House of Commons Hansard #128 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was housing.

Topics

International Human Rights ActPrivate Members' Business

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded division, Government Orders will be extended by 25 minutes.

Amendment to Bill C-228 at Committee StagePoints of OrderPrivate Members' Business

3:40 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Mr. Speaker, I am rising to follow up on the point of order that was raised earlier this week by the member for Winnipeg North in respect to Bill C-228.

The bill, presented by the member for Sarnia—Lambton, has to do with protection of pensions. The member forWinnipeg North highlighted that the finance committee had ruled a particular amendment having to do with the protection of severance and termination pay in the case of bankruptcy as being out of order.

I would like to call to the Speaker's attention, first of all, the fact that the committee did consider that question—

Amendment to Bill C-228 at Committee StagePoints of OrderPrivate Members' Business

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

I would ask the hon. member to hold on for a second.

I am going to ask the members in the House to maybe stop talking or at least whisper to each other. I know they have important messages to pass onto each other and they cannot wait.

I think it has now calmed down.

The hon. member for Elmwood—Transcona.

Amendment to Bill C-228 at Committee StagePoints of OrderPrivate Members' Business

3:40 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Mr. Speaker, going back to what I was saying earlier, the committee did consider that question.

I want to call to your attention that, after some deliberation, the committee decided to overturn the ruling of the chair. That was not done spontaneously or without planning and consideration. We had the bill's sponsor at committee. Not only did the bill's sponsor at committee say that she believed those amendments were appropriate in the context of her own bill, but in fact, at second reading she said in her remarks that she had anticipated these amendments because they were discussed prior to the bill's passage at second reading. They were part of the debate in this House at second reading.

The bill passed second reading with all members who were paying attention to that debate knowing full well that the sponsor of the bill intended to accept amendments to that effect.

I think that between the very clear position of the sponsor of the bill in respect to these amendments, the fact that it was made very clear before the second reading vote, and then the fact that the committee overturned the chair's ruling on it being ruled out of order, our considerations should weigh very heavily on your mind, Mr. Speaker, when you consider your ruling on the point of order raised by the member for Winnipeg North, which would have the effect of removing protection for severance and termination pay of Canadian workers in the event that their company experiences a bankruptcy.

Thank you very much for your consideration of that important point, Mr. Speaker.

Amendment to Bill C-228 at Committee StagePoints of OrderPrivate Members' Business

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

I will be coming back to the House on that as soon as possible.

The hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton.

Amendment to Bill C-228 at Committee StagePoints of OrderPrivate Members' Business

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON

Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, I want to uphold the comments of the member for Elmwood—Transcona. I do not see that the government of the day should be able to overrule the will of the committee.

I would ask you to consider that as you consider the matter.

Amendment to Bill C-228 at Committee StagePoints of OrderPrivate Members' Business

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

As I said, I will be coming back to the House on that very soon, because it is a timely matter.

Government Response to PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's responses to seven petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.

Interparliamentary DelegationsRoutine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian delegation to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Parliamentary Assembly respecting its participation at the 29th annual session in Birmingham, United Kingdom, from July 2 to 6, 2022.

Citizenship and ImmigrationCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 12th report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration entitled “Promoting Fairness in Canadian Immigration Decisions”.

I would like to thank all the members of the committee for their hard work to produce this substantive report on such an important issue, which led to an important series of recommendations for the government that could lead to real improvements to our immigration system.

I would like to thank our hard-working analysts, Julie Béchard, Madalina Chesoi, Andrea Garland, and especially Martin McCallum, who has now left us to pursue new appointments and opportunities in the public service.

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

Transport, Infrastructure and CommunitiesCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Peter Schiefke Liberal Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the seventh report of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities entitled “Improving efficiency and resiliency in Canada’s supply chains”.

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

The EnvironmentPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to stand in the House and present a petition on an issue of a high degree of concern from residents in Saanich—Gulf Islands. It relates to the destruction of old growth forests and the combined issue that old growth forests are on indigenous lands and protect biodiversity and play an important role in sequestering carbon.

The petitioners call on the government to work with provinces and first nations to halt logging in endangered old growth ecosystems; to fund long-term protection of such ecosystems; to support value-added forestry, as constituents are consistently concerned that raw logs are exported rather than being sent to local sawmills to create employment; to ban the exports of raw logs; and to stop the use of whole trees in wood pellet production, which is advertised as a solution to climate change even though such a proposal is fraud.

Agriculture and Agri-FoodPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

John Aldag Liberal Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour of presenting, on behalf of over 8,000 signatories, a petition related to some federal lands that are held in the riding of South Surrey—White Rock that are very important to the residents of Cloverdale—Langley City and Langley—Aldergrove.

There are 300 acres of land that are deemed to be surplus. They are very important from a food perspective within our region. These lands are really special. They produce some of our first potatoes, carrots and cabbage every year. Seventy per cent of British Columbia's kale production from May through August comes from these 300 acres. Also arising from these lands are 50 million vegetable servings delivered across western Canada.

The petition calls for the federal government to, among other things, cease in the disposal of these lands and look at retaining them permanently for agricultural purposes.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 836, 837 and 842 to 844.

Question No.836—Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB

With regard to the federal carbon tax or price on carbon: (a) what is the cumulative amount of carbon tax revenue which has been collected from agricultural producers in the (i) 2019-20, (ii) 2020-21, (iii) 2021-22, fiscal year; (b) what is the projected amount of carbon tax revenue which has been rebated to agricultural producers in the (i) 2019-20, (ii) 2020-21, (iii) 2021-22, fiscal year; (c) what is the cumulative amount of carbon tax revenue projected to be collected from agricultural producers in the (i) 2022-23, (ii) 2023-24, (iii) 2024-25, fiscal year; (d) what is the cumulative amount of carbon tax revenue projected to be rebated to agricultural producers in the (i) 2022-23, (ii) 2023-24, (iii) 2024-25, fiscal year; (e) what are the details of how the amount in (a) was calculated, including a breakdown of how much revenue came from gas, electricity, and other items impacted by the carbon tax; and (f) what is the breakdown of (a) through (d) by province where the federal carbon tax is in effect?

Question No.836—Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

University—Rosedale Ontario

Liberal

Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, the federal fuel charge is generally not paid directly by consumers of fuel. Rather, the federal fuel charge is generally paid to the Canada Revenue Agency through monthly returns filed by producers or distributors of fuel. These returns only account for aggregate amounts. Typically, once the fuel charge has been paid by a fuel producer or distributor, there is no further reporting of who finally directly bears the cost of the federal fuel charge.

The Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, or GGPPA, provides significant up-front relief for farmers from the fuel charge. Notably, the GGPPA provides farmers with relief from the fuel charge for gasoline and light fuel oil (e.g., diesel) used in tractors and other farm machinery. The relief is provided through the use of exemption certificates when certain conditions are met. As the fuel charge is ultimately not paid by the registered distributor upon delivery when an exemption certificate applies, there is no reported amount of this relief.

In addition, recognizing that many farmers use natural gas and propane in their operations, the Government of Canada recently implemented a refundable tax credit to return a portion of fuel charge proceeds directly to farming businesses operating in backstop fuel charge provinces, currently Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, starting in the 2021-22 fuel charge year. The credit aims to help farmers transition to lower-pollution ways of farming, while also maintaining the price signal to reduce emissions.

It is estimated that farmers will receive approximately $100 million in the first year with this amount increasing to approximately $122 million for the 2022-23 fuel charge year. Amounts returned for the 2023-24 fuel charge year and beyond are expected to increase further as the price on pollution continues to rise. Actual amounts returned will depend on the number of farmers claiming the credit and their eligible expenses. As this is the first year of implementation, further information on the actual amount returned through the return of fuel charge to farmers tax credit will not be known until the following fiscal year.

Question No.837—Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Melissa Lantsman Conservative Thornhill, ON

With regard to the decision by the government to only list one of the five branches of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), namely the Quds Force, as a terrorist entity: (a) why does the government refuse to list the entire IRGC as a terrorist entity; and (b) is there any specific criteria or threshold which the government does not consider to have been met which is preventing the entire IRGC from being listed as a terrorist entity, and, if so, what criteria or threshold has not been met?

Question No.837—Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Oakville North—Burlington Ontario

Liberal

Pam Damoff LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, the government has strong measures in place to ensure Iran and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or IRGC, are held accountable for their support of terrorism, including some of the toughest and most comprehensive sanctions in the world.

Within the last month an additional 42 individuals and 12 entities were announced to be sanctioned under the special economic measures Iran regulations, or SEMA, in addition to the 202 previously listed Iranian entities and individuals. These measures prohibit dealings related to the listed individuals and entities, some of whom have participated in or enabled gross human rights violations, including against Iranian women, and perpetuated disinformation activities to justify the Iranian regime’s repression and persecution of its citizens. The assets these individuals and entities may hold in Canada will be effectively frozen.

On October 7, 2022, the Prime Minister announced the intention to list the Iranian regime and its top leaders, more than 10,000 officers and senior members, as perpetually inadmissible to Canada for their engagement in terrorism and systemic and gross human rights violations, by pursuing a designation under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, or IRPA. This includes heads of state, high ranking officials of the IRGC, intelligence officials, senior public servants, diplomats and members of the judiciary.

In addition to these recent actions, Iran continues to be designated as a state supporter of terrorism under the State Immunity Act.

Moreover, the IRGC’s Quds Force continues to be listed as a terrorist entity under the Criminal Code. In addition to the Quds Force, the government lists a number of terrorist entities under this regime that have benefited from its patronage and that have helped advance Iran’s interests and foreign policy. These include Hezbollah, Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Taliban Al-Ashtar Brigades, Harakat al-Sabireen and the Fatemiyoun Division. The Criminal Code sets out a terrorist listing regime to help prevent the use of Canada’s financial system to further terrorist activity and to assist in the investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences.

The assessment process for listing a terrorist entity under the Criminal Code is one of continuous analysis to ensure that the process and tools used are rigorous and based on evidence, intelligence as well as domestic and international law.

The government pursues all the tools at its disposal and is working with like-minded countries to continue to keep pressure on Iran to cease its unlawful and terrorist behavior. The government is taking action to ensure that nobody who is responsible for Iran’s egregious actions can operate in Canada. Canadians can be confident in the work performed by our security agencies, which are alert to evolving threats and will not hesitate to take necessary action.

Question No.842—Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC

With regard to the government's response to extraterritorial police forces or similar types of foreign entities operating in Canada: (a) what countries is the government aware of that currently have police forces operating in Canada; (b) what is the government's estimate on the number of individuals currently in the country belonging to each force, broken down by country; and (c) has the government taken any specific action to stop Canadian citizens from being harassed, intimidated or otherwise negatively impacted by members of such forces?

Question No.842—Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Oakville North—Burlington Ontario

Liberal

Pam Damoff LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, Regarding the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and part (a) of the question, given its mandate and specific operational requirements, CSIS does not generally disclose details related to operational activity. With respect to part (b), given its mandate and specific operational requirements, CSIS does not generally disclose details related to operational activity. With regard to part (c), Canadians should never be subject to harassment or intimidation by foreign actors. As such, CSIS is committed to fulfilling its mandate to investigate threats to the security of Canada and the Canadian population. This includes any foreign influenced activity that is detrimental to the interests of Canada and are clandestine or deceptive, or involve a threat to any person. However, given its mandate and operational requirements, CSIS does not generally disclose details related to specific operational activity.

Regarding the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and part (a) of the question, in order for an international law enforcement agency to operate in Canada they must notify the INTERPOL national central bureau in Ottawa and seek approval under the foreign criminal investigators in Canada, or FCIC, protocol. This protocol sets out Canada’s notification and approval requirements for regulating the entry and monitoring of foreign criminal investigators pursuing foreign criminal investigations in Canada.

The FCIC protocol is aimed at safeguarding Canadian security, sovereignty and public interest, while ensuring adherence by foreign law enforcement and prosecution agencies to applicable Canadian policy and legislation, including the Criminal Code of Canada, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the Privacy Act. As of October 17, 2022, there are currently no international law enforcement agencies operating in Canada under the FCIC protocol.

That said, the RCMP is aware of and is investigating allegations of unauthorized police presence in Canada. Since the investigation is ongoing, there will be no further comment on the matter at this time.

With regard to part (b), as noted in the answer for part (a), there are currently no international law enforcement agencies operating in Canada under the FCIC protocol. The RCMP is aware of and is investigating allegations of unauthorized police presence in Canada. Given the investigation is ongoing, there will be no further comment on the matter at this time.

With regard to part (c), as part of the RCMP’s international policing liaison officer program, the RCMP organizes regular briefings with foreign partners hosted in country to ensure they remain continuously abreast on Canadian laws and legal requirements.

In terms of actions taken, the RCMP works closely with domestic and international partners to counter any hostile activities by foreign states.

Foreign interference, or FI, entails foreign states, targeting Canada’s democratic institutions, economic systems and diaspora communities to advance their political, economic and security interests to the detriment of Canada’s.

The RCMP is mandated by legislation, under section 2 of the Security Offences Act and ministerial direction, to investigate threats to the security of Canada defined in section 2 of the CSIS Act, breaches of security defined in the Security of Offences Act, or SOA, and Security of Information Act, or SOIA, or any other criminal offence or any other federal statute or Criminal Code offence that may have a national security dimension. Further to this, the RCMP acts against FI threats that are criminal or illegal in nature, including acts involving the harassment, intimidation or coercion of individuals or groups within Canada.

The RCMP has several teams, units and efforts in place that contribute to disrupting FI. The RCMP also engages with the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police to help inform police of jurisdiction of FI threats and to establish mechanisms for reporting FI incidents. Federal policing participates in several interdepartmental efforts to combat FI, including the security and intelligence threats to elections, or SITE, task force, an initiative consisting of the RCMP, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, Communications Security Establishment and Global Affairs Canada, or GAC. FP also participates in the GAC-led rapid response mechanism, a G7 initiative established in 2018 that seeks to strengthen coordination across the G7 in identifying, preventing and responding to threats to G7 democracies.

It is important for all individuals and groups living in Canada, regardless of their nationality, to know that there are support mechanisms in place to assist them when experiencing harassment and intimidation. Anyone who feels threatened online or in person, should report these incidents to their local police. If someone in the public is in immediate danger, they should call 911 or contact their local police. Individuals may also contact the RCMP national security information network by phone at 1-800-420-5805 or by email at RCMP.NSIN-RISN.GRC@rcmp-grc.gc.ca. Service is available in Canada’s both official languages.

Question No.843—Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS

With regard to employees at Health Canada, as of September 29, 2022: (a) what is the total number of employees at the director general level or higher; (b) of the employees in (a), how many (i) are a doctor of medicine (MD), (ii) have a doctorate in a medical field, but are not MDs, (iii) have a doctorate in another field, broken down by field; and (c) what are the details of each employee at the director general level or higher that has such a background, including, for each, their (i) title, (ii) relevant degrees?

Question No.843—Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Milton Ontario

Liberal

Adam van Koeverden LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and to the Minister of Sport

Mr. Speaker, with respect to part (a) of the question, the answer is 79. With respect to part (b)(i), the answer is zero employees. Please note that in addition to the 79 executives in part (a), there are six medical doctors at the MD MOF-04 and -05 levels who serve either as senior medical advisers to DG levels or higher; or hold executive positions below the DG level. With respect to part (b)(ii), it is one employee, and for part (b)(iii), it is five employees. With respect to part (c), of the 79 DGs or higher, and the six MD MOF-04s and -05s the breakdown is as follows: six MD-MOFs, one doctorate in a medical field, and five doctorates in other fields. Please note that education is personal information so further details on positions and types of degrees cannot be disclosed.

Question No.844—Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

With regard to purchases of COVID-19 vaccine doses by the government: has the government purchased any doses before the doses being approved by Health Canada, and, if so, what are the details of all such purchases, including the (i) manufacturer, (ii) name of the vaccine, (iii) date of purchase, (iv) number of doses purchased, (v) date of the approval by Health Canada?

Question No.844—Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Milton Ontario

Liberal

Adam van Koeverden LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and to the Minister of Sport

Mr. Speaker, Canada built its vaccine portfolio through advance purchase agreements, or APAs, securing future access to COVID-19 vaccines in development at a time when it was not yet known which vaccine candidates would receive Health Canada authorization, and if so, when. This was done in order to ensure that Canada was at the forefront of receiving life-saving vaccines at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, while providing suppliers the opportunity to accelerate product development and production capacity, and to engage in the regulatory process. Vaccine candidates were selected with guidance from the COVID-19 vaccine task force, experts who helped identify a diverse portfolio of different vaccine types that were most likely to be effective and delivered the fastest.

The first two agreements, with Moderna and Pfizer, were announced in August 2020, followed by similar agreements with Janssen for Johnson & Johnson, Novavax, Sanofi and GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca/Verity Pharmaceuticals and Serum Institute of India, and Medicago. The agreements included firm commitments to purchase doses as well as access to optional doses should they be required.

Companies began submitting data to Health Canada for regulatory review as early as September 2020. The ability to review data from early development while later-stage clinical trials are under way expedites the regulatory review process.

Before filing a submission for a continuing review, sponsors of clinical trials are expected to have gathered a certain level of evidence on the safety, quality and efficacy of their vaccine. Vaccine applications are reviewed through an independent process and products are authorized based on scientific rigour and medical evidence. Products are not made available for use in the Canadian market until they have received regulatory approval.

Vaccine agreements with suppliers are as follows. For AstraZeneca Vaxzevria COVID-19 vaccine, the manufacturer is AstraZeneca Canada Inc. The date the initial agreement was publicly announced was May 17, 2020. The number of doses purchased was 20 million, and the date of initial approval by Health Canada was February 26, 2021.

For Covishield, the manufacturer is Verity Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc./Serum Institute of India, in collaboration with AstraZeneca Canada Inc. The date the initial agreement was publicly announced was February 26, 2021. The number of doses purchased was two million, and the date of initial approval by Health Canada was February 26, 2021. The authorization expired September 16, 2021.

For Moderna Spikevax COVID-19 vaccine, the manufacturer is Moderna. The date the initial agreement was publicly announced was November 16, 2020. The number of doses purchased was 44 million. The initial agreement, after some options exercised, amendment for 2022-24 was up to 25 million in 2022, up to 35 million in 2023 and up to 35 million in 2024. The date of initial approval by Health Canada was December 23, 2020.

For Pfizer-BioNTech Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine, the manufacturer was BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH. The date the initial agreement was publicly announced was July 20, 2020. The number of doses purchased was 51 million. The initial agreement, after some options exercised, amendment for 2022-24 was up to 65 million for 2022, up to 60 million in 2023 and up to 60 million in 2024. The date of initial approval by Health Canada was December 09, 2020.

For Janssen Jcovden COVID-19 vaccine, the manufacturer was Janssen Inc., or Johnson & Johnson. The date the initial agreement was publicly announced was August 14, 2020. The number of doses purchased was up to 38 million, and the date of initial approval by Health Canada was March 5, 2021.

For Medicago Covifenz COVID-19 vaccine, the manufacturer was Medicago Inc. The date the initial agreement was publicly announced was October 23, 2020. The number of doses purchased was up to 76 million, and the date of initial approval by Health Canada was February 24, 2022.

For Novavax Nuvaxovid COVID-19 vaccine, the manufacturer was Novavax Inc. The date the initial agreement was publicly announced: August 14, 2020. The number of doses purchased was up to 76 million, and the date of initial approval by Health Canada was February 17, 2022.

For the Sanofi vaccine, the manufacturer was Sanofi. The date initial agreement was publicly announced was July 29, 2020. The number of doses purchased was up to 72 million, and it is still under review by Health Canada.

Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Further to that, Mr. Speaker, if a revised response to Question No. 597, originally tabled on September 20, 2022 and the government's responses to Questions Nos. 834, 835 and 838 to 841 could be made orders for returns, these returns would be tabled immediately.