Debates of Nov. 20th, 2023

(Return tabled)

Question No.1795—

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

With regard to items and services funded by Indigenous Services Canada under Jordan’s Principle since 2016, broken down by funding stream: (a) what are the details of all funding provided, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) amount, (iii) recipient, (iv) description of the items or services; and (b) what was the total amount spent per year under Jordan’s Principle?

(Return tabled)

Question No.1796—

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

With regard to Employment and Social Development Canada’s Skills for Success Program and the Training and Tools Stream: (a) what is the total amount granted under this program for the year 2023, and, of this amount, how much has been granted to Quebec-based organizations; (b) of all the projects selected, how many are designed to serve a francophone population or clientele; and (c) what are all the projects selected and the amounts granted for each of them?

(Return tabled)

Question No.1797—

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

With regard to at-risk pay and performance bonuses for those classified as executive and above at Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, and Indigenous Services Canada, since 2018, broken down by year and by type of job: (a) what specific criteria was used to determine if executives received (i) at-risk pay, (ii) performance bonuses, (iii) neither at-risk pay nor performance bonuses; and (b) what number and percentage of executives received (i) both at-risk pay and performance bonuses, (ii) at-risk pay only, (iii) neither at-risk pay nor performance bonuses?

(Return tabled)

Question No.1799—

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

With regard to Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officers serving the United States—Canada land border: (a) does the government consider the CBSA officers protecting the land border to be public safety officers; (b) what is the number of CBSA officers who have worked at CBSA for (i) under five years, (ii) five to 10 years, (iii) 10 to 15 years, (iv) 15 to 20 years, (v) 20 to 25 years, (vi) more than 25 years; and (c) how many CBSA officers are currently on (i) long-term leave, (ii) administrative leave, (iii) short-term leave, for health and safety reasons?

(Return tabled)

Question No.1800—

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

With regard to the Canada Summer Jobs program: (a) for each of the 338 federal ridings, (i) how much money, (ii) how many positions, (iii) how many hours of work, were allocated for fiscal year 2023-24; (b) for each of the 338 federal ridings, (i) how much money, (ii) how many positions, (iii) how many hours, were requested for fiscal year 2023-24; (c) for each of the 338 federal ridings, what is the numerical difference between the amount of money requested and the amount of money received; (d) for each of the 338 federal ridings, what is the numerical difference between the number of positions requested and the number of positions granted; (e) for each of the 338 federal ridings, what is the numerical difference between the number of hours requested and the number of hours granted; (f) what is, in mathematical terms, and defining all variables, the formula that was used in fiscal year 2023-24 to determine the funding allocated to each riding; and (g) what is the share of overall funding, expressed both as a percentage and in dollars, that has been allocated to federal ridings in Quebec, broken down by fiscal year, since 2006-07?

(Return tabled)

Question No.1802—

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

With regard to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and snow crab fisheries in Newfoundland and Labrador, since January 1, 2023: (a) what are the details of all meetings held by the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard and departmental staff concerning emergency supports for harvesters, including the (i) date of the meeting, (ii) individuals or organizations in attendance, (iii) government officials in attendance; and (b) what investments has the government made to protect existing investments and infrastructure of the inshore, owner-operator fishery and rural communities that rely on the industry?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand at this time.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

The House resumed from November 3 consideration of the motion that Bill C-57, An Act to implement the 2023 Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Ukraine, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, 2023

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour, and I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to this piece of legislation today.

I am from a Mennonite background, and the majority of my constituents are of Mennonite origin. Canadian Mennonites, by and large, come from Ukraine. The first group migrated to Canada in the 1870s, and another large group followed in the 1920s, fleeing socialism and communism. After the war, many fled, escaping from the socialist dictatorships in eastern Europe and fleeing to Canada via Paraguay and other South American countries. The stories these folks tell are truly mind-blowing, stories of how families walked out of Ukraine on foot with just the clothes on their backs, at times having to resort to eating grass and travelling by night trying to avoid the communists so they could come to Canada, a land of freedom and opportunity. My grandparents were among those who fled the Russians and came to Canada in the 1920s, so Ukraine and the Ukrainian people have a special place in my heart and in the hearts of my constituents.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Canada has sought to help Ukraine. In fact, it was 35 years ago this month, in November 1988, that the dissolution of the Soviet Union began. The communist experiment had failed. The Marxist socialist fantasy had collapsed under the weight of its own tyranny, moral bankruptcy and economic weakness. It was shortly thereafter, in December 1991, under Prime Minister Mulroney, that Canada proudly became the first western nation to officially recognize Ukraine. Fast-forward two decades to 2015. It was the Conservatives whose successfully negotiated the first and current Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement and voted unanimously to ratify it. In fact, it was my good friend and fellow Mennonite, the member for Abbotsford, who was the lead negotiator on that deal, and I commend him for his great work, which today stands the test of time. Conservatives are strong supporters of free trade, and we are supporters of Ukraine.

I say all this to dispel the ridiculous notion the government tries to propagate that somehow Conservatives do not support Ukraine. We do. To equate or try to correlate a lack of support for this government's failed policies with a lack of support for Ukraine is simply dishonest and in very poor taste. Again, for anyone not paying attention thus far, let me say it one more time: Conservatives are strong supporters of free trade and we are strong supporters of Ukraine.

No one is debating whether or not we should have free trade with Ukraine; that is not the question. The question is this: What are the changes being proposed, and, as with any trade agreement, will those changes be of long-term benefit to Canada? However, there is a second question, and I do think it is a fair question, which is whether now is really the right time to be doing this. I guess if I were to sum up my feelings on the bill before us, my response would be “No, now is not the right time.” Ukraine is in the middle of a war for its very survival. I am not a Ukrainian government official, but if the situation were reversed and Canada were in a war for its survival, and suddenly Ukraine came knocking from halfway around the world and said, “Hey, we realize you're kind of busy surviving, but we thought now would be a great time to revisit our trade relationship”, my response would be “Seriously, you're bringing this up now?” Free trade is great. Free trade is important. Conservatives are the party of free trade, but, frankly, we do have a free trade deal in place. It has not expired and will not expire, so why now?

The government has added 11 new chapters to the agreement. It is pushing to rush this legislation through the House. The questions is why. What kind of woke clauses is it trying to slip in here, a carbon tax perhaps?

The government has bragged, “For the first time in a Canadian free trade agreement, the environment chapter includes provisions recognizing the importance of...climate change policies, including through market-based approaches and trade-related climate measures to achieve green growth objectives.” That sounds like Liberal for carbon tax to me. I know that is a big concern we are hearing from business leaders. Carbon taxes hurt trade the same way they hurt families. They increase the cost of everything while doing nothing to demonstrably help the environment.

Europe has been begging us to support LNG, and where the Americans have done so, Canada has once again fallen behind. It has fallen behind because the government continues to put its ideological vendetta against our energy sector and its carbon tax scam ahead of Canadian competitiveness and affordability for families.

Failing to develop and export clean and ethically sourced Canadian energy to Europe only serves to strengthen Russia. By failing to develop our vast energy resources, we are actually helping Russia and keeping Europe reliant on Russian oil and gas. In fact, as my colleague from Calgary Heritage noted in his speech a while back, “Canada is the sole NATO ally with the potential to backfill European energy demand with $3-trillion worth of natural resources, the world’s fourth-largest oil reserves, NATO’s third-largest reserves of natural gas and the capacity to scale agricultural products and technologies for the world.” That is Canada.

Canada could be an international leader, helping to strengthen developing democracies while at the same time growing our own economy and national security through reasonable and responsible resource development, rather than the international pariah we have become after eight years of the failed Prime Minister. He is not worth the cost to Canadians and he is not worth the cost to the free world.

As I wrap up my remarks this afternoon, I would like to stay on this subject for a moment: the cost of the Prime Minister to Canadians and how this relates to the current conversation and current conflict in Europe.

We are united in this House in saying that Russia's invasion of Ukraine was wrong. We are horrified by the violence. With one voice, we condemn the violence. We have stood with the people of Ukraine in their hour of need. Canada has provided some 10 billion dollars' worth of humanitarian, military and direct financial support. That said, the Prime Minister and the government have been consistent and unequivocal in saying, “We will...support Ukraine with whatever it takes, for as long as it takes.” That concerns me a bit, and I have heard that concern from a growing number of my constituents. I think when a leader makes statements like this, Canadians deserve to know what that looks like. When the Prime Minister says, “whatever it takes, for as long as it takes”, what exactly does he mean?

Ukraine is our friend. Russia's invasion was wrong. Still, Canadians should have reasonable expectations and know what and who their government is committing them to. I fear the government's woke excitement and alarmism blinds it not only to what is really important in a trade deal, but also when it comes to the basic democratic values that we expect of our friends and international partners.

As my colleague from Yellowhead noted in his speech, “Canada stands as a beacon of democracy and human rights on the world stage. When people buy Canadian, they are not just buying a product. They are buying into a set of values, values that respect human dignity, prioritize environmental sustainability and advocate for peace.” Freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of the press are things that matter. They are under assault in Canada under the Prime Minister and are under assault in Ukraine. Truth is the first casualty of war, and freedom quickly follows. Friends should always have each other's backs, but sometimes we also need to sit down and have tough conversations. I recognize that is part of a larger conversation than the one we are having here today.

To wrap up, Conservatives believe in supporting our Ukrainian friends, including through trade, but those costs need to be clearly defined for Canadians. We believe Canada should continue looking for ways to use our economic strengths to support the Ukrainian people, including by exporting Canadian LNG to break European dependence on natural gas from Russia.

Conservatives are looking very carefully at this legislation. We are talking to those in affected sectors. We will work to ensure our trade and other international agreements are always in the interests of Canada and all Canadians.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the problem with that last speech is that none of the facts back up what the member said.

He said that Conservatives stand with Ukraine. He will have to explain to me why, when President Zelenskyy came to the House, the Leader of the Opposition never once mentioned it on social media. As a matter of fact, in an act of subtle defiance, the member for Calgary Nose Hill had to go back a year ago, to the last time Zelenskyy addressed this Parliament, to quote a tweet of what he had said that time, as though that was somehow justifying the fact that he had visited this time.

More importantly, to the red herring that he just pulled up about why we need this now, it is because Ukraine came to the table, sat down with Canada and made the deal. Now the Ukrainian Canadian Congress says that it “strongly supports the strengthening of trade and economic ties between Canada and Ukraine. Canada and Ukraine have negotiated this treaty, and we call on all parties to support the swift adoption and implementation.”

Does the member know better about this issue than the Ukrainian Canadian Congress?

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Madam Speaker, of course, Canadians know that Conservatives support Ukraine. We have demonstrated that through our support of the help and the aid that we have provided to Ukraine in the last year and a half.

Our support is unequivocal for Ukraine.

Conservatives are prudent, and we like to know what the cost is before we make big commitments. Really, all we are asking of the government is to, for once in its history, provide Conservatives, the House and Canadians with the cost of what it is saying it is going to be. There needs to be transparency, and that is something that is sorely lacking from the Liberal-NDP government.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Madam Speaker, of course, I am very much a supporter of free trade with Ukraine and anything else we can do to help a democracy stand up against an invasion of its territory.

I am a little concerned by the Conservatives saying that their support for Ukraine is unequivocal and then saying that it has limits, and that they seem concerned about the cost. There seems to be a bit of a contradiction in the speech, saying there is unequivocal support and then saying that we have to know how much it costs before that support is unequivocal.

I know that the government and New Democrats certainly stand with Ukraine. We do not want to offer any hope to Russia that we are somehow going to abandon Ukraine, which I am afraid the member's speech did toward the end.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Madam Speaker, it is a good question because it would appear as though perhaps there is an inconsistency in our position. There is not.

Conservatives support Ukraine. We negotiated the first free trade agreement. We support free trade. There is currently a free trade agreement in place. It works. There is nothing wrong with it. In fact, if anything, it is in favour of Ukraine. That was negotiated intentionally to help a fledgeling company in its pursuit of democracy and freedom and the rights of humans and the furtherance of democracy.

Do we want to know what the cost is? Absolutely, we do not just blindly rush into things such as national pharmacare and free dental for everybody without wanting to know the cost.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Madam Speaker, at the international trade committee, we had the Ukrainian ambassador, and we had a very good interaction with her. She emphasized Ukraine's desire to see this legislation go through. She emphasized the importance of this legislation, specifically touching upon the huge infrastructure that has been damaged, the cost of which is about $400 billion.

She also emphasized that we need to get ready now so that Canada can be a partner in the rebuilding of Ukraine. She explained that last year, at the Ukraine rebuilding conference, which was held in Canada, was overcrowded with Canadians companies and Ukrainian companies getting ready for the war to be over and to rebuild Ukraine.

I would like to have the hon. member's comments on that.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Madam Speaker, I am not sure what the question was in that comment. Canada and Conservatives, from a Conservative position, stand eager to help Ukraine in its rebuilding. We know that a free trade agreement is going to be part of that, so that it will enable us to supply them with what it needs to regain its position as the breadbasket of Europe.

Ukraine has tremendous agricultural assets that we can leverage here from Canada. We have got the expertise. We have got equipment manufacturing. We are going to be very willing and eager to stand with it in its rebuilding process.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to speak to Bill C-57, an act to build onto the existing Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement. I want to thank my colleague from Dufferin—Caledon for his work in examining this bill and working to strengthen the economic bond between Canada and Ukraine.

As many of my fellow members already know, I proudly represent the constituency of Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, a region that is home to many Ukrainians. The community of Dauphin, Manitoba, is proudly home to Canada's National Ukrainian Festival. The Parkland region has a rich history in celebrating Ukrainian culture and heritage, and the region shares a strong bond with the people of Ukraine. Much of my constituency was built by the people who immigrated to Canada from Ukraine generations ago. It does not take much to notice the incredible contribution that Ukrainians have made to the social, cultural and economic fabric of Canada.

I, along with my Conservative colleagues, unequivocally support Ukraine, especially over the last 20 months during Russia’s illegal war, which was launched on the Ukrainian people. I will remind members that it is our responsibility as members of the House, alongside our allies, to ensure that Vladimir Putin and those aligned with him are held accountable for their war crimes in Ukraine. These individuals must face prosecution at both the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice.

Since Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine in February of 2022, Canadians have been united in supporting the people of Ukraine in their fight for freedom and defending their sovereignty. I was proud to see so many communities throughout my constituency open their doors to support Ukrainians fleeing the unjustified war on their homeland. I think of the community members in Dauphin who launched the Parkland Ukrainian Family Fund to support parents and children fleeing to Canada. Since they launched this initiative, the community of Dauphin has provided homes for over 40 families. It is efforts and contributions like these that showcase how strong the relationship between Canada and Ukraine is.

As Ukraine continues to fight for its freedom, Conservatives will always stand with the people of Ukraine. We also understand the importance of trade and supply agreements with our friends in Ukraine. It was the Conservatives who negotiated the trade agreement with Ukraine, something we are very proud of. This agreement eliminated tariffs on 86% of Canada’s merchandise exports to Ukraine. The proposed modernization of the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement is an important subject in the House. As one of our strong allies, Ukraine represents hundreds of millions of dollars in trade every year.

Before I dig into Bill C-57, it is important to look at the history of this legislation and Canada’s relationship with Ukraine. In December 1991, almost 32 years ago to the day, a Conservative-led government became the very first western country to recognize Ukraine’s independence from the Soviet Union. It was the previous Conservative government that championed Operation Unifier, in which the Canadian Armed Forces led a mission to fortify Ukraine’s armed forces through military training. This operation was very successful in preparing Ukrainian forces for their fight against Russia in this war and, as I said earlier, it was a Conservative government that successfully negotiated the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement.

I am proud to stand today as a Conservative to speak up once again for the long-standing friendship between Canada and Ukraine. It should go without saying that nobody in the House is arguing that Canada and Ukraine move forward without free trade. In 2022, Canada’s total merchandise trade with Ukraine was $420 million, with $150 million in exports and $270 million in imports.

Canadians may be unaware, but motor vehicles and parts, fish and seafood, and pharmaceutical products were the top three exports to Ukraine, while Canada’s top imports from Ukraine were animal and vegetable fats and oils, iron and steel, and electrical machinery and equipment. It is important to note that, if Bill C-57 is implemented, the current free trade agreement from 2017 will remain in effect. This would provide time for Canada and Ukraine to get this legislation right, in ways that best serve Canadian and Ukrainian needs alike.

It is vital that, as legislators, we exercise due diligence and ensure that any trade agreement is one which serves the interests of all Canadians. This is why Conservatives are working and engaging with Canadians and stakeholders to ensure that their feedback is heard and taken into consideration before Bill C-57 is rushed through Parliament. It is no secret that the current Liberal government has a failed record of engaging with stakeholders and listening to Canadians. Listening to the concerns of Canadians is not one of the government’s strong suits. That is why Conservatives are determined to ensure that good legislation passes through Parliament.

Upon reviewing Bill C-57, it becomes quite apparent that there is room for improvement and that there are many missed opportunities to strengthen support for Ukraine. Constant attacks from Russia have damaged and destroyed much of Ukraine, but in Bill C-57, there is a lack of focus on rebuilding. One subject that is missing from the legislation is support for rebuilding energy infrastructure. In a time of energy insecurity, one would think that rebuilding energy infrastructure would be top of mind. How are the people of Ukraine supposed to rebuild their economy when their energy infrastructure is not functional?

Another area that the Liberals seem to have ignored is Canada’s inability to provide liquid natural gas to its allies. Had it not been for the Prime Minister’s anti-energy policies, Canada would have been better suited to supporting Ukraine and our allies by supplying LNG to the world. By doing so, we could help cut off Putin from supplying energy to Europe. Instead, after eight years, the government has not built a single LNG terminal. The government has no regard for the importance of exporting Canadian energy to our allies around the world. Canada stands as the only NATO ally equipped to meet the energy needs of Europe, possessing a blessing of natural resources. This includes being the world's fourth-largest holder of oil reserves, boasting NATO's third-largest reserve of natural gas, and possessing the capability to expand the production of agricultural products and technologies on a global scale. Instead, Ukraine and Europe are forced to fund their enemy in war.

Canada should continue looking for ways to use our economic strengths to support the Ukrainian people, including by exporting Canadian LNG to break European dependence on natural gas from Russia. As I said earlier, Conservatives will always work to ensure that trade agreements are in the interests of Canada and of all Canadians. I mentioned how Conservatives were the ones who successfully negotiated the first Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement. It is important that we debate the legislation thoroughly and continue to support the Ukrainian people, especially in this time of war. I, along with Canada’s Conservatives, will continue to stand with Ukraine.