Debates of June 20th, 2023

Commissioner of Lobbying

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

It is my duty to lay upon the table, pursuant to section 11 of the Lobbying Act, the report of the Commissioner of Lobbying for the fiscal year ended March 31.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(h), this report is deemed to have been permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

Government Response to Petitions

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 13 petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.

Enhancing Transparency and Accountability in the Transportation System Act

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-52, An Act to enact the Air Transportation Accountability Act and to amend the Canada Transportation Act and the Canada Marine Act.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Interparliamentary Delegations

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour of tabling nine reports from the very active Canada-United States Inter-Parliamentary Group.

As members know, parliamentary diplomacy is extraordinarily important, particularly with our largest ally. I want to commend all of the members who participated in this extraordinary work over the last year.

The first report I will be tabling is a report on the Canada-United States Inter-Parliamentary congressional visit in Washington from May 23 to 26.

The second report pertains to the congressional visit to Washington from February 6 to 9.

The third report is on the congressional visit to Washington from September 12 to 15, 2022.

The fourth report is the National Governors Association annual summer meeting in Portland, Maine, from July 13 to 15.

The fifth report is on the Council of State Governments national conference in Hawaii from December 7 to 10, 2022, which was one of my favourites.

The sixth report is on the annual legislative summit of the National Conference of State Legislatures in Denver, Colorado, from August 1 to 3, 2022.

The seventh report is on the 76th annual meeting of the Council of State Governments Southern Legislative Conference in Oklahoma, from July 9 to 13, 2022.

The eighth report is on the 31st Pacific NorthWest Economic Region annual summit in Calgary from July 24 to 27, 2022.

Finally, the ninth report is for the Council of State Governments Western Legislative Conference annual meeting in Boise, Idaho, from July 19 to 22, 2022.

I thank members for their patience. As I said earlier, these reports represent extraordinary work by members in this House and the Senate as well. The U.S. is our most important ally, and parliamentary diplomacy is never more valuable than it has been in these exercises.

Environment and Sustainable Development

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the ninth report of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development, entitled “The Government of Canada's Planned Phase-Out of Fossil Fuel Subsidies and of Public Financing of the Fossil Fuel Sector”.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have a dissenting opinion to present from the Conservative members of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development in response to the committee's report, “The Government of Canada’s Planned Phase-Out of Fossil Fuel Subsidies and of Public Financing of the Fossil Fuel Sector”.

It is the Conservative members of this committee's belief that the report falls short in a number of critical areas, starting with the lack of a definition for what a fossil fuel subsidy is. Climate challenges must be addressed using concrete solutions, not ideological platitudes, and our dissenting opinion outlines some of our thoughts on the matter. However, I believe the summary of this report would be best summed up by a quote from somebody who is a bit ironic for a Conservative to quote on this matter, former Liberal insider and environment minister Catherine McKenna. She said as she was leaving office, “we eliminated all of the fossil fuel subsidies at the federal level”.

It is an honour to table this dissenting opinion on behalf of members of the Conservative Party.

Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the ninth report of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, entitled “The State of Canada’s Access to Information System”.

While I am on my feet, I want to thank the members who participated in this report and the witnesses. I also want to thank Nancy Vohl, the clerk, and the analysts, Sabrina Charland and Alexandra Savoie, for their work on this.

I hope this report reflects the seriousness of the current state of the access to information system. The recommendations in this report are meant and designed to fix what is a broken system.

Canada Shipping Act, 2001

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

moved for leave to introduce Bill C‑346, An Act to amend the Canada Shipping Act, 2001 (certificate of competency).

Mr. Speaker, I am introducing this bill today for workers and employers in the marine industry, a key industry in the Lower St. Lawrence and many other parts of Quebec and Canada that provides employment for many people and is a huge part of our daily lives.

Today, the industry is facing a serious labour shortage. Vacant positions are not being filled, which weakens the whole supply chain. Given that just one missing crew member can bring an entire vessel's operations to a standstill, it is vital that we do everything in our power to ensure that we have new people to fill those positions in the marine industry and in our supply chains that depend on it. The government already held consultations in that regard in the spring.

The bill that I am introducing today will be of real assistance to the government. It is a ready-made bill that proposes real action to solve a real and immediate problem that the government is already aware of. I therefore invite the government and all members of the House to set partisanship aside and accept the help that I am offering today so that we can work together, help, support and ensure the sustainability of our marine industry. Let us pass this bill quickly to save our marine industry and ensure that it has the labour force it needs.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Trans Canada Trail Day Act

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

moved for leave to introduce an Act to establish Trans Canada Trail Day.

Mr. Speaker, the Trans Canada Trail is the world's longest trail, stretching over 28,000 kilometres from coast to coast, and four out of five Canadians live within 30 minutes of it. The trail was officially connected on August 26, 2017, after 25 years of work by countless Canadians to make it a reality. In recognition of that, this bill would establish the 26th day of August as Trans Canada Trail day.

While I am on my feet, I move:

That the House do now proceed to orders of the day.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The question is on the motion.

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.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded vote.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #389

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I declare the motion carried.

Bill C-18—Time Allocation Motion

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

moved:

That, in relation to Bill C-18, An Act respecting online communications platforms that make news content available to persons in Canada, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the stage of consideration of Senate amendments to the bill; and

That, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration of the said stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, there will now be a 30-minute question period. I invite hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise in their places or use the “raise hand” function so that the Chair has some idea of the number of members who wish to participate in this question period.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Madam Speaker, this bill deals with a very important topic, which is the sustainability of journalism in Canada. There have been many stakeholders from across the country who have expressed deep concerns, and I also note that, at various stages of the debate, there were many witnesses from different regions, different demographics, who participate in media in Canada who were not allowed to testify at committee.

My concern is that, if the government is curtailing debate on this without a chance for every member to speak to the amendments that the government is suggesting it either will or will not support, the voices of regional Canadians who are engaged in the media will not have a chance to be adequately debated in the House.

I am wondering, with the decline of local media in Canada, why the government is choosing to curtail debate on a bill that could, in fact, have some censorship provisions at this juncture.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Madam Speaker, there is a reason why the bill is here in front of us, and that is because there is a huge power imbalance between the tech giants and local journalists. In the last 15 years, we have seen around 500 newsrooms close their doors: big and small; in cities and rural areas; English, French and different languages. That is hurting our democracy.

This bill is absolutely essential. It is essential that we move forward. We had the chance to debate it here in the House. We debated it in committee for a long time. We went to the Senate. It was debated in the Senate. It was debated in committee at the Senate. It had the chance to go there. It is now time for us to pass the bill.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, I really do not like that they are imposing time allocation. I think it is an insult to democracy and parliamentary privilege.

That said, I do not agree with my Conservative colleague who said that people were not heard in committee when it studied Bill C‑18. I think everyone spoke to that bill. The committee heard as many people as possible and we had ample time to debate the bill.

The bill was debated in the House and it was studied in the Senate. This week, the government is moving forward by imposing time allocation, and I find that deplorable. I would like to ask the minister if he believes that we could have dealt with Bill C‑18 in the House this week without resorting to time allocation. Or, on the contrary, does he believe that the Conservatives would have done everything possible to drag things out to ensure that the bill, which they oppose, does not pass?

I deplore time allocation. Was it absolutely necessary to use it today? Could we have dealt with it this week in the normal course of debate?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will make an exception to the rule. I usually have kind words for my colleague. I still have very kind words for him, but the Bloc Québécois is being a little hypocritical. Bloc members never like time allocation, but they want to take credit when a bill is passed. They say that it is thanks to them that a bill is passed, and that they moved heaven and earth to do it. However, when it is time to vote for a bill to pass it, they hide. Let them show some backbone. Either they support it or they do not. It is one or the other.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, as my colleague from Drummond just mentioned, we had dozens and dozens of witnesses. Two of the key witnesses who came forward about Bill C-18 were from the Alberta Weekly Newspapers Association and the Saskatchewan Weekly Newspapers Association. These newspapers, independent outlets right across Alberta and Saskatchewan, are the ones that cover cities and other places represented by half of the Conservative caucus, and they said Bill C-18 needs to be put in place, adopted as quickly as possible.

We have Alberta community newspapers and Saskatchewan community newspapers saying the bill needs to be brought in, and we have Conservative MPs who represent those ridings fighting tooth and nail to block this bill completely, refusing to allow it through. To me, that seems to be hypocrisy and a clear contradiction of what Conservative MPs should be defending, which is their communities' interests.

Why are the Conservatives blocking a bill that their community newspapers are calling for?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague and his party for their incredible work on this bill. I thank the Bloc Québécois too, with the little exception here today. Its members did a good job too, because this bill is fundamental.

The question is a very important one, but I have no answer for it because I do not know why the Conservatives are blocking such an important bill. This bill is good for big cities and small communities, and for papers and radio stations across the country. Why is it? It is because big tech is getting all the money, as 80% of all advertising revenue is going to two companies: Google and Facebook. The Conservatives seem to be comfortable with that. They are super happy. They stand up for the tech giants all the time, instead of standing up for small papers and small community radio stations. They do not have the guts to stand up for local journalism. We will stand up for them.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, here we go again. I have supported time allocation in the past. The budget implementation act, for example, took us months to get through, and it got to the point where I felt it was appropriate to say that we were hearing the same speeches over and over again and that we should move on. I also just finished supporting moving to orders of the day, because I also recognize we are at a time when there are a lot of partisan antics going on here.

That being said, this is the fourth sitting day in a row when we are voting on limiting debate again. In this case, the Senate amendments came back last night. We heard one speech from the minister and one from the official opposition, and now we are being told to limit debate again. Does the minister recognize the implications this approach has for our democracy?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Madam Speaker, this bill is important for our democracy, because the media are disappearing. Almost 500 newsrooms have disappeared across the country: big ones and small ones; in cities and small communities; and in English, French and indigenous languages. So many have disappeared.

That is why it is urgent to move forward. This bill has been studied in the House, in committee, in the Senate and in the Senate committee. It has come back here and it is time we move on, because too many newsrooms have closed their doors. We need a solid, independent, non-partisan news system in our country. We need the tech giants to contribute. That is why it is so important to pass this bill now.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Madam Speaker, this is not about a power imbalance but the refusal of the legacy media to innovate. It is not up against links, as Facebook and Google do not advertise newspaper links; rather, it is up against Kijiji, Craigslist and, in Petawawa, even Jennifer Layman's Forward Thinking, where everyone in the valley goes to advertise or find a job.

What this is really about is preventing news from getting to the wider population through the end result of not having news links on Facebook or Google. This means that Canadians do not get all the news that is going on.

Why does the minister want to stifle the debate on the ability of Canadians to learn what is going on in their own country? What do the Liberals have to hide?