Debates of May 30th, 2023

Opposition Motion—Public Inquiry into Allegations of Foreign Interference

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Madam Speaker, today I rise to address the House of Commons on a matter of the utmost importance: the protection of our democracy and the institutions that uphold it.

Democracies in Canada and around the world are facing a pivotal moment. Malicious foreign-state actors are eager to cast doubt on the strength and integrity of our democratic institutions. Their aim is clear: to erode the trust we maintain in our democratic institutions and weaken the very essence of our democracy.

Fortunately, despite being challenged, Canada's electoral systems stand strong, and reports continue to demonstrate that we rank among the world's healthiest democracies, yet we cannot afford to be complacent. We must confront the evolving threats to our democracy and guarantee that our infrastructures remain robust and impervious to attack. More importantly, we must continue to deliver on our promises of protecting Canada's democracy through clear and ongoing concrete actions.

This is precisely what the government has done and continues to do. We have led the way among our international partners by spearheading the implementation of the plan to protect Canada's democracy. This plan represents a government-wide strategy comprised of four key pillars: enhancing citizen preparedness, improving organizational readiness, combatting foreign interference and building a healthy information ecosystem.

Following a series of independent assessments reaffirming the utility and relevance of the four pillars, the plan was renewed again in 2021, helping to protect our electoral system against the evolving threats of the landscape. As an integral component of our comprehensive strategy, we introduced the critical election incident public protocol, a framework that aims to outline the steps by which an independent and non-partisan panel would notify Canadians of any incident that may jeopardize the integrity of elections, and established the security and intelligence threats to elections, SITE, task force to support the work of this panel.

To ensure accountability to Canadians we included a mandatory provision for an independent evaluation of the mechanism in addressing election threats, and this serves as a critical measure in maintaining public trust in the panel's ability to safeguard our democratic process during the caretaker period, that is, during a federal general election. The reviews, but more importantly the insights they yield, ensure we remain focused on continually improving our systems.

Independent panel leaders were provided with access to a wide range of materials that included classified and unclassified documents prepared to support the work of the panel, as well as access to interviews with representatives from national security agencies, government officials, security-cleared members of political parties, and of course the members of the panel itself. This access ensured a thorough examination of the relevant information and perspectives essential for a comprehensive evaluation.

These independent reviews have resulted in the publication of two reports. In 2019, the first independent assessment on the critical election incident public protocol was conducted by a former director of CSIS, who found the implementation protocol successful. Similarly, in the 2021 general election, the independent assessment of the protocol was undertaken by a former federal deputy minister and the governments of deferring partisan stripes. The assessments found that elements of the protocol worked well and recommended suggested improvements.

We know that democracy is not a static entity; it requires our constant attention, particularly as threats continue to evolve. For this reason, as allegations of Chinese interference in Canadian elections flooded media cycles on March 6, the Prime Minister tasked the minister responsible for democratic institutions with developing a plan within 30 days to address any outstanding recommendations stemming from the 2019 and 2021 assessments.

The Prime Minister also called for additional reviews on these matters to further uphold confidence in our democratic institutions by both the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians and the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency. These findings and recommendations will be reported to Parliament in due course.

The robust accountability mechanisms the government has put into place are not just about accountability, but about continuing to improve. Just as the threat to our democracy continues to evolve, so too must our efforts in assessing how we are doing along the way and what is the best way to ensure that we continue to improve.

The Prime Minister also announced the appointment of a former governor general, the Right Hon. David Johnston, as special independent rapporteur on foreign interference, with a broad mandate to make expert recommendations on building trust in our democracy. On May 22—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I apologize, but it being 5:44 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the business of supply.

The question is on the motion.

Shall I dispense?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

[Chair read text of motion to House]

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

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, the NDP would ask for a recorded division.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Pursuant to order made Thursday, June 23, 2022, the recorded division stands deferred until Wednesday, May 31, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I suspect if you were to canvass the House you would find unanimous consent to call it 5:59 so we can begin Private Members' Business.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Does the hon. member have unanimous consent to see the clock at 5:59 p.m.?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-244, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance and repair), as reported (with amendment) from the committee.

Copyright Act

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

There being no motions at report stage, the House will now proceed, without debate, to the putting of the question on the motion to concur in the bill at report stage.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

moved that the bill be concurred in.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

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

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Madam Speaker, I would like to request a recorded division.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Pursuant to order made Thursday, June 23, 2022, the recorded division stands deferred until Wednesday, May 31, 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 Pricing

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Madam Speaker, two weeks ago, I had an opportunity to ask the government about whether the carbon tax causes food inflation. The point of my question was that, all throughout the food chain, the carbon tax is charged. Farmers will pay a carbon tax. In fact, by 2030, the average farmer will pay $150,000 per year in carbon tax, and they get absolutely no rebate on that. Of course, the cost of that carbon tax is therefore passed on to consumers.

However, it is worse, because the truck operator who comes to pick up the farm product from the farm to take it to a processor pays a carbon tax. The processor is then going to pay a carbon tax on the heat or the air conditioning or the operation of their machinery. The truck operator who picks it up from the processor is going to pay a carbon tax. When it gets to the grocery store, the grocery store owner is going to pay carbon tax because of heating, cooling, etc. Therefore, in the end, the people who suffer are Canadians who are trying to feed their families. What we know unequivocally is that food inflation is causing Canadian families to go hungry. One in five Canadians is skipping meals to make ends meet.

In my riding of Dufferin—Caledon, in the town of Orangeville, I look at seniors' usage of the food bank. We can think of this: Seniors who have worked their entire lives are now resorting to going to the food bank to be able to eat, because the carbon tax has so driven up the cost of food that they can no longer afford to feed themselves. The use of food banks is up over 80% in the town of Orangeville. These are the statistics from the food bank itself. All I have been asking the government to do is to admit that carbon tax is causing food inflation.

It gets worse. The CFIB has now stated that, in 2023 alone, the carbon tax is going to cost small business owners $8 billion. What they will get back in rebates is a mere $35 million. Many of these small business owners are also in the food industry. They own our small restaurants. They own our small grocery stores. They are also getting pounded with carbon tax. All these things drive up the cost of food, spurring the crisis in affordability. Seniors are using the food bank; one in five Canadians is skipping meals.

It is a very simple question. I have asked it many times. I say this with all seriousness: Confession is good for the soul. Why will the government not just admit that the carbon tax is causing food inflation?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Madam Speaker, Canadians know that climate change is real and that it is an urgent threat that requires significant, decisive action. We see the 1,600 fires that are burning across Canada. Canadians are being evacuated from their homes in Halifax, and the opposition just does not take climate change seriously.

I would like to emphasize that Canada has a strong climate plan to address the issue I have just described. Last year, we released the 2030 emissions reduction plan. This plan describes in detail the many actions we are taking to support the global efforts to combat climate change and to meet Canada's 2030 emissions reduction target. Carbon pricing is central to our plan, because it is effective and costs less than any other climate policy. Canadians want the government to act, and carbon pricing is the most affordable way to do it.

The federal approach to carbon pricing puts money back in the pockets of Canadians. In fact, most households come out ahead. Low-income households, in particular, do much better. The average household receives more in climate action incentive payments than it faces in direct costs because of carbon pricing. This has been confirmed repeatedly in independent studies.

Let us not be nearsighted. Climate change is a global challenge, and the costs of inaction are high. Canadians want climate action. The government owes it to them to be responsible and use the policies that are the most efficient and cost-effective. Our approach ensures that Canadians are well placed to benefit from the opportunities created by the global transition that is under way. Pricing carbon pollution, as well as returning the proceeds to Canadian families and businesses, is an effective and affordable way to combat climate change while supporting the sustainability of Canadian communities.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Madam Speaker, if he means the carbon tax is effective by driving people into food poverty, I am going to agree with the member because that is what is happening.

If it is effective to stop forest fires that he alleges are as a result of climate change, why do we have the fires? At what level of carbon tax will the forest fires stop?

Every time there is any kind of a weather incident, whether it is too much rain, too little rain, too hot or too cold, the Liberal government trots out the spectre that this is all as a result of climate change, as if none of these things ever happened before in the history of the planet. What makes matters worse is, why has the carbon tax not stopped it? It absolutely has not, because it is not a climate plan. It is a tax plan.

Why do the Liberals not finally admit that it is a tax plan, it is causing food inflation and it is impoverishing Canadians so that they have to go to the food bank?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Madam Speaker, every time we put forward an affordability measure, dental support, rental support, the Canada child benefit or a middle-class tax cut, the Conservatives vote against it. They are incredibly hypocritical when it comes to the affordability challenges of Canadians.

Just in closing, evidence confirms that putting a price on carbon pollution works. It spurs clean growth, supports jobs and cuts the pollution causing climate change. The federal carbon pollution pricing system is not about raising revenues. It is about recognizing that pollution has a cost, empowering Canadians and encouraging cleaner growth and a more sustainable future.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 5:55 p.m.)