Debates of Nov. 22nd, 2023

Public Services and Procurement

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

Madam Speaker, I was simply reading a quote, which I think is on the record, that showed the NDP speaking out against giving lethal weapons to Ukraine. Ukraine needs weapons.

I will speak now about the arrive scam app, which is a grotesque scandal that I think many Canadians are seized with. It is actually more like a family of scandals; it is a number of different scandals that are interrelated. The government spent $54 million developing an app, which is far in excess of what it had spent on apps before. It spent $54 million developing a glitchy app that did not work and that sent many Canadians into quarantine who should not have been in quarantine.

In the process, the government hired not a major company or a company with IT expertise. Rather, it hired GC Strategies, a company of two people working out of their basement and who did no IT work. They simply subcontracted all of the actual work. That would be like the Speaker's hiring me to paint her fence for $100, my then hiring the member for Winnipeg North to paint the fence for $20, and my pocketing $80. He did all the work, and the Speaker was sort of fine with that arrangement. That is what happened consistently. I think Canadians have a grave problem with why the two-person company that did nothing got all the work. The RCMP is now investigating the contractors. Meanwhile, there is an admission that fraudulent resumes were submitted to the Government of Canada by GC Strategies, and there are senior public servants accusing each other of lying about who is responsible for the choice to hire GC Strategies.

We need an answer from the government on this, because we have tried to ask senior public servants, and they have accused each other. They have said, “It wasn't me; he chose GC” and “No, someone else chose GC Strategies.” One can understand why nobody wants to take credit for the decision, given the fact that a company with no IT experience and that did no work was hired. The government needs to explain, because it was a decision made by the Government of Canada.

In the midst of these structural problems about contracting, fraudulent resumes and public servants accusing each other of lying, will the government finally tell us who is responsible for choosing GC Strategies for ArriveCAN?

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement]

Madam Speaker, as previously indicated in the House, we take these allegations seriously. As the member is aware, a matter is under investigation by the RCMP, and we have full confidence in our national law enforcement agency. Let us be clear that the RCMP commissioner stated on October 23 of this year that “contrary to public reporting, the RCMP is not investigating the ArriveCAN matter. The confusion may arise from the fact that we are investigating a file based on allegations brought by Botler AI”.We trust that the RCMP will pursue the investigation with integrity, and that, should the RCMP find any wrongdoing in the matter, it will pursue any charges as appropriate.

Additionally, the CBSA has launched its own internal audit, even though GC Strategies and Botler AI did not have a contract with the government. Notwithstanding that, it is important for the CBSA to review its contracting and provide more rigour in the procurement process, in part by increasing oversight of the granting of contracts and of those who hold contracting authority. In the meantime, the CBSA has suspended some of its existing contracts until the agency gets further clarity on the facts. Although the allegations and investigations are not specific to ArriveCAN, we recognize they may also yield findings relevant to that procurement.

Members may know that the CBSA and the Public Health Agency of Canada have also been engaged with the Office of the Auditor General on a performance audit of ArriveCAN. We await the Auditor General's findings and recommendations.

Once again, we will respond to all findings and ensure that any acts of wrongdoing have consequences.

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

Madam Speaker, that great fog of a non-response obviously gets nowhere close to the question I asked. I will repeat it. We have the arrive scam scandal: $54 million that was spent on an app that should have cost much, much less. Money was spent through a company that did no IT work and subcontracted all of the actual work.

We need to know who is responsible. Who made the choice to hire GC Strategies? There are senior public servants, Cameron MacDonald and Minh Doan, accusing each other of lying about who is responsible. Somebody has to be responsible. The government made the decision to give the money to GC Strategies for the arrive scam app. It is a simple question: Who was responsible for the decision to hire GC Strategies for the ArriveCAN app?

Finally, to the parliamentary secretary, who was the person responsible for hiring GC Strategies?

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Madam Speaker, the government takes these allegations seriously. We will act on any investigation and audit findings to ensure that controls, oversight—

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member had an opportunity to ask his question. I would ask him to please offer that respect back to the member. It was very quiet when he was making his statement. Please allow the parliamentary secretary to answer.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Madam Speaker, as I said, we will act on all the findings and ensure that controls, oversight and stewardship over contracting are strengthened. The CBSA and the RCMP are investigating certain allegations, and they will act appropriately on those findings. Ahead of that, the CBSA had already launched its own internal audit of contracting, and it has increased its oversight on the granting of contracts. The agency has also directed all employees with contracting authority to retake procurement training and certification.

Furthermore, the CBSA has suspended some contracts until the facts are clear. Once again, we take all allegations seriously, and we will act on the findings and on the facts to provide Canadians with proper services and value for money.

Oil and Gas Industry

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity this evening to follow up on a question that I asked in question period on October 20 regarding the Liberal government’s opposition to liquefied natural gas exports to Europe.

For context, shortly after Vladimir Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the leaders of western European countries started to take steps to end their dependence on oil and gas imports from Russia. This makes a great deal of sense, because buying oil and gas from Russia means funding Vladimir Putin’s war machine against Ukraine.

What exactly did the leaders of Europe do? In August of last year, Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany visited Canada looking to buy more oil and gas from this country. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister told him that there has never been a strong business case for Canadian oil and gas exports to Europe.

What did the German chancellor do next? He flew to the Middle East to see if the dictators of the United Arab Emirates and Qatar felt that there was a strong business case for oil and gas exports to Europe. Those Middle Eastern dictators were happy to sign a multi-year memorandum of understanding that will guarantee steady oil and gas exports to Germany for years to come.

The story does not end there. Last month, France, the Netherlands and Italy all signed separate agreements to import LNG from Qatar for the next 27 years. This raises a question: Why is Canada not exporting LNG to Europe?

According to a report released by the Fraser Institute shortly after Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine last year, “Unfortunately, despite being the world’s fifth-largest producer of natural gas, Canada has missed the opportunity to expand our supply of LNG to overseas markets due to a lack of export infrastructure, largely due to regulatory barriers and environmental activism.”

In fact, Canada does not have a single operational LNG export facility, and only one is under construction. This is the Coastal GasLink project in British Columbia.

That brings us to my question in question period last month, when I asked if the Liberal government still believes that there is no business case for Canadian LNG exports. What was the government's response? It was, “Mr. Speaker, it is really shameful that the Conservative Party would use this humanitarian situation to peddle conspiracy theories.”

There are some things I would really like to know. What conspiracy theories was the Liberal minister referring to? Were last year’s German LNG deals with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates all conspiracy theories? When Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited Canada last year, was he part of the conspiracy? What about the three agreements that Qatar signed last month with France, the Netherlands and Italy? Are they in on the conspiracy as well? What about the 6,000 people who worked on the construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline? Does the Liberal minister think that they are part of the conspiracy too?

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources and to the Minister of Official Languages]

Madam Speaker, companies and countries around the world are making decisions to ensure that they are able to access and deliver energy that is reliable, clean and affordable. That is true in Canada and around the world.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine included significant impacts on global energy markets and supply chains. That is why the European Union signalled that it is looking to secure sustainable sources of energy, stating that it is clean energy that will play the largest role in their long-term energy security. We must be skating where the puck is going.

The Conservatives may deny climate change, but they have to at least acknowledge that is not the case for our partners and allies in Europe.

We know that energy security and climate action go hand in hand. When it comes to supporting Canadian projects to provide energy to our allies, I can confirm to the member across the way that our government has a better record than the Conservatives do on every level.

To give members an example, we have approved, as the member mentioned, the Cedar LNG project in B.C., led by the Haisla Nation. It is a small-scale floating facility and marine export terminal. Beyond LNG, there are many increasingly important resources of low-carbon fuel that we are working actively on. One of the top 10 hydrogen-producing countries is Canada, which has emerged as a leader in developing new hydrogen and fuel cell technologies.

Allow me to add that Atlantic Canada will be a significant driver of that as well. The Canada-Germany hydrogen alliance will also export hydrogen to Germany as early as 2025. Just last week, we announced the financing of major hydrogen projects in Nova Scotia using wind power.

Once the Conservatives stop their shameful opposition to Bill C‑49, we can begin to build offshore wind farms in Newfoundland and Labrador and in Nova Scotia. That means thousands of jobs, a lot of clean energy for the power grid and emissions-free hydrogen production for export. While the Conservatives denigrate our economic future, we are taking measures to build the future.

On top of this, I will briefly mention our efforts to bring clean nuclear energy and biofuels to our allies. There are growing opportunities for Canada's CANDU technology. Earlier this year, the minister of energy joined the Romanian minister to announce a $3-billion loan to Romania, which will be best spent on building two new CANDU reactors in Romania.

All of this money will be spent on Canadian companies and good jobs for the clean sector. We will be powering Romania at no cost to the taxpayer. This will help Romania phase out coal and provide clean power to countries that are looking to move away from Russia.

On biofuels, we continue to invest this year in Canadian innovation to support our allies' energy needs. In May, we announced $86 million to save and retool the Come By Chance refinery in Newfoundland and Labrador, so that the former oil refinery can lead the region in sustainable biofuel production. Canada will continue to be a reliable and steady global supplier of clean energy.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Madam Speaker, in the Liberal parliamentary secretary's original response from last month, he said, “It is really shameful that the Conservative Party would use this humanitarian situation to peddle conspiracy theories.” I find the use of the word “shameful” to be very interesting. What exactly is it that the Liberals find to be shameful?

Do the Liberals think that it was shameful for German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to go to the Middle East to buy oil and gas after the Prime Minister gave him the cold shoulder? Is it shameful for other European countries to buy LNG from Qatar, given the Prime Minister's statements? Do the Liberals think that the 6,000 people who worked on the Coastal GasLink LNG project should be ashamed for providing clean, ethical Canadian energy to the world?

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is ironic to hear the Conservatives pretend to care about Canada's economic future when their campaign on climate denialism has prevented them from supporting even the most popular economic opportunities. The Conservatives are currently using shameful tactics in the natural resources committee to hold back Bill C-49.

Bill C-49 would play a key role in allowing for the development of offshore wind power, a key component for hydrogen and clean electricity. This is critical for improving global energy security and growing the number of good-paying jobs available across all Atlantic provinces.

We have already reached an agreement with the Germans and the Europeans on hydrogen exports. Both premiers support this bill, and the industry has been calling for it to be implemented. The only obstacle is the Conservative Party of Canada and its shameful campaign against all forms of climate action. However—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but his time has expired. The right of reply is limited to one minute.

The hon. member for Kitchener Centre.

Persons with Disabilities

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, on the heels of yesterday’s disappointing fall economic statement, I rise to continue pushing the government to end legislated poverty for people with disabilities. To this day, people with disabilities continue to disproportionately live in poverty across the country. Of those living in poverty, 41% have a disability. While a Canada disability benefit has been promised to Canadians with disabilities for years, it has now been six months since this Parliament unanimously supported the Canada Disability Benefit Act, with no funding committed since.

People with disabilities deserve better from the government. Therefore, I will reiterate what I have said in this House before. If the governing party were serious, it would have supported people with disabilities the way it approached child care, through funding first, then agreements with the provinces and territories and then legislation. However, for people with disabilities it was the other way around. It was legislation first and now we continue to see funding not get committed, and we hear only crickets when it comes to actually funding the benefit. This is all part of why the disability community has been calling for the disability emergency relief benefit, DERB, to recognize legislated poverty for people with disabilities as the urgent crisis it is.

When it came to CERB during the pandemic, the government acted with urgency. We know it is possible. We know it could do so here again. That is why I asked the Prime Minister in question period weeks ago if he would put in place this emergency benefit while the Canada disability benefit regulations drag on. I asked this, recognizing that neither he nor I have ever had to live under the crushing weight of legislated poverty, imploring him to act quickly.

Not only did he not answer my question and not only has the government not put in place DERB in the time since, but then we had the fall economic statement yesterday. For people with disabilities there was nothing. There was nothing for the Canada disability benefit. There was nothing for the disability emergency relief benefit. It was not surprising for some given the words of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance on this very question. When asked specifically by the media in the week leading up to the fall economic statement about funding the Canada disability benefit, her words were that they cannot fund everything. It is deeply disappointing to hear that from her after all the government has promised to people with disabilities.

My overarching concern ultimately is that the governing party seems to be allowing the leader of the official opposition to almost govern from opposition. The government needs to wake up and realize that it needs to differentiate itself from the Conservatives, not become more like them. It needs to show that it remembers what it looks like to be progressive. It needs to make clear that the lives of people with disabilities are not there simply for a photo op, and that Canadians with disabilities expect it to follow through because once again, today, Canadians with disabilities continue to live in poverty. For all the fanfare with the Canada Disability Benefit Act passing, as I am sure we will hear from the parliamentary secretary, nothing has changed yet for Canadians with disabilities across the country.

My question for the parliamentary secretary is this: What is the point in passing the Canada disability benefit if the government does not seem to have any plan to actually fund the benefit?

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Diversity]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for Kitchener Centre for his advocacy.

Our government recognizes that many Canadians with disabilities need additional financial support. That is the reason for the Canada disability benefit. The benefit will provide this.

We are in no way dilly-dallying and wasting time. The passage of Bill C-22 is a major milestone. Our government has a strong and unwavering commitment to create a more inclusive and barrier-free Canada. This is the result of decades of relentless advocacy by the disability community. I want to thank all parliamentarians of this House who supported the passing of this critical piece of legislation.

This summer, we reviewed the engagement process for developing regulations. We are moving forward with our commitment to create and implement a new Canada disability benefit as soon as possible.

This is a big undertaking. We must make sure it is done properly and done well. We cannot cut corners. We must respect the regulatory process. We must provide opportunities to persons with lived experiences to contribute to the benefit regulations. The disability community must have its say in how this benefit will look. This is required by the Canada Disability Benefit Act.

We are now actively engaging with a variety of stakeholders. They include persons with disabilities from a range of backgrounds, provincial and territorial governments and Canadians at large. We are working together in developing the regulations.

The Minister of Diversity, Inclusion and Persons with Disabilities and I held a number of round tables with the community, who generously shared their perspectives and experiences.

Last week, we launched an online engagement tool. This will allow all Canadians to have their voices heard. We are diligently analyzing this input. The input is valuable. It will help us develop meaningful and impactful regulations. When we get there, the draft regulations will of course be published in the Canada Gazette. This will give one last opportunity for Canadians to share their feedback.

Again, we are doing everything to make sure that the disability benefit will be fulsome and impactful, and will serve Canadians and lift up those experiencing economic challenges who are of working age and living with disabilities.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to make it really clear to the parliamentary secretary that he is absolutely right that people with disabilities must, and I appreciate he used the word “must”, be involved meaningfully in the collaboration of the design of the regulations. That is the case because it was in an amendment I put forward that was supported at committee. It is now the law.

No one is debating the extent to which people with disabilities must be meaningfully engaged in the design of the regulations. The point I am making is that the government does not need to wait for regulations to be done to dedicate the funding. As I mentioned, when it came to child care, it was the exact opposite. Funding came first and other steps followed. The federal government could do the exact same thing here. It has chosen not to for six months, and time is running out for people with disabilities living in poverty.

Is the government going to provide a disability emergency response benefit, and is it going to step up and fund the Canada disability benefit?

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Madam Speaker, we are moving as swiftly as possible on ensuring that the disability benefit is fulsome, is done in full consultation with the disability community and factors in the comments, feedback, expertise and lived experiences of the disability community. We are doing the work to make sure this is done properly, in a fulsome way, and done right.

From the beginning, our government has been committed to supporting Canadians with disabilities. We are filling in the gaps. Yesterday, the Deputy Prime Minister tabled our government's next phase of a plan to help create good middle-class jobs and grow a strong, inclusive economy. The disability community is part of our society and economy.

We are making sure to get this done properly and in full consultation with the community. This is in the spirit of “Nothing Without Us”. It helps us ensure that all voices are included, especially the voices of those who have disabilities.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 8:09 p.m.)