and I hope that if you seek it, you will find consent for the following motion: That given that: one, that the mental health of Canadians has been negatively impacted by the pandemic; two, that economic conditions are exacerbating financial barriers to mental health supports; and, three, that our public health care system is under immense strain, the House call upon the government to put into place a Canada mental health transfer without delay.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—ArriveCAN Application Performance Audit

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, it is somewhat disappointing that the Conservatives continue to not come to the realization that what is happening around the world is quite serious with regard to inflation. The United States, England and many European countries have higher inflation rates than Canada.

Having said that, Liberal MPs are concerned about the cost of groceries and about the cost of some of the important consumer products. That is why we are bringing forward progressive legislation to help Canadians at a time when they need it.

Why does the Conservative Party, when it comes time to do something to support Canadians, vote against our progressive, supportive legislation for Canadians?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, after all the mismanagement and examples of Liberal insiders getting rich, why should anyone trust the government to do what it says it is going to do? When Canadians are struggling to make ends meet and cannot pay their bills, it is an outrage to ask them to foot the bill for the government's wasteful spending, and I refuse to do it.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask my colleague why she thinks this NDP-Liberal costly coalition becomes so irritated every time we ask it for metrics, for proof behind what they do; in this case, the metrics used to determine the number of COVID-infected individuals entering Canada that validated the $54 million spent on the ArriveCAN app.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is very concerning that the government refuses to be transparent and has reacted the way it has when we have made what would be typical requests around a significant government procurement program or any other data that we need to ensure the way it is spending Canadian taxpayer dollars is done wisely. It shows that Conservatives are worried about transparency and the Liberals are worried about being held accountable for how they are spending Canadians' money.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I understand the member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek is quite concerned about the cost of the ArriveCAN app. I wonder if she is also concerned about the $21 billion it is expected to cost for the Trans Mountain pipeline, the expansion of a leaky pipeline in the midst of a climate emergency; and the $17 billion more in a loan guarantee from just a few weeks ago. Could the member comment on that?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, what I would simply point out for the member is that Canada has the most ethical energy sector in the world. If we are concerned about lowering global emissions, not just our country's, and supporting our allies abroad, particularly in Europe, then we should be helping our oil and gas sector to flourish rather than slowly suffocating it and always criticizing it.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo.

Here we are today talking about accountability. I wonder if my hon. colleague could comment on the lack of accountability we have seen when it comes to a hotel room that cost somewhere between $6,000 and $7,200.

We are having a discussion on the $54 million that was spent, and that is a big sum of money. We have smaller sums. Could the member comment on the lack of accountability when the Prime Minister will not even tell us who was in that room?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Speaker, what I will say in the very short time that I have is this. The Conservatives will not back down from demanding answers and accountability for Canadians. We will always seek to get the truth for Canadians when it comes to the overspending and mismanagement of the government.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise to speak to this great opposition day motion and I want to thank the Leader of the Opposition for moving it.

Many different things have happened over the last two or three years and that has brought us to where we are today, with a very particular focus on the ArriveCAN app. We need to show respect for taxpayer dollars, which is more fundamentally based on respect for the rights of our fellow Canadians.

An essential part of Parliament's role is to hold the government accountable for its spending along with its policy decisions regardless of the party that is in power. That is exactly what the motion calls for, nothing more. Hopefully all members from all parties in the House can agree with that idea, including Liberals who sit on the government side. We will have to wait and see the result of the vote, because the issue in question has to do with the controversial arrive scam app.

The motion calls for the Auditor General to conduct a performance audit, and that is something different from the House expressing our approval or disapproval toward a specific government policy. It is not even a committee study. Instead, this would be an independent review that would take the issue away from partisan debates between the government and the opposition.

It would address the need for some necessary accountability, though, because we cannot pretend that nothing really happened with the ArriveCAN app over the last two years. If government members are truly confident that they have made the right decisions along the way, then they should have no problem supporting the motion. In the end, it would prove their case with no problem, and I hope that point has been clearly understood.

We are here today, one month after the government eventually decided to drop the mandatory use of the ArriveCAN app, but that alone does not mean all issues have been resolved. We do not have the whole story, and many of the questions that Canadians have are left unanswered.

Why did the federal government mandate it in the first place? Why were Canadian citizens required to download and use an app to enter their own country? Why was there a lack of accommodation or flexibility? Why did it take so long for the government to finally drop the mandate? Why did it cost $54 million to create, when it has since been shown that it could have been made for as low as $250,000. It was originally projected to cost only $80,000. Who exactly benefited or profited from paying out all of these millions of dollars? This is what all members need to know on behalf of their constituents all across the country.

While we are having this debate, we also cannot forget all the impacts this mandated app has had on Canadians. The government has tried to claim that this was somehow about vaccination, to turn the issue against those who did not receive COVID vaccines. The reality is that we saw how this mandate affected different people regardless of their medical status. ArriveCAN took it a step beyond the other problems involved with vaccine mandates for work and travel. It created yet another barrier for new groups of people in our society, which relates to the technology used.

If the Liberals want to defend this decision by making it all about vaccines, then they are at least revealing part of the unfortunate truth by saying so. They have essentially admitted that their intention was to punish the unvaccinated, which came with the suggestion to the wider public that doing so would stop transmission. This might have worked to scapegoat and divide people during and after a snap election, but the mandate did not do what they said it would do. Of course, it is true that the app was clearly part of a broader policy that undermined and violated Canadians' right to medical privacy. What was the result?

Although the Prime Minister might not understand this fact, regular people have many reasons to travel besides taking luxurious vacations. These mandates devastated careers and relationships for people. Some of them were unvaccinated, while others did not disclose that they were vaccinated for privacy reasons, because that was the issue at stake. The government chose to keep it in place while it became more apparent over time that its excuse for it was flawed.

Again, the ArriveCAN requirement took all this to a new level. It made the situation more complicated and nonsensical. Some people could show their papers, but their personal circumstances did not allow for them to use ArriveCAN. Some did not have the right technology. Some just simply were not able to use it or maybe did not have ready access to it for practical reasons. In a lot of cases, we are talking about seniors or minorities who found that their government had added an arbitrary barrier under the vaccine mandate.

These are our fellow Canadians who live in my riding and in every other riding, including those belonging to Liberal members, and I am sure they have heard similar stories from constituents as I have.

For example, I had someone reach out to me by phone from one of the many Hutterite colonies. They do not use technology, do not have access to computers and their options for other access are limited. However, this individual was vaccinated and crossed the border into the United States, but upon returning to Canada was forced to quarantine simply because he was not using the ArriveCAN app and did not have the means to even have the app in the first place. It did not make any sense to him, and I agreed with him.

There are also a number of seniors in a similar situation who were forced to quarantine, even though they could otherwise prove their vaccination status under the rules. This had consequences that were more than a mere inconvenience. People were confined to their homes.

In the case of the constituent I mentioned, the community's lifestyle is based on agriculture and food production. This would have disrupted his ability to contribute to the important type of work that needs to get done. In fact, this constituent was down in the States getting the parts he needed for his agricultural machinery, his agricultural implements, to be able to perform what the government at the time had deemed to be an essential service, but he was told that he had to go home for 14 days anyway.

Farmers know they cannot afford to lose up to two weeks of valuable time. Their work, as we all know, is isolated by nature. There is one person driving a machine. Ranchers are out checking their cattle and herds. There is zero risk to the communities around them. This is another example of how the Liberals have zero understanding of what life is like in rural Canada.

Then it somehow got worse. Not only was the app intrusive, but it also had glitches. If people complied and used ArriveCAN, they still were not safe. There were people who were able and willing to use the app but who were still wrongly identified for quarantine time anyway. At one time, the Canada Border Services Agency said that these incorrect notifications went out to over 10,000 people. This is a disaster that was as embarrassing as it was confusing. It went right along with the government's failure to provide Canadians with passports and with notoriously bad flight disruptions at our airports, but the Liberals dragged it on nonetheless despite the calls to end it from border communities, tourism groups, border guard unions and the public. By the time they dropped this restriction, the travel season was all but over.

My riding is along the border we share with the United States, and tourism is an important part of our local economy. It also happens to be a rural area, which adds its own limitations to the situation. From that perspective, I can assure everyone there was real damage done to these communities because of these misguided policies. What makes it worse is we knew from common sense that the extra burden and impracticality for tourism, agriculture and other local industries was not necessary.

There were all kinds of Canadians who paid a price for the Prime Minister and the Liberal government to save face or score political points. Fortunately, the Liberals could not ignore the mounting pressure any longer and dropped the requirements at the border, which was the right thing to do. There are still some challenges remaining for our citizens and border communities. One such example is that the hours of operation still have not returned to normal.

A constituent of mine had a two-hour trip to make to the U.S. and back to get his cattle to the vet. It turned into a 14-hour trip because he was not allowed to come back over the border. There are regulations in this country that limit how long animals can be in a trailer, and this simple decision put him at risk. He had to spend even more time on the road away from home, risking the health of his animals as he was travelling.

Canadians can once again fully exercise the spirit of their charter right to remain in, enter or leave Canada. We also no longer restrict international travellers from coming here, but the United States still has a vaccine mandate at their border for our citizens. That is their decision to make. Our government obviously cannot make it for them. However, does the Prime Minister care to advocate and stand up for the same Canadians he has demonized and marginalized over the past two years?

The Liberals have not acknowledged what they did wrong. There has not yet been an expression of regret or apology. One way for them to show some goodwill would be to support this motion. There are a lot of strong opinions on these issues both inside and outside of Parliament, but if we at least agree to this, we could start to focus on getting more of the facts involved with a divisive policy.

That is something the Auditor General could provide. We could get a better idea of what happened and learn to do better in the future. Canadians could see some unity and leadership across party lines in this place. Hopefully, this would set a good example and help to heal the divisions we have in this country.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Mr. Speaker, I heard the member talk about the requirements for being vaccinated, and I was thinking back to when I was speaking earlier and was quoting the former leader of the opposition, the member for Durham, when, back in November 2021, he said that the best way to protect our economy, the best way to protect our country, was to get vaccinated and he was calling on everybody to get vaccinated.

I am wondering if the member agrees with that. Was the best way to protect our economy and our country to encourage people to get vaccinated?

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, the vaccine obviously was a helpful tool during the pandemic, but it was not a means to mandate things and to drive a wedge in the country. That is what the government has done. We see programs like the ArriveCAN app that waste $54 million, which is just a drop in the bucket of some of the other scandals the government has had. The Liberals have managed to use these issues as a way to divide Canadians and to further line the pockets of their Liberal friends. That is a problem.

That is why we have this motion on the table today to get the Auditor General to look at the performance of the app. It is a simple motion. I hope the member will be supporting it.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the opening line of this motion says, “That, given that (i) the cost of government is driving up the cost of living,” and I just want to drill into that a bit.

I have done some research. In the OECD, which is made up of 38 countries, the average inflation rate is 10.2%. The inflation rate in Canada at the same time is 7.6%. Of the 38 countries, a very healthy majority are conservative governments, including the U.K. The U.K. has had a Conservative government for the last 12 years, and its inflation rate is 8.8%. Hungary's inflation rate is 13.7% and it has a very right-wing government. Poland's inflation rate is 15.8% and it has a right-wing government.

Where does the member get his data or rationale for the statement “the cost of government is driving up the cost of living,” when just about every right-wing government in the world has inflation exceeding what ours is in this country?

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, when we look at how much money the government has borrowed and how much money the government has printed to be able to buy up government debt, that is creating inflation. This is creating the issue of Canadians not being able to buy more goods, because the value of our dollar is worth less. This was a decision the Government of Canada in itself made on its own. This is one of many issues going on, but the more the government continues to borrow and spend above its means, the more Canadians are going to have to pay for that. Regardless of the program the government puts in place, Canadians are still going to be paying for it either directly or indirectly.

One of the worst silent or invisible taxes is inflation. We see the way it has gone. For example, back in May the average mortgage in Canada was $800 more in the span of only six months. I cannot even imagine what it is now.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about seniors. As the critic for seniors, I obviously paid very close attention to that part of his speech. Seniors' groups in my riding and elsewhere in Quebec have talked to me about the ArriveCAN app. They were, perhaps, disproportionately affected by it.

I would like my colleague to comment on how we can really help seniors. He also spoke about inflation and the carbon tax. That is not what seniors in my riding are asking for to deal with inflation. They are asking for an increase in the old age security pension, the way Canada has of helping them, for all seniors, including those between the ages of 65 and 74.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, seniors in different areas of the country have different issues that are impacting them. For example, in Saskatchewan, if there was no carbon tax, their pensions, OAS and GIS would go further. There are lots of other initiatives that would help seniors. As far as the motion goes, seniors were writing to my office throughout the pandemic. They were vaccinated and met all the requirements, but they were still forced to quarantine for 14 days. This meant they had issues getting their prescriptions and getting to medical appointments. I had one guy, for example, who needed surgery on his eye, but his driver, who was his wife and happened to be an American citizen and a permanent resident of Canada, lost her ability to drive him to that appointment. They did not know what to do. There was a big issue there.