Debates of May 17th, 2022

Human Rights

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, the first petition I am presenting is with respect to the ongoing genocide of Uighurs and other Turkic Muslims in China. Petitioners note various violations of human rights, including forced sterilization, systematic sexual violence, forced abortion, arbitrary detention, separation of children from families, invasive surveillance, destruction of cultural sites and many others. Petitioners are calling on the government to finally recognize that Uighurs and other Turkic Muslims in China have been and are being subject to genocide, to use the Magnitsky act to sanction those responsible for these heinous crimes and to actually defend the rights of Uighurs.

The second petition highlights the situation of a particular Uighur Canadian activist, Mr. Huseyin Celil, who was effectively abducted from Uzbekistan and has been imprisoned in China ever since, for over a decade and a half. Petitioners note they are very pleased by the release of the two Michaels, and they want to see the government advocate for Mr. Celil with the same level of prioritization that was given the case of the two Michaels.

The asks are for the government to demand the release of Mr. Celil and the recognition of his citizenship, to state that this is a priority of equivalent significance as was seeking the release of the two Michaels, to appoint a special envoy to work on securing Mr. Celil's release and to seek the Biden administration's support and assistance in this advocacy, as was done in other cases, as mentioned.

Ethiopia

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, the third petition highlights ongoing concerns about violence and conflict in the humanitarian crisis in the Tigray region of Ethiopia. Petitioners would like to see more government engagement and action in support of the people of Ethiopia in the context of the conflict and violence that have taken place.

Human Organ Trafficking

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I am also pleased to present a petition in support of Bill S-223, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for people to go abroad and receive an organ taken without consent. The bill that this petition is dealing with will be up for a vote in the House tomorrow.

Charitable Organizations

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, the final petition I am presenting, similar to those presented by a number of colleagues, raises concerns about the desire of the Liberal government to weaponize charitable status determination and use it to target the Liberals' political opponents. Petitioners note that determinations about charitable status should be made on a politically and ideologically neutral basis. They should be made impartially, without preference for groups that have one particular political persuasion over another, yet the Liberal platform committed to politicize and weaponize charitable status determination, so this is a great concern for charities that might be directly affected and for the entire charitable sector, which wants to see more support from the government, not these kinds of divisive approaches—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader is rising on a point of order.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, this is not a reflection on the number of petitions the member is introducing but rather on the current petition that he is presenting, which is more of a political statement coming from the Conservative Party. I do believe that the member has the right, obviously, to read into the record some thoughts in a concise way on what the petitioners want, which is one thing, but to be taking a political, partisan position that the Conservative Party has is another.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The Speaker is not aware of exactly what is in the petition; however, I do want to remind members that they are to summarize the petition exactly as to what the petition has said. If hon. members are actually adding their position or their political views, then that is different. I would suggest that hon. members take that into consideration.

I will allow the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan to finish.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the point, and I think I was being faithful to the rules in that respect. I appreciate the interest of the parliamentary secretary on this important issue, or an issue that the petitioners think is important, I should say.

The petitioners ask to “[p]rotect and preserve the application of charitable status rules on a politically and ideologically neutral basis, without discrimination on the basis of political or religious values and without the imposition of another 'values test'” and to “[a]ffirm the right of Canadians to freedom of expression.”

I commend all of these petitions to the consideration of the government and all hon. members.

Questions on the Order Paper

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

Madam Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 448, 451, 452 and 454.

Question No.448—

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

With regard to companies that went bankrupt after receiving the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS): (a) how many companies that received CEWS have since gone bankrupt; (b) what is the total amount of CEWS funding received by the companies in (a); (c) how many of the companies in (a) owed back taxes to the Canada Revenue Agency when they were sent the CEWS payments; (d) what was the total amount of back taxes owed by such companies; (e) what are the names of the companies that owed back taxes; and (f) how much did each company in (e) owe when they were sent CEWS funding?

[Diane Lebouthillier, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the above-noted question, what follows is the response from the CRA for the period April 26, 2020 to March 29, 2022, the date of the question.

In response to part (a), the term “employer” in this context includes, but is not limited to, the following per the CEWS eligibility criteria: corporations, partnerships, proprietorships, charities, non-profit organizations, etc.

Based on the information available to the CRA, of the 446,871 employers who received payments under the Canada emergency wage subsidy, CEWS, 750 employers, or 0.16%, have subsequently filed for bankruptcy proceedings.

In response to part (b), based on the information available to the CRA, of the $100.65 billion in subsidies approved under the Canada emergency wage subsidy, CEWS, the total amount of CEWS payments received by the employers identified in part (a) is $145,928,476, or 0.14%.

In response to part (c), eligible employers’ entitlement to this wage subsidy is based on a decline in their revenues and the salary or wages actually paid to employees. For the above-noted 750 employers in part (a), 352 owed back taxes to the CRA when they were sent the CEWS payments. The Canada emergency wage subsidy was a key measure to ensure that workers were able to count on a source of income through the COVID-19 pandemic.

In response to part (d), the total amount of back taxes owed by the employers identified in part (c) was $25,926,888.04.

In response to parts (e) and (f), as the protection of the taxpayer information is of utmost importance, the confidentiality provisions of the acts administered by the CRA prevent the disclosure of taxpayer information related to specific cases.

Question No.451—

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

With regard to the backlog of disability benefit claims at Veterans Affairs Canada: (a) what is the number of first applications where veterans are also waiting for a positive decision that will allow them access to delivery of health care treatment, as of March 29, 2022; and (b) where did the 16-week service standard related to the process for receiving disability benefits come from?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, in response to part (a), as of March 31, 2022, the total number of pending disability benefit applications, i.e., first applications, reassessments and departmental reviews, was 30,825. Of this total, 11,619 were beyond the 16-week service standard.

Of the overall total, 23,181 were first applications pending for disability benefits, of which 10,956 were beyond the 16-week service standard.

In response to part (b), on September 15, 1995, Veterans Affairs Canada assumed the administration of disability pensions from the Canadian Pension Commission. The inherited turnaround time from the commission was 36 months.

Within approximately one year of assuming responsibility, Veterans Affairs Canada was able to reduce the service standard to 24 months based on improved performance.

Over time, the service standard decreased to reflect operational improvements: first to 18 months, then 12 months, then nine months, and eventually to six months or 24 weeks.

On April 1, 2011, Veterans Affairs Canada reduced the service standard from 24 to 16 weeks. The rationale was that veterans’ applications were better prepared than in the past and the process had been streamlined as part of transformation upgrades. At this time, Veterans Affairs Canada began calculating the service standard from the date the applicant provided all of the required information, i.e., a complete application.

In 2014-15, Veterans Affairs Canada further reduced the service standard to 12 weeks. This was done prior to the increase in applications from those who served in peacekeeping missions and Afghanistan. The performance against the 12-week service standard was 64%.

As the department was unable to achieve the 12-week service standard and was seeing a continued rise in applications, it reinstated the 16-week service standard in 2015-16.

The 16-week service standard applies to first applications and reassessments, while departmental reviews have a service standard of 12 weeks.

Question No.452—

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

With regard to the backlog of applications at Veterans Affairs Canada: what are the average and median wait times of (i) first applications, (ii) second applications, (iii) "red-zoned" applications?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the following are the requested wait times for applications completed from April 1, 2021, to December 31, 2021. The wait times are measured in weeks from the service standard of 16 weeks start date to the decision date.

The average and median wait times for disability benefit applications are as follows. For first applications, the average was 41.9 weeks and the median was 26.1 weeks. For reassessments, the average was 9.9 weeks and the median was 5.7 weeks. For departmental reviews, the average was 26.2 weeks and the median was 15.6 weeks. For red zone applications, the average was 9.3 weeks and the median was two weeks. The disability benefits program does not have second applications, so the wait times for reassessments and departmental reviews have been provided.

Question No.454—

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

With regard to historical data sets available or previously available from Statistics Canada: what are the details of all data sets which have been dismantled, removed or have become unavailable for Canadians to access since January 1, 2016, including, for each, (i) the date the data set was dismantled, removed or became unavailable, (ii) what happened to the data set, (iii) the summary of the contents, including the topics contained in the data, (iv) the reason the data set was removed, (v) who authorized changing the availability of the data set, (vi) whether or not there still is a way for the public to access the data, and, if so, how?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, no dataset was removed since January 1, 2016. All data remain available on the Statistics Canada website. If a data table is dismantled, the data will be included in another publicly available dataset.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

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

Madam Speaker, if the government's response to Questions Nos. 447, 449, 450, 453 and 455 could be made orders for returns, these returns would be tabled immediately.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Is it the pleasure of the House that the foregoing questions be made orders for returns and that they be tabled immediately?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question no 447 —

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

En ce qui concerne les avions de chasse F-18 d'occasion que le gouvernement canadien a achetés à l’Australie: a) quels ont été les coûts totaux associés à l’entretien des aéronefs depuis leur acquisition, ventilés par (i) année, (ii) type de dépense; b) quels sont les coûts prévus de l’entretien de ces avions de chasse, ventilés par année, de l’exercice en cours jusqu’à 2032-2033; c) quelles sommes ont été consacrées à des améliorations, que ce soit directement pour les avions de chasse ou des dépenses connexes, y compris pour (i) les radars, (ii) l’équipement de communication, (iii) l’équipement, (iv) d’autres dépenses, ventilées par exercice depuis leur acquisition; d) quels sont les coûts prévus des améliorations, que ce soit directement pour les avions de chasse ou des dépenses connexes, ventilés par exercice et type d’amélioration, de l’exercice en cours jusqu’à 2032-2033?

(Le document est déposé.)

Question no 449 —

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

En ce qui concerne le crédit d’impôt pour l’achat d’une première habitation de 5 000 $, ventilé par exercice depuis 2018-2019: a) combien de particuliers ont réclamé le crédit d’impôt; b) quelle est la ventilation de la valeur en a) par province ou territoire?

(Le document est déposé.)

Question no 450 —

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

En ce qui concerne l’entente de 173 millions de dollars conclue par le gouvernement avec Medicago pour le développement d’un vaccin contre la COVID-19 et la décision de l’Organisation mondiale de la santé (OMS) de ne pas accepter le vaccin pour une utilisation d’urgence: a) le gouvernement savait-il que Medicago appartenait en partie à une compagnie de tabac et que cela causerait un problème pour l’obtention de l’autorisation de l’OMS avant la signature de l’entente, et, le cas échéant, pourquoi le gouvernement a-t-il quand même donné suite à l’entente; b) à quelle date le gouvernement a-t-il appris que la participation de Philip Morris dans Medicago poserait un problème pour l’OMS; c) un ministre a-t-il présenté à l’OMS une demande ou une observation officielle concernant la question du vaccin Covifenz et, le cas échéant, quels sont les détails, y compris, pour chaque cas, (i) la date, (ii) le nom du ou de la ministre, (iii) un résumé de la manière dont les demandes ou les observations ont été présentées, (iv) le titre du fonctionnaire de l’OMS qui a reçu les demandes ou les observations; d) quelle est la ventilation par pays de la façon dont les 20 millions de doses de vaccin Covifenz produites dans le cadre du contrat avec le gouvernement seront-elles distribuées; e) à ce jour, combien des doses en d) ont effectivement été distribuées; f) combien de doses de Covifenz le gouvernement avait-il prévu distribuer dans le cadre de l’engagement international du Canada à l’égard du COVAX; g) le gouvernement a-t-il remplacé les doses promises en f) par un autre vaccin contre la COVID-19 et, le cas échéant, par lequel?