House of Commons Hansard #267 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was food.

Topics

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

December 13th, 2023 / 6:15 p.m.

Bloc

Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC

Madam Speaker, I am pleased and proud to rise here today at the end of the third reading of Bill C‑290 so that this bill can go to Senate, where we hope it will be studied and passed quickly so we can protect our public servants.

Public servants are the people who apply the rules and policies while ensuring that the federal services machine remains in good working order. Public servants are the first to notice when the rules and policies are not properly enforced, when they are asked to do things in a way that is not right or when people are doing things they should not be doing. They are the first to witness anything that could go wrong.

When a public servant witnesses such behaviour, it is important that they be able to report it without fear for their personal, social and professional life, as well as that of their family. I will come back to that. We have information that has led us to believe that, despite the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act, some public servants have kept quiet and others have been threatened. My colleague talked about this in his speech. With that in mind, my colleague from Mirabel decided to take the bull by the horns and say that we could not let this go.

There is no small wrongdoing. Wrongdoing is wrongdoing. Whether it is big, small or mid-sized, it is wrongdoing, period. Each time there is wrongdoing, taxpayers' money is misused. Each time someone blows the whistle and, in the end, a public servant gets rebuffed, harassed or intimidated, there is a loss of expertise and loyalty. That loyalty must be protected. That is why my colleague from Mirabel introduced Bill C‑290.

This bill needs to be passed. We need to protect our public servants, those who are the most loyal, who want things to run smoothly, who want taxpayers' money to be used appropriately. However, what we have been seeing is that some public servants are being harassed and intimidated. I am talking about those who dare to speak up. Some have even had threats made against their families. Some have been told that they will not get a pension. Some of these threats have been carried out. People have been forced to retire early, and their pension was frozen for months or even years. That is not how an employer should treat its employees. If any private sector employer did something like that, they would very quickly end up in court.

Our role is to protect public servants and the public. By protecting whistle-blowers in the public service, we are protecting the public by extension. That is what this bill does. Does it go far enough? No, it does not. There are issues regarding royal assent, among others. Some provisions were weakened by committee amendments. That is unfortunate because, rather than becoming a leader, an exemplary employer, Canada is hardly making any headway with this bill.

People will say I am gullible. Perhaps I am naive, but I had hope. I believed the member for Hull—Aylmer when he said that the government was going to introduce a bill that would complement and strengthen ours, so that Canada would become a leader in protecting public servants who disclose wrongdoing. That bill was to be tabled before the end of the year.

Here we are, basically at the end of the year. I have yet to see a bill that would strengthen ours. That said, I am a bit gullible. I will remain positive. I will remain optimistic that the government is going to introduce a bill that will strengthen the one that my colleague from Mirabel introduced and that was studied in committee, in order to really protect public servants.

The process of amending the bill was not easy, but it was extremely rewarding from a personal learning perspective. Amendments were tabled that narrowed the scope of the bill. Some of these amendments had to be introduced because my colleague from Mirabel's bill required royal assent. We do not run the government and we never will. In case this comes as a surprise to anyone, that will never happen. Certain amendments had to be introduced to avoid royal assent, which was an issue, apparently.

I think the biggest disagreement we had in committee was on the bill's coming into force date. The government wanted to delay that indefinitely. We said the law needed to apply as soon as there was royal assent. If we delay its implementation indefinitely, as with other bills where the government said it would come into force 18 months after royal assent, we would end up with a bill that might never come into force because there will be an election or something, when we want the measure to be implemented as soon as possible.

There is not a government in the world that would not benefit from having legislation that protects public servants who disclose wrongdoing. Every government should have strong legislation on the matter. This protects people who are loyal and it ensures that there is no corruption, no wrongdoing, no reprehensible or illegal act within the public service, which is why it needs to be exemplary. The government, too, needs to set the best example possible for other employers. That is why it is important to have strong legislation. I hope that the Liberal government, or any other government, will realize how important this is and will introduce legislation that will be even stronger than the one we have here.

When we met with people about this bill, we were asked why the Bloc Québécois was introducing such a bill. They said that the Bloc Québécois is separatist, but it wants to protect Canadian public servants. It does, but there are Quebeckers working in the Canadian public service. It is important that we protect our shared values. They acknowledged that that was true, that the Bloc Québécois is used to being David fighting Goliath.

Bill C‑290 is a David and Goliath bill. The Senate is another Goliath. I sincerely hope that the members of the Senate will do what was done in committee and come together to pass a private member's bill for the benefit of the entire public service and, ultimately, taxpayers' money.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:25 p.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise on behalf of the transparency-loving residents of Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke to speak to Bill C-290, an act to amend the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.

It has been fascinating to hear members from the NDP-Liberal government speak to this legislation. The Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act is a direct result of Liberal corruption.

Whistle-blower protection was a cornerstone of the Conservative Federal Accountability Act. It was the first substantive bill introduced by the Harper government following over a decade of Liberal corruption that reached its climax with the sponsorship scandal. The Chrétien Liberals had given millions of dollars to well-connected companies to do little actual work other than to funnel the cash back to Liberal Party coffers.

Canadians had grown tired of the arrogant, corrupt Liberals and demanded a change. Despite losing the election, the NDP and remaining Liberals refused to listen to Canadians. That is why the socialist coalition voted against our accountability act and whistle-blower protection.

I saw the bow-tied banker from Ajax join with the failed punk rocker from Timmins—James Bay voting against whistle-blower protection. As different as those two members may appear, they share the same inverted belief that people should serve the government instead of government serving the people.

Now, if Canadians have any doubt of this NDP-Liberal government's contempt for whistle-blowers, just look at its track record. One of the first acts this government did was to redirect a shipbuilding contract to its friends. When multiple people shared that information, what did this Prime Minister do? He called Vice-Admiral Norman a criminal and said the admiral would face the courts. Mark Norman spoke truth to power and paid a heavy price. I know he thinks this Prime Minister is not worth the cost.

When another whistle-blower leaked the story of Jody Wilson-Raybould being pressured to direct a prosecution, this Prime Minister called the report fake news. He then fired Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott and kicked them out of caucus to boot. This government is so repulsed by truth and accountability, it attacked the people the whistle-blowers tried to protect.

Then there are the multiple whistle-blowers who tried to do the right thing at the Sustainable Development Technology Corporation. They followed the procedures. They reported it to the deputy minister. The deputy minister even compared it to the Liberal sponsorship scandal. That same deputy said his minister would blow a gasket upon learning the damning information, except nothing happened. No gaskets were blown. No executives were fired. No board members were sacked. There were rampant conflicts of interest and comparisons to the sponsorship scandal. Yet, it was not until the whistle-blowers went to The Globe and Mail that anything happened.

Swap out the words “sustainable development” with “foreign interference”, and we see a similar story. If not for the CSIS whistle-blower, Canadians would still be in the dark about the extent of Communist interference. Our Conservative Party was attacked in the last two elections. The government knew it and covered it up. The Liberals had just spent the last eight years pushing conspiracy theories about Russia to smear Conservatives, so the last thing they needed were credible reports they had received assistance from Communists who control China. If not for the CSIS whistle-blower, there would not be a public inquiry into foreign interference.

Given the recent partisan comments by the judge and her selection of intervenors, we may still not actually have an actual public inquiry. Even the hand-picked special rapporteur actually confirmed that many of the CSIS leaks were accurate. He confirmed that the member for Don Valley North did engage in secret meetings with the Communist consulate in Toronto and did discuss the two Michaels. That member would still be sitting in the Liberal caucus were it not for the whistle-blower.

Yet, this Prime Minister sent his national security adviser out to speak to reporters just to let them know that this government is actively hunting for this whistle-blower. NSA Thomas actually said the whistle-blower would be caught and punished. The Liberal government is declaring a whistle-blower guilty without a trial again. It is as though it has learned nothing from Vice-Admiral Norman and his persecution. That is why we must pass this bill.

The NPD-Liberal government will continue to ignore lessons unless we update the legislation. After eight years of Liberal corruption, whistle-blower protection must become stronger. The Liberals claim this is unnecessary, because they budgeted $2 million for a special task force that is supposed to review a committee report from six years ago. They can save taxpayers $2 million and just support the legislation.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:30 p.m.

Liberal

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

The hon. member for Mirabel for his right of reply.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:30 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, I have always found you to be very charming, with your bright smile. I am feeling charmed today, but it is not because of you. It is because after hours of debate, after voting, testimony and amendments at committee, it is very moving to stand before you and my colleagues, who have worked with me for this last hour of debate on Bill C‑290 and on whistle-blower protection.

Today, the House of Commons is at a crossroads. I will not go over the bill's history or its content once again. My colleagues did a great job—

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

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

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member. There seems to be a problem with the interpretation.

The problem seems to be resolved, so the hon. member for Mirabel may continue his speech.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, I was saying that we have reached a crossroads with this bill. All of the parties worked on it. It is a bit of a sliding scale. As we know, our interests diverge. Today, however, we have a good bill. This is obviously a first step, but everything starts with a first step.

I would like to take this opportunity to do what I did during my previous speeches on Bill C‑290. Once again, I call on all the parties to work together, because absolutely nothing could be less partisan than protecting whistle-blowers, transparency and integrity. Absolutely nothing should be less partisan than that.

I would add that today, we finally have a serious opportunity to send a message of hope to all federal public servants watching us today. They contact us, and we know that they are watching us. We want to tell them that their integrity and safety matter. I am speaking to them directly. Their safety, integrity, career, life and family matter. That is the profound message conveyed by this bill.

Now, there are some people I would like to thank directly. I would like to thank whistle-blower Julie Dion and whistle-blower Luc Sabourin, both former public servants at the Canada Border Services Agency. They are courageous people with a sense of public service right down to their core. They paid dearly in order to stand up for transparency. I would like to thank whistle-blower Joanna Gualtieri, a former public servant—

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

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

I must interrupt the hon. member.

We have a point of order from the hon. member for Calgary Heritage.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Conservative

Shuv Majumdar Conservative Calgary Heritage, AB

Madam Speaker, I rise to inquire about Private Members' Business. It ends at 6:57 p.m. today, as I understand, but there are no questions and comments. Perhaps the hon. member could come back tomorrow for questions and comments.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

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

There are no questions and comments.

The hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean is also rising on a point of order.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Bloc

Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC

Madam Speaker, I think the reason some people are raising points of order is because the hon. member for Mirabel has been black-listed by the hon. member for Carleton. His Conservative Party cronies want to play games.

Let us allow my colleague to finish. It is a great bill.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

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

The hon. member asked whether the hon. member for Mirabel could come back tomorrow to answer questions, because he would not have time to answer them today. However, there is no question period. That is all there is to it.

The hon. member for Edmonton Griesbach has a point of order.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

NDP

Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB

Madam Speaker, I am very interested in the member for Mirabel's comments. I have seen the Conservatives several times attempt to shutdown debate in this place and censor members.

If you could, please ensure that we have a lively debate and that the member has a full speech without interruption from the—

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

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

There is no question that the hon. member for Mirabel will have his full time.

We have another point of order, from the hon. member for Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

An hon. member

They're doing it again.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Madam Speaker, asking to make sure we have interpretation is the right of every member of Parliament. I take offence to what that member said.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

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

No, that was not the issue.

The hon. member for Mirabel.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, I will refrain from rising on a point of order myself, but I will use the time I have left to thank Joanna Gualtieri, whistle-blower, former foreign affairs official and pioneer in this field in Canada. I would also like to thank Pamela Forward, president of Whistleblowing Canada; David Hutton, co-founder of the Whistleblowing International Network; Tom Devine, of the Government Accountability Project in Washington and Ian Bron, of the Centre for Free Expression, a former whistle-blower. This is clearly getting a lot of support.

I would of course like to thank the members of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates for their work. In particular, I want to mention the members for Courtenay—Alberni and Edmonton West. The latter has been championing this cause for a long time.

I also want to thank my colleague from Beauport—Limoilou. If ever there was a caring, competent and understanding person to do this work in committee, it is her. As my colleague clearly demonstrated in committee, the current legislation discourages whistle-blowers. There is a breach of trust. Rather than encouraging whistle-blowers to speak out, we are discouraging them. These people are acting in the public interest, in the interest of Canadians, Quebeckers and taxpayers. We are seeing it here in the House. We saw it a few minutes ago. Certain types of conduct are eroding people's confidence in our institutions. Whistle-blowers counterbalance that.

I will use the minute I have left to wish all of my colleagues from all parties a happy holiday season. I want to take a moment to say happy holidays to my constituents in Saint‑Placide, Kanesatake, Oka, Pointe-Calumet, Saint‑Joseph‑du‑Lac and Sainte‑Marthe‑sur‑le‑Lac, as well as those in the north in Saint‑Colomban and those in the east in Saint‑Anne‑des‑Plaines. I want to wish a merry Christmas to everyone who lives in Mirabel, around the airport, and to you, Madam Speaker.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:40 p.m.

Liberal

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

I thank the hon. member for his kind wishes, and I wish him the same in return.

Is the House ready for the question?

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The question is on the motion.

If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:40 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, if we could have a recorded division, I would be very grateful.

Public Sector Integrity ActPrivate Members' Business

6:40 p.m.

Liberal

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

Pursuant to Standing Order 98, a recorded division stands deferred until Wednesday, January 31, 2024, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Carbon PricingAdjournment Proceedings

6:40 p.m.

Conservative

Richard Lehoux Conservative Beauce, QC

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise this evening to take part in my first adjournment debate in the House.

I am speaking tonight to follow up on a question I asked the Prime Minister about Bill C-234 and, more importantly, the embarrassing way it was handled in the Senate. For some unknown reason, it was the Minister of Transport who rose to answer me and, frankly, I was not pleased with the response.

Bill C-234 is a common-sense Conservative bill that would remove the carbon tax on propane and natural gas used for drying grain and heating buildings, to give farmers a chance to survive this government's crippling carbon tax and take the first step toward reducing the cost of food in our country.

In his response, the Minister of Transport said that I was misleading Canadians. He used the same tired arguments he always does, such as the idea that the carbon tax does not apply in or affect Quebec.

In my opinion, and in the opinion of anyone with an iota of common sense, the carbon tax obviously affects Quebec, directly and indirectly. Quebeckers will certainly be affected at the pump when the second carbon tax adds 17¢ per litre to the cost of gasoline.

When Quebec farmers import their propane from Ontario or other parts of the country, the carbon tax applies to them. I have invoices from pork and chicken producers in my riding to prove it, but the government refuses to look at them.

In other cases, the carbon tax applies indirectly, for example, when Quebeckers import any other domestic goods shipped by truck across the country into our province. The higher prices are getting passed on to us because, contrary to what the Bloc-Liberal coalition believes, Quebec is not self-sufficient.

Bill C‑234 is extremely important. At the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, we have heard testimony from countless farmers from every part of the country. Every one of them agrees that this bill should be passed as soon as possible.

The Prime Minister decided to pressure the Liberal senators he himself appointed to gut Bill C‑234 at the Senate and then send it back to the House. They managed to remove the clause on barn heating and reduce the sunset clause from eight years to three years at the Senate. Bill C‑234 will be sent back to the House with these amendments. It will no longer have an impact on the price of food, which was the original purpose of the bill.

As we have heard many times, there is currently no other viable alternative for drying grain or heating buildings. That is why the Conservatives agreed to the eight-year sunset clause in the initial bill.

The questions I have for the government are the following. Does the government think that the carbon tax affects Quebec, either directly or indirectly? When the Senate's new amendments are debated here in the House, will the government do the right thing and delete these two amendments that have completely gutted Bill C‑234, so that it can be adopted as it was the last time, by the vast majority—

Carbon PricingAdjournment Proceedings

6:45 p.m.

Liberal

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

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services.