Debates of May 3rd, 2022

Islamophobia

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Muslims across Canada and around the world observed the end of the holy month of Ramadan, a time of fasting and charity, and marked the beginning of Eid al-Fitr, a time to pray, feast, give back, help the less fortunate in our communities and celebrate with our loved ones.

This Eid, I would like to draw attention to those Muslims across the world who are struggling: the Uighurs, the Rohingya, Muslims in India, the Kashmiris, the Philistines, and more.

Human rights matter. Here in Canada, we are combatting Islamophobia through appointing a special representative for combatting Islamophobia. We are working on online hate and so much more. We all need to work together to ensure that Canadians in Mississauga—Erin Mills and across Canada have the protections we all need to ensure that we prosper.

Today, I wish each and every Muslim Canadian in Canada and across the world a very happy Eid. Eid Mubarak.

Public Safety

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

Mr. Speaker, for days during the illegal protest on Wellington Street, the Prime Minister stayed in hiding, refusing to intervene and deliberately sowing discord and division by condemning Canadians who did not think like him.

Then on February 14, realizing that his inaction might backfire, he brought out the big guns, the Emergencies Act, claiming that the police needed it to deal with the protests.

Protesters returned on the weekend. They left, without the Emergencies Act.

Can the Prime Minister tell us why?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank all the police forces and the RCMP for their good work. Last week, they carefully prepared a plan for the protest.

This protest played out very differently from the events in January and February, when we invoked the Emergencies Act on advice from the police. It was a necessary and responsible decision, and we are going to work with the commissioner and parliamentarians in the interest of transparency.

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

Mr. Speaker, to justify invoking the Emergencies Act, the Liberal government cited security threats. It stated, “the threats of violence and presence of firearms at protests...constitute a public order emergency”.

These are serious allegations that created a lot of public concern.

Knowing that, why did the Prime Minister allow members, senators and House of Commons staff to continue to circulate among the protesters at the protest in January and February?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, from the beginning of the illegal blockade last winter, we offered a great deal of support to all parliamentarians working on the Hill. However, what some parliamentarians experienced here was very different from what the residents of Ottawa experienced, which included many disruptions and violence in the community. This was proven by all the arrests made by the police.

The Emergencies Act needed to be invoked. We will now co-operate with all transparency processes.

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

Mr. Speaker, another part of the proclamation states that there must be an emergency that arises from threats to the security of Canada that are so serious as to be a national emergency.

What information did the Prime Minister possess at the time that confirmed the existence of such a serious risk to our country?

How many Canadians were arrested for committing sedition against the Government of Canada?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, there was a plenty of evidence of disruptions at the border, in our communities and to our economy. Many Canadians lost their jobs temporarily. That is one reason why the Emergencies Act needed to be invoked.

Now we must participate in a transparency process, and the government will co-operate with the commissioner, Justice Rouleau.

Ethics

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the main pillar of our justice system is that all Canadians must be treated equally under the law. When new evidence of fraud comes to light, law enforcement has a duty to investigate, regardless of how powerful or privileged any individual who committed the fraud may be. The Attorney General has an obligation to make sure this applies to everyone, including a sitting prime minister.

Does the Attorney General believe that individuals who commit criminal offences, regardless of how powerful or privileged they are, or what positions they hold, should be charged?

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

Mr. Speaker, what we see again and again is the Conservatives wanting to play partisan games. Rather than posing questions on the issues that are affecting Canadians they want to throw mud. Canadians are looking for answers, and we have put forward tangible solutions in everything from housing to the environment.

They want to talk about things that happened six years ago. They want to obfuscate and block Parliament from doing its work, taking days and days to repeat the same things. We can do that. They can play their partisan games, or they could do the business of the nation and ask things that Canadians actually care about.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians do care that they are treated equally under the same laws that apply to the powerful and privileged in this country. The criminal brief released by the RCMP made it clear that, if this were a civil servant or any other Canadian, they would be facing serious criminal charges in this case. There are new known facts that warrant a full investigation.

Does the Attorney General believe that the law should be applied equally to all Canadians, including a sitting prime minister, if they commit a criminal offence?

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

Mr. Speaker, I realize that the Conservatives want to spend time talking about things that happened six years ago, but I would ask them about this instead. Right now we have a Bill C-8, which has been debated for 12 days in the House. That was introduced in December, so that is five months of obstruction. I would say that, while they do not want to talk about the economy, while they do not want to talk about the environment and while they do not want to talk about the issues that are important to Canadians, will they at least let the other parties in this place do their work and get the business of this nation done?

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the federal immigration department is possibly the worst department in Canada, and that is saying something. The wait time for Quebec immigrants applying for permanent residence is 31 months. There is a backlog of 29,000 files, and some cases have been dragging on since 2009. Ottawa is where cases go to die.

That is why it is arrogant to mock Quebec for wanting to manage all of its own immigration files. Above all, it is arrogant towards the people who are waiting.

In light of its obvious incompetence, why does the federal government not let Quebec manage all of its own immigration applications?

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, immigration is essential to our economy.

What is going to get things moving is an increase in Quebec's immigration levels. Quebec is allowed to receive up to 28% of the immigrants who are welcomed to Canada each year, but it has chosen to accept only 13%.

If Quebec really wants to improve wait times for the tens of thousands of people waiting for permanent residence in Quebec, it only has to follow the example of our government and increase its immigration cap.

Women and Gender Equality

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, let us never take women's rights for granted. Let us never assume that everything we have gained will never be taken away. Let us never believe that the issue has been settled once and for all, that everyone agrees that a woman's body is her own, and that the decision to terminate her pregnancy is hers and hers alone.

We need to continue to fight because one careless moment could set us back decades. Can the Deputy Prime Minister guarantee that her government will ensure that women's right to abortion will be protected?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, yes, I would first like to say that, as a Canadian woman, I was both shocked and deeply worried by the news from the United States last night about abortion rights.

Having said that and speaking in the House today as a woman, as a mother and as Canada's Deputy Prime Minister, it is important for me to underline our government's clear and determined commitment to protect a woman's right to choose. That is a fundamental right.

Canada Revenue Agency

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government leapt into action to go after the Canadians who applied for CERB because the government had told them to, but when it comes to a wealthy, powerful corporation, it cut a sweetheart backroom deal for a company that avoided paying its fair share, over the objections of CRA staff.

Why does the government continue to prioritize going after everyday families instead of going after wealthy corporations that are purposely avoiding paying their fair share? When will the government understand it needs to prioritize the wealthy corporations that are cheating the system and stop going after working-class Canadians?

[Diane Lebouthillier, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, the confidence of Canadians and the integrity of our tax system are central to all of the agency's activities. The allegations of misconduct in relation to transfer pricing agreements were reviewed by a third party and no misconduct was found.

Let us be clear. The investigation carried out by an independent tax expert showed that the terms of the agreement were favourable to the agency and did not provide any type of preferential treatment to the taxpayers involved.

Natural Resources

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, people are paying the price of rising fuel costs and of climate change, while the big oil companies are making record profits. Imperial Oil has earned its biggest profits in 30 years. Cenovus earned $1.6 billion in profits.

Why does the government continue to give more subsidies to these companies, instead of putting an end to oil subsidies?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, our government is working with all sectors of the economy to reduce greenhouse gases, but also to grow the economy. We are working with the steel sector, the oil sector and all sectors to ensure we have a very strong economy in the future.

Public Safety

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will ask the Minister of Public Safety the same question I asked yesterday, a question that he suspiciously avoided answering.

Did any minister or members of their political staff speak with Justice Rouleau before his appointment as commissioner on the inquiry into the Emergencies Act?

Did they discuss what kind of evidence the inquiry would or would not seek, including documents covered under cabinet confidence or solicitor-client privilege?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure my hon. colleague that the government is fully committed to being transparent around the events and circumstances that led to the invocation of the Emergencies Act.

Last week, we launched the public inquiry, affording Justice Rouleau broad powers to compel witnesses, documents and information, including some classified information, should he choose to ask for it.

Our intention is to shine a light on those events and it would be, I think, a point of departure to hear the Conservatives recognize that there was an emergency. We fulfilled our responsibility to protect Canadians.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, he is avoiding the question again, but I will move on.

This past weekend, Ottawa saw the so-called “Rolling Thunder” protest come and go without major incident. During the "freedom convoy” protest, the government claimed that it needed the Emergencies Act because it needed to compel tow truck drivers to remove the protesters.

Over this last weekend, we saw many vehicles towed without needing the Emergencies Act, yet another blow to this government's fabricated claims.

If the government did not need extraordinary powers to get the tow trucks, what did it need them for?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I would like to begin by expressing my gratitude to all frontline police officers, including members of the RCMP, who ensured that we were able to maintain public safety over the course of the past weekend.

Of course, there are big distinctions between what occurred last weekend and what occurred last winter, which was a national emergency.

We invoked the Emergencies Act after we received advice from law enforcement. Once it was invoked, we were able to restore public safety, and now we will ensure that there is transparency in the accountability of that decision.

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the minister claimed that Liberals invoked the Emergencies Act because they needed it, yet there was a large protest, related to the winter one that he just referred to, this past weekend, and as far as I am aware, no one remains camped out on the roadways around Parliament. This is in direct contradiction to what the minister is claiming. As this weekend showed, with leadership and coordination between government and police, peace and order can be maintained.

There was clearly a failure by the Liberals to show leadership during the winter protest, as the minister refers to it, and they used the Emergencies Act to bail themselves out.

Is that not right?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, I would point out that, notwithstanding the fact that public safety was maintained, there were enforcement actions taken last week as a result of some individuals who, again, crossed the line and broke the law.

It would be, again, an opportunity for the Conservatives to recognize, finally, after months of denying it, that there was an emergency. Collectively, we have a responsibility and a burden as parliamentarians to uphold the law. That is exactly what we did when we invoked the Emergencies Act, and now we will ensure that there is transparency, so that all Canadians can be reaffirmed in that decision.