Debates of April 25th, 2022

Ethics

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

Mr. Speaker, what Canadians understand is that this government is out of touch. It blames others instead of taking responsibility for doing what is right to help Canadians. That is the reality.

An article in the Globe and Mail reports that the RCMP considered charging the Liberal Prime Minister with fraud over the infamous free trip that he and his family had accepted.

My question is simple. Does the Prime Minister accept the fact that there are two justice systems in this country: one that applies to everyone and one that does not apply to the Prime Minister?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the Conservative Party is playing politics.

It is important to understand that this matter was resolved years ago, in December 2017, when the Ethics Commissioner released her report. The Conservative Party is well aware that the Prime Minister responded appropriately to these questions.

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

Mr. Speaker, in this case, what the reports of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner showed was the Prime Minister's lack of judgment on more than one occasion.

The RCMP considered laying fraud charges, but laws prevented it from doing so. The only person who can authorize the Prime Minister to receive a gift is the Prime Minister himself.

The Prime Minister cannot be above the law though. How many times did the Prime Minister meet with RCMP officers, and when did the most recent meeting take place?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is well aware that this matter was resolved five years ago. The Ethics Commissioner produced a report, and the Prime Minister's response to the matter was very clear.

The global situation right now is very serious. Many important things are happening here in Canada and around the world, and I think it would be a good idea to ask questions about those things.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the RCMP here, not the Ethics Commissioner. Newly released documents from the RCMP reveal there may be reasonable grounds to believe that the Prime Minister committed the offence of fraud on the government, contrary to section 121(1)(c) of the Criminal Code. This was after the Prime Minister was found guilty of accepting luxurious Bahamian vacations worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Mounties did not proceed with charging the Prime Minister because the Prime Minister may have granted himself a get out of jail free card.

Did the Prime Minister give himself the power to break the law?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, five years ago, a report was done by the Ethics Commissioner. That report made all of the matters clear. The Prime Minister responded appropriately.

Again, I will say I understand the party opposite wants to drag in partisan politics and play games, but I would say there are a lot of pressing issues facing this country. We just had a budget tabled that takes critical action on housing, indigenous reconciliation and the environment, and I would think those are important things to be asking about.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I know we have been away for a couple of weeks and we want to talk to each other, but let us try to keep it down and respect the questions and the answers here at the same time.

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

Where is Justin? Come out with your hands up.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I am going to put people on notice at this point. Let us keep it down so we can get the great questions and great answers.

The hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would love to hear from the Prime Minister on this. His silence is deafening.

The Prime Minister was found guilty under four sections of the Conflict of Interest Act. The only reason the RCMP did not charge him was that he is the Prime Minister, so there is one law for the Prime Minister and another law for all the rest of us. The RCMP said the Prime Minister was off the hook because he could have granted himself permission to accept the luxurious vacation gift worth $215,000. On what exact date did the Prime Minister act with impunity and grant himself the power to break the law? What is the date—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Are we ready for the answer?

The hon. government House leader.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, at a time when we are seeing in Canada incredible economic progress, in fact 110% beyond where we were at prepandemic levels; when we see our GDP exceeding where we were at prepandemic levels; and when we see the challenges that are faced by Canadians here in Canada and around the world, I would expect that in question period we would—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Order. We are on question number five. Do we want to continue? I would really like to get on with the next few questions.

I am sure the Bloc Québécois will also want to ask some questions in a few minutes.

The hon. government House leader may finish his answer.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I say, there are pressing and important matters that face this country and the world. If the members opposite wish to play partisan politics and relitigate something from five years ago, when the Prime Minister has acted appropriately and there was an Ethics Commissioner report, that is a choice they can make, but I would suggest that there are things more worthy of the time in this House.

Official Languages

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been chastised by the courts for appointing a unilingual anglophone lieutenant governor in New Brunswick. Not only is that unconstitutional, but it also shows a serious lack of judgment. There is only one bilingual province in Canada, and the PM finds a way to appoint a unilingual anglophone.

We are reminded that he also appointed a governor general who did not speak French in an officially bilingual Canada.

When will the Prime Minister stop treating proficiency in French as a second-rate skill and francophones as second-class citizens?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Minister of Official Languages and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his question.

Protecting and promoting French is a top priority for this government. It is important that our leaders set an example, which is why Ms. Murphy is taking French classes. She recognizes the importance of being able to communicate and converse with New Brunswickers.

Once again, with our bill to modernize the Official Languages Act, we will do our part to ensure that this work continues.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is quite funny. That is the pot calling the kettle black.

Last week, the Prime Minister was up in arms about CN appointing a unilingual anglophone board of directors.

He said he was flabbergasted and frustrated, but he himself personally appointed a unilingual anglophone lieutenant governor in New Brunswick and a Governor General of Canada who does not speak French.

How can the Prime Minister of Canada be surprised that CN is thumbing its nose at French when he personally is sending the message that French is not important?

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, we must protect our official languages. This situation is unacceptable.

CN Rail is well aware that we find the situation unacceptable and has assured us that the matter will be resolved in the coming months, during the next round of board appointments.

We are working on strengthening the Official Languages Act.

We expect CN's leaders, including its board of directors, to lead by example.

Seniors

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the government admitted its mistake with the GIS clawback and paid seniors back, but the one-time payment had a date restriction. Now, hundreds of seniors across this country are left out in the cold.

I wrote to the minister last week about this urgent concern. The Liberals must fix this. It is leaving seniors poor in our country. When will the current government stand up for seniors and start treating them all with dignity and respect?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Minister of Seniors]

Mr. Speaker, we know just how challenging this pandemic has been for seniors. That is why, from the very beginning, we have been there to support them. On April 19, we delivered a one-time payment for those affected seniors.

We also passed Bill C-12, which ensures that seniors, particularly working and low-income seniors, are never again impacted by any pandemic benefits they take.

We will continue to ensure that we support and deliver for seniors every step of the way.

Pharmacare

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we just learned the Liberals are backing down on drug price reforms that would make life-saving medications more affordable and save us billions. This means Canadians will keep paying excessive costs for prescription drugs, which are among the highest in the world. Meanwhile, the Liberals choose to protect the profits of large pharmaceutical companies.

The Liberals say no one should go without the medicine they need, but this policy choice makes that happen. Will the government get moving on public universal pharmacare so every Canadian can get the medicine they need and deserve?

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and to the Minister of Sport]

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to improving access to quality medicines for all Canadians. Canada has among some of the highest patent medicine prices in the world, and these prices have negatively affected the ability of patients to access new medicines.

On April 14, we announced new amendments to the patented medicines regulations that will give the PMPRB new tools to improve access to quality medicines while generating significant savings over the coming years for Canadians. These changes will also ensure the sustainability of our health care while supporting innovation and investment in the pharmaceutical sector.

Public Safety

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Emergencies Act is one of the most powerful laws in the land, with an extremely high threshold needed to invoke it. That is a good thing, otherwise charter rights could be easily abused by governments.

That threshold is whether there is a national threat to public safety so serious that it cannot be addressed by any other law, yet we well know that there are many existing laws that can address illegal blockades of critical infrastructure, obviously. Maybe that is why the Liberals are hiding behind cabinet confidence and refusing to release documents justifying their decision to use these powers. It is because they know the threshold has not been met.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, when this country was faced with very real threats to critical infrastructure, our vital supply lines and the incredible disruption that was taking place right out here in the streets of Ottawa, our government did what was necessary and required to deal with that situation through the invocation of the act.

I want to advise this House that today the government is fulfilling its statutory requirements in appointing Justice Paul Rouleau as the commissioner of the public inquiry into the circumstances of using this act. We will do what is required, and we will do it in the right way.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, that inquiry will be useless unless the Liberals waive cabinet confidence and allow Canadians to know the whole story. Really, the stakes could not be higher for Canadians, given that their charter rights are at risk with this unprecedented invocation of the Emergencies Act.

To be clear for Canadians at home, the emergency powers allow the government to freeze their bank accounts, seize their assets and suspend their charter rights, all without due process. That is why there is an extraordinarily high threshold needed to invoke it.

The Minister of Public Safety said today that he will be up front and transparent with Canadians. If that is the case, why would the Liberals not waive cabinet confidence? Are they hiding something?