House of Commons Hansard #33 of the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was police.
Marco Mendicino LiberalMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, with all due respect for my colleague, there is no justification for these illegal blockades.
The debates in the House on the pandemic are very important, but the way these blockades are being held in Ottawa or at the border is unacceptable. That is why we invoked the Emergencies Act: to help police end these blockades.
Karen Vecchio Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
Mr. Speaker, the lack of action from the government has resulted in the reaction to end the protests and blockades by invoking the Emergencies Act. It is the most reactive step taken to date.
Canadians are looking for hope and for a plan. The government decided to vote against having a plan. What proactive steps did the Prime Minister actually take prior to putting in these restrictions?
Mark Holland LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, of course we have been clear about being there every step of the way to support law enforcement as this situation has continued.
It is important to reflect on the steps the Conservative Party has taken during this process, starting with the interim leader, who said, “I don’t think we should be asking [these people] to go home”, inferring that the Conservatives should take this as a political opportunity. There is the member for Carleton, who is a leadership aspirant, saying that he stands with the illegal activity occurring outside and that we should “Keep the momentum going.” Of course, this continues with the members for Yorkton—Melville, Saskatoon—Grasswood and Cypress Hills—Grasslands.
Again and again and again, they encourage the—
Public SafetyOral Questions
Karen Vecchio Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
Mr. Speaker, perhaps the House leader did not understand. What I am looking for is an answer to the question about the plans and what this Prime Minister has actually done.
Step one, he stigmatized, traumatized and divided Canadians, just as the House leader is doing today.
Step two, he hid in a cottage. He did not react. When things were going on, we did not hear from the Prime Minister.
Step three, he whipped his caucus, where every single member, with the exception of one, voted against a plan.
This leadership has failed. It has failed. What actions did the Prime Minister actually take prior to putting in these restrictions?
Mark Holland LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, every one of us walks through what is going on outside every day. We see the residents of Ottawa being terrorized by this illegal occupation that is occurring.
Will the members opposite stand today, every single one of them, and clearly say that it is time to go home? Will they stand, every single one of them, and stop tweeting, stop encouraging and stop saying things like “Keep the momentum going”? Instead, will they ask those folks outside to go home, to make sure that this illegal activity is not something that their party, a party that is supposed to stand for law and order, stands with?
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, the National Assembly is unanimous: Quebec does not want the Emergencies Act.
Even though the Prime Minister said that his order would be geographically targeted, we see that it covers all of Canada. It applies not only to Quebec, but also to Quebec infrastructure such as hospitals, dams and vaccination centres.
There is no crisis in Quebec, as evidenced by the fact that the SQ is helping in Ontario. On what basis does the Prime Minister believe it is necessary to suspend fundamental freedoms in Quebec just because he has lost control of the siege in Ottawa?
Marco Mendicino LiberalMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, that is not how the act works.
The Emergencies Act was introduced with all the protections in the charter. All the powers, all the authorities and all the measures included in the declaration will apply in a manner that is consistent with the charter.
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, the situation at the Ambassador Bridge was resolved, as were the situations in Coutts and in Manitoba. The situation in Quebec was always under control.
The only place where this situation is still ongoing is Ottawa, the Prime Minister's own back yard. The national crisis is over. There is no reason to use the Emergencies Act or limit fundamental rights across Canada.
The Prime Minister's opponents are calling him a dictator, which is clearly not true, but does he realize that he is validating their claim? That is irresponsible.
Pablo Rodriguez LiberalMinister of Canadian Heritage
Mr. Speaker, facts are facts.
The Bloc Québécois cannot just make things up or invent facts. The act does not take away any of the provinces' powers. We will not use the act to suspend the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
We are talking about concrete measures to help Quebec, if Quebec needs them. If it does not need them, then nothing will happen, and the Bloc knows that. The Bloc should at least be honest about it and stop making things up.
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, Quebec does not need it and does not want it.
Why is the Emergencies Act being used? According to the act, it is for “the protection of the values of the body politic and the preservation of the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of the state”, but none of that is under threat. According to the act, there must be a national emergency. This is not the case.
The act provides the authority “to take special temporary measures that may not be appropriate in normal times”. Canada’s territorial integrity is not under threat. There is no national emergency. Why, then, use the Emergencies Act?
Marco Mendicino LiberalMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, the circumstances require it.
We have been very clear that we will not use these measures where they are not necessary. I would not want to deprive Quebeckers of these important tools to ensure their security and the integrity of their territory.
There is talk of possible demonstrations and blockades at the Lacolle border crossing this weekend. All the measures in the declaration are temporary, targeted, and exercised in accordance with the charter.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Speaker, earlier this week I asked the finance minister what she was doing to control the skyrocketing cost of living. All she did was shift blame. She avoided the question. Yesterday, we received the news we were all dreading. Statistics Canada says that the consumer price index rose 5.1% in January. It is the worst it has been in over 30 years.
Paycheques no longer go as far as they used to, and Canadians are getting left far behind. I will ask again. What specifically is the minister doing to get inflation under control?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, unlike the Conservatives, Canadians understand that inflation is a global phenomenon, and here are some numbers to back that up. The latest inflation number in Canada was 5.1%. In the U.S. it was 7.5%, and in the U.K. it was 5.5%. Our inflation is lower than the G7 average, which is 5.5%, the G20 average, which is 6.1%, and the OECD average of 6.5%.
Canadians understand. It is time for the Conservatives to understand as well.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Speaker, for months now, the Liberal minister has been claiming that inflation is “transitory”. There is nothing to see here, folks. This week, Statistics Canada proved the minister wrong. Inflation is up again to 5.1%, the highest it has been in over 30 years. Prices are up 8% for fish, 12% for beef and 19% for bacon.
How does the minister expect Canadians to put food on the table? When is the government going to realize that it has lost complete control over inflation?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I think it was actually the chairman of the federal reserve who used the term “transitory” to characterize inflation. Let me just point out, yet again, that the Conservatives continue to push a false narrative, frankly, about everything that is happening in Canada, and very much including the economy. The fact is that the Canadian recovery is strong. Our GDP grew by 5.4% in the third quarter. That beat the U.S., Japan, the U.K. and Australia.
I also want to point out that S&P and Moody's both reaffirmed our AAA credit rating this fall.
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Mr. Speaker, three weeks ago, we were talking about inflation, and the Minister of Finance told me that there was no problem because it was a global problem and that the IMF said that Canada was fine and that the GDP was going up. How convincing.
What are we seeing now? Inflation continues to rise and is at 5.1%. Beef is up 12%; gas is up 30%; housing is up 6%. Those are things Canadians know for sure. Another thing we know is that the government is doing absolutely nothing.
Can the Minister of Finance leave the IMF out of it and talk about what Canadians are actually going through?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, we do not need lectures from Conservatives about helping the most vulnerable Canadians deal with the cost of living.
We introduced the Canada child benefit, which is indexed to inflation and has lifted almost 300,000 children out of poverty.
Our government increased the guaranteed income supplement, which is also indexed to inflation and has helped over 900,000 seniors.
That is what we have done.
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Mr. Speaker, Canada is one of the biggest funders of oil and gas in the G20. A new study showed that last year alone, the government, through Export Development Canada, handed out $4.4 billion, earning Canada the worst possible climate score. That is despite repeated Liberal promises to phase out fossil fuel subsidies.
We are in a climate emergency and EDC is fuelling the crisis. Why will the government not make EDC clean up its act, stop giving billions to big oil and gas and start standing up for Canadians?
Steven Guilbeault LiberalMinister of Environment and Climate Change
Mr. Speaker, in fact, G20 countries have committed to eliminating fossil fuel subsidies by 2025. We in Canada have committed to doing that by 2023, which is two years earlier than our G20 colleagues. On top of that, EDC has reduced its fossil fuel subsidies by more than $3 billion per year since 2018.
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, I made an accusation against the environment minister that his government had held 370 backroom meetings with big oil in just two years. I withdraw those comments, because it turns out that it actually rolled out the red carpet for 1,224 meetings with big oil. That, my friends, is the definition of carbon captured, so it is no wonder that under the Prime Minister Canada has fallen to the bottom of the G7, in terms of climate action.
When is the environment minister going to stop acting as the head butler for the oil lobby and start standing up for Canadians?
Steven Guilbeault LiberalMinister of Environment and Climate Change
Mr. Speaker, one of the highest carbon prices in the world is here in Canada. There are regulations on methane pollution, and a 40% reduction by 2025. There is a cap on oil and gas emissions. These are all things our government has done to fight climate change and ensure we create good jobs and a prosperous future for all Canadians.
Michael McLeod Liberal Northwest Territories, NT
Mr. Speaker, this Tuesday, 54 potential unmarked graves were found at Keeseekoose First Nation. Three weeks ago, Williams Lake First Nation announced that a survey had identified 93 potential unmarked graves on the site of the former St. Joseph's Mission residential school. Nearly a year ago, Canada was rocked by the discovery of 200 probable unmarked graves on the grounds of the former Kamloops Indian Residential School. Despite all of this evidence, some still deny the actual legacy of residential schools and claim the number of unmarked graves is exaggerated. I find this very troubling and unacceptable.
Could the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations comment on what our government is doing to support the survivors of these residential schools?
Indigenous AffairsOral Questions
The Speaker Anthony Rota
Points of orders are not allowed, except on technical matters.
I would like to remind members that interpretation services are provided in the House.
There is accommodation that takes place in the chamber. Sometimes, technically, it does not always work. We had everything tested and it worked out fairly well. I believe the translation took place.
If you cannot hear the interpretation, please let me know. Has the interpretation stopped?