Debates of April 19th, 2023

Questions on the Order Paper

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

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 1281, 1285, 1287 and 1288.

Question No.1281—

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

With regard to the legislative review of the Canada Infrastructure Bank (CIB): (a) what are the details of the engagement and communication plans for the review, including (i) how the public and stakeholders are being consulted, (ii) who has been consulted to date, (iii) who has not yet been consulted and what are the timelines for those consultations to be completed; (b) is any part of the review conducted by external contractors and, if so, by whom; (c) what is the scope of the review and does it include a review of the mandate of the CIB; and (d) what acute issues, if any, were considered when defining the scope of the review mentioned in (c)?

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), internal engagement within the federal government began with the launch of the review in June 2022. The external stakeholder engagement phase has been under way since November 8, 2022, starting with an event attended by federal, provincial and territorial ministers, deputy ministers and other officials. With regard to (i), Infrastructure Canada officials have been holding meetings and round tables with key stakeholders, and reviewing past submissions and committee information. All stakeholders, including members of the general public, are invited to provide written submissions by email. Information about the review, including its scope and the email address for submissions, is posted on the departmental website at https://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/CIB-BIC/index-eng.html and on the Consulting with Canadians site at https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/consultations/consultingcanadians.html. The Canada Infrastructure Bank has also included information on the review on its website at https://cib-bic.ca/en/about-us/reports-and-transparency/. With regard to (ii), to date, Infrastructure Canada officials have consulted a broad range of stakeholders including financial sector members, developers, associations, municipal and provincial governments, and indigenous groups. With regard to (iii), Infrastructure Canada officials continue to meet with more stakeholders within each group and to seek written submissions until March 31, 2023.

With regard to part (a) (ii) and (iii), in processing parliamentary returns, the government applies the principles set out in the Access to Information Act. Detailed information is being withheld on the grounds that it constitutes third-party information, operations of government and/or cabinet confidences.

With regard to (b), some analysis has been contracted externally to firms with infrastructure and infrastructure financing expertise, including KPMG, Deloitte, and Ernst and Young to complement internal analysis conducted by the department.

With regard to parts (c) and (d), the review of the Canada Infrastructure Bank Act will assess the following: whether the policy premises and context that underpinned the creation of the Canada Infrastructure Bank are still sound and pertinent, whether the Canada Infrastructure Bank’s legislated mandate and authorities to support its operations remain relevant in the context of an evolving policy and infrastructure landscape, and whether changes or clarifications are needed to position the Canada Infrastructure Bank going forward.

The scope of the review was determined by the legislative requirement contained in the Canada Infrastructure Bank Act itself, which is to review the provisions and operations of the act. The department also took into account input from past consultations with public and private stakeholders, evidence provided at parliamentary committees, as well as internal government consultations. The final report will be tabled in Parliament in June 2023.

Question No.1285—

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

With regard to the federal government’s funding of Gymnastics Canada being frozen in July 2022: (a) what was the original reason the government froze this funding; and (b) despite allegations of abuse and maltreatment within the sport still being unsettled, has this funding been reinstated and, if so, (i) on what date, (ii) for what reason?

[Pascale St-Onge, Liberal, Minister of Sport and Minister responsible for the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), as a result of safe sport issues in the sport of gymnastics, Sport Canada froze funding to Gymnastics Canada and imposed the condition that Gymnastics Canada become a program signatory to Abuse-Free Sport, including the services of the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner, to allow Canadian gymnasts to be able to access the independent safe sport mechanism and other support services offered.

With regard to part (b), funding to Gymnastics Canada was reinstated on November 14, 2022, as the organization had met the condition of becoming a program signatory to Abuse-Free Sport on October 18, 2022.

Question No.1287—

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

With regard to Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada and the government’s 50-30 Challenge: (a) how many organizations applied to be a 50-30 Challenge Ecosystem Partner; (b) how were the five successful candidates chosen as Ecosystem Partners; (c) how was the distribution of the $28.5 million funding to the Ecosystem Partners determined; (d) how are the Ecosystem Partners expected to spend their funding and what accountability mechanisms are in place; (e) how many dollars have been spent on the 50-30 Challenge by the Ecosystem Partners as of March 1, 2023; (f) what projects and supports to the 50-30 Challenge have been made available to 50-30 Challenge participants to meet their diversity and inclusion goals; (g) what are the Ecosystem Partners expected to achieve; and (h) how will the government track the success rate of the 50-30 Challenge?

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

Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), there are 28 organizations that applied to be a 50-30 Challenge Ecosystem Partner.

With regard to part (b), successful candidates were chosen as Ecosystem Partners based on the quality of their proposal in terms of meeting the following requirements as outlined in the call for applications that can be found here: The 50 – 30 Challenge Ecosystem Funding Call for Applications: Application Guide (canada.ca).

Activities proposed must have a national reach, i.e., access to services, including in rural, remote and northern regions throughout Canada, with a range of support applicable to all challenge participants. Proposed projects must ensure that services and activities will be provided in both official languages. Proposed activities must benefit a minimum of three of the five equity-seeking groups. However, preference was given to applications who can support all five equity-seeking groups. Proposed projects are three years in length, to be completed by March 31, 2024. Proposed projects should offer a range of supports to assist challenge participants and provide eligible activities that contribute to meeting the 50 – 30 challenge program objectives. Proposed projects have a minimum budget of $3 million but do not exceed $10 million for the duration of the project. Proposed projects must deliver services and products in both official languages. Proposed projects must provide two years of past financials, either audited or review engagement. Activities must clearly meet the requirements and will achieve the goals of the 50-30 challenge. Proposed projects must provide a detailed activity work plan with key project milestones. Proposed project activities must effectively meet the objective of the 50-30 challenge and demonstrate how benefits will be achieved. The timing of project implementation, including risk mitigation tactics, must be feasible. There must be expertise in inclusive practices for diverse population groups, experience in effectively managing projects of a similar size and scope, and experience in financial administration and management of projects of similar size and scope. Proposed projects must demonstrate organizational capacity to provide outreach, third-party training, mentorship, best practices and guidance, as well as a sound governance model that reflects diversity practices. They must demonstrate strength of collaborations that will be leveraged to carry out their project, the extent to which the applicant and the proposal meet the funding eligibility criteria, and value for money that is clearly linked to project activities and outputs.

With regard to (c), the distribution of the $28.5 million funding to the Ecosystem Partners was determined based on each recipient’s proposed project cost.

With regard to (d), Ecosystem Partners are expected to support the 50-30 challenge participants as outlined in the call for applications which can be found here: The 50 – 30 Challenge Ecosystem Funding Call for Applications: Application Guide (canada.ca)

They should link challenge participants to best practices for hiring a diverse workforce and creating inclusive and equitable workplaces. They should provide guidance to challenge participants on the development of diversity and inclusion action plans. They should promote the What Works Toolkit and other supports to assist challenge participants in meeting the challenge objectives.

On a quarterly basis, Ecosystem Partners are required to submit a progress report that includes a description of the progress made on specific activities described in their contribution agreements, issues or risks encountered, communication and marketing material produced, and any other components outlined in their contribution agreements.

Ecosystem Partners are also required to submit a final report in conjunction with the request for final payment. The final report must include a description of changes in project timelines, and demonstrate the success and the benefits resulting from the project.

With regard to (e), $ 4,629,948 has been disbursed to 50-30 Challenge Ecosystem Partners as of March 1, 2023.

With regard to (f), Ecosystem Partners have started to offer services to the participants. These services are offered through the Ecosystem Partners’ websites: Egale Canada, Global Compact Network Canada, Ted Rogers School of Management's Diversity Institute at https://diconsulting.ca/, Women's Economic Council, and Colleges and Institutes Canada.

With regard to (g), by promoting best practices related to diversity, providing guidance to challenge participants on their plans, and promoting tools and supports available to participants, the Ecosystem Partners are expected to support the achievement of the program’s objectives. These objectives include increased awareness of the best practices and measures that fuel recruitment, retention and promotion of diverse employees and leaders; and assisting Canadian organizations to become more responsive to diversity by integrating diversity and inclusion practices into their management policies and practices. The contribution agreements with the Ecosystem Partners include specific performance indicators on which they must report quarterly to monitor the success of their activities.

With regard to (h), there are specific performance indicators set out to track progress towards the program’s objectives, including indicators related to awareness and training activities, and on progress reported by challenge participants in achieving diversity. The Ecosystem Partners are required to submit quarterly progress reports, which include results on the performance indicators, and a final report demonstrating the success of the project.

Question No.1288—

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

With regard to the amendments to the Canada Labour Code respecting fair treatment as regards wages, more specifically the changes concerning equal treatment provided by the Budget Implementation Act 2018, No. 2, S.C., c. 27, in sections 452 and 461 of Subdivision A of Division 15 of Part 4 of the Act: (a) has the department finished its consultations on the development of regulations; (b) can we have a summary of the report on these consultations; (c) has the department started drafting the regulations; and (d) has a date or timeline for the coming into force of this provision been set and, if so, what is this date?

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), the labour program held initial regulatory consultations between June and August 2019 with federally regulated stakeholders, including employer and employee representatives.

Subsequently, on December 21, 2021, the labour program launched an online consultation to obtain further stakeholder input on the proposed regulations related to equal treatment and temporary help agency provisions. Stakeholders were asked to provide feedback on a discussion paper, Discussion Paper: Fall 2021 Labour Program External Consultations - Regulatory Initiatives under the Canada Labour Code. The consultation ended on February 21, 2022.

With regard to part (b), a summary report was not prepared for these consultations. The labour program received nine submissions from employer and employee representatives operating in the federal jurisdiction, as well as community organizations.

In summary, some employers requested exemptions to some or all the provisions, while other employers with collective agreements requested that collective agreements take precedence over the provisions or unionized employees be exempt from the provisions.

Employee representatives stated that exemptions should not be given, as they would frustrate the legislative intent to ensure equal treatment for equal work. They also noted that workers who have temporary and/or part-time work arrangements are more likely to belong to vulnerable groups and therefore should benefit from the new standard. Most submissions expressed the need for greater clarity concerning certain terms set out in the legislation, such as “merit” and “substantially the same kind of work”. Several stakeholders argued that the term “seniority” should be defined as “date since hire or length of service” and not be based on the numbers of hours worked.

With regard to part (c), the labour program is advancing this regulatory initiative and is building the policy framework for the drafting of regulations. For the Labour Program Forward Regulatory Plan 2023-25, the proposed draft regulations are to be pre-published in Part I of the Canada Gazette later this year, currently planned for fall 2023.

With regard to part (d), a coming into force date has yet to be determined. Any update on the timing of the publication of regulations in Part II of the Canada Gazette will be published in the Labour Program Forward Regulatory Plan.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

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

Mr. Speaker, furthermore, if the government's responses to Question No. 1286 could be made an order for return, this return would be tabled immediately.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No.1286—

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

With regard to government expenditures in the electoral districts of Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane–Matapédia, Manicouagan, Montmagny—L’Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine, and Papineau, for fiscal years 2020-21 and 2021-22, broken down by electoral district: (a) what is the total amount for each fiscal year; (b) what is the detailed breakdown of the amounts in (a) by department, Crown corporation, agency or organization; and (c) what are the grants and contributions made, broken down by funding source?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

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

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Motions for Papers

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

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all notices of motions for the production of papers also be allowed to stand at this time.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

The hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes is rising on a point of order.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform the House that the interim Ethics Commissioner has resigned that role, effective today.

As a result, there are decisions that the office cannot proceed with, which are based upon functions that only the commissioner can undertake. After the politicization of that role by the Liberal government, the office remains paralyzed.

The official opposition invites the government to meaningfully consult with recognized parties on an appointee whose appointment avoids even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

That was not a point of order, but I will take it under advisement.

The House resumed from April 18 consideration of the motion that this House approve in general the budgetary policy of the government.

Financial Statement of Minister of Finance

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first, please note that I will be sharing my time with the member for Shefford.

We got another budget. When I saw the budget, I remembered two things. First, when I was an economics professor at CEGEP and university, I had a tradition. When the budget was tabled, back when I was not in politics, I would take it and do an economic analysis of it. When I saw this budget, the first thing I thought was, thank god I will not have to analyze it in front of 70 students, because there is really not much to say about it, from an economic standpoint. It is devoid of inspiration. It is as if it was as easy for the Liberal government to find inspiration as to do a 5,000-piece puzzle while wearing boxing gloves.

The second thing I thought about was my leader, and what an extraordinary leader he is.

The members opposite are laughing because they know that I am right. I thank them for admitting it.

In 2021, the government kicked things off with the throne speech. It took some time before the House came back; it had other things to do, I guess, but it took a few months before the ball got rolling. The House reconvened. That morning, I was not fashionable, but we were finally back.

Then, there was the throne speech. I will never forget it. The leader stood up and said that the government before us was tired. Let us think about that. The government had just been elected, it gave a throne speech and it was already tired. When I saw the budget, I thought that it was the budget of a tired government.

There are two very striking things in this budget. The first is that the Liberals bought themselves a majority yet again. They had already done it once, but they arranged for their good friend the NDP to support them until death do they part. What do people say when they get married?