House of Commons Hansard #386 of the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was conservatives.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Oral Questions—Speaker's Ruling The Speaker rules that questions in Question Period must relate to government administrative responsibility. Question Period's purpose is government accountability, not attacking opposition parties who lack the same response opportunity. The Speaker will enforce this. 900 words.
Public Accounts Members debate a Public Accounts report on pandemic border measures, focusing on current border security. Conservatives raise concerns about lax controls, increased fentanyl trafficking, illegal crossings, and potential U.S. tariffs, criticizing the government's record. Liberals defend their border investments, accusing Conservatives of amplifying misinformation and past cuts. NDP members also criticize Conservative border cuts and accuse them of undermining Canada by echoing U.S. rhetoric. Bloc members criticize federal border management and call for CBSA administrative supervision. 25200 words, 3 hours.
Industry and Technology NDP moves to split Bill C-27 into privacy/tribunal and AI components. They argue the bill is poorly drafted and compromises privacy, seeking to pass the privacy component and protect the Privacy Commissioner. Liberals argue for a holistic approach, are open to amendments, and accuse parties of obstruction. 6200 words, 45 minutes.
Access to Parliamentary Precinct NDP MP Leah Gazan responds to a Conservative MP's question of privilege, denying involvement in an event that allegedly breached privilege and defending her support for "Jews Against Genocide" demonstrators against accusations. 1000 words, 10 minutes.
Opposition Motion—Repeal of Bill C-5 Members debate a Conservative motion claiming Liberal drug policies and Bill C-5 contribute to 47,000 deaths. Conservatives propose reversing C-5, increasing sentences, and enhancing border security. Liberals, Bloc, and NDP counter that C-5 addressed unconstitutional mandatory minimums and simple possession, argue Conservatives cut border security, and advocate for harm reduction and treatment. 12900 words, 2 hours.
Supplementary Estimates (B), 2024-25 First reading of Bill C-79. The bill grants sums of money for federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025. It passes all readings with support from Liberals, Bloc, NDP, and Green parties; Conservatives and one Independent vote against. 400 words, 10 minutes.
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased that the member opposite quoted the Parliamentary Budget Officer because, according to his analysis, the “current fiscal policy in Canada is sustainable over the long term.” That is the finding of an objective analysis that was referred to by the member opposite. That is the reality.
Dominique Vien Conservative Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC
Mr. Speaker, the reality looks like this: public finances in disarray, tensions at the border, frustration in cabinet, dissent in caucus and public fatigue of this worn-out, inefficient, spend-happy government. Not even the finance minister is getting along with the Prime Minister, according to The Globe and Mail. It is time for him to ask himself that important question. There is plenty of snow if he needs to go take a walk.
How big is the deficit?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I will be tabling the fall economic statement next Monday, here in the House of Commons.
The fall economic statement will show that the government is maintaining its fiscal anchor. More specifically, it is a question of reducing the federal debt as a share of the economy over the medium term. In addition, I expect the debt-to-GDP ratio we projected in the spring budget for fiscal year 2023-24 will be met.
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, three Chilean asylum seekers escaped from the Laval immigration holding centre.
These are people with ties to international organized crime who were subject to a removal order. The three escapees are just the latest in a long line of nearly 750 asylum seekers in Quebec who are inadmissible for security reasons, yet the federal government is not deporting them. These people are a threat to the public.
How can the government justify such massive failures to hold and deport asylum seekers with criminal pasts?
Dominic LeBlanc LiberalMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, we certainly share our colleague's concerns about the circumstances of what happened at the Laval centre on the weekend.
I have asked border services to conduct an immediate review of the facility's security systems. We have tripled the number of guards on site. We have changed protocols for certain people to access certain parts of the facility.
We will keep working to ensure that this kind of thing does not happen again.
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, the federal government cannot deport the 750 foreign nationals with criminal records from Quebec, and they are just the tip of the iceberg.
In 2020, the Auditor General denounced the fact that the Canada Border Services Agency was not conducting investigations to find individuals who were supposed to be deported. Ms. Hogan said, “at least 70% of all criminal cases were not reviewed annually, and 75% of all failed asylum cases were not reviewed every 3 years as required.” Clearly, the agency is incapable of taking action.
Is this because of a lack of resources or a lack of political will?
Dominic LeBlanc LiberalMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, it will come as no surprise to my colleague that the answer is neither. Many countries around the world are experiencing similar situations as the number of asylum seekers is increasing.
However, we accept that we have a responsibility, by law, and in accordance with the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, to ensure that certain individuals who pose a threat to Canada's public safety are detained before being removed from Canada. That is exactly what we are investing in now, and we will continue to keep everyone safe.
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, there is the matter of political will. Last winter, The Globe and Mail reported that, since 2016, just one month after the new Liberal government took office, 14,609 people had been issued deportation orders. In May 2023, 9,317 of those people were still in Canada.
Let us think about that. During almost the entire Liberal reign, 64% of those who are inadmissible to Canada were never deported. At this point, it seems as though the deportation of criminals is basically voluntary.
Why have there been no consequences for violating a deportation order, even for years, under the Liberals?
Dominic LeBlanc LiberalMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, our colleague is well aware that deporting people who do not have legal status in Canada and who have violated our criminal law is a serious responsibility that we accept.
It goes without saying that it is a serious responsibility to work with our police forces and the CBSA. We are also working with our partners in some provinces to ensure that we can detain anyone who poses a real threat to public safety and deport them from Canada.
I have full confidence that we will be able to continue this work.
Jasraj Singh Hallan Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
Mr. Speaker, the spending spree spat between the finance minister and the Prime Minister has spilled into the public, according to The Globe and Mail.
The PBO confirmed that the Prime Minister forced the finance minister to blow through her $40-billion fiscal guardrail promise, taking Canada's finances off a cliff. Now he wants her to bury the bad news of their deficits in the dark days of December next Monday.
How bad is the deficit?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I was actually about to ask if the Conservatives are giving out Christmas presents for alliteration? We are supposed to be talking about serious issues here.
I am glad, though, that the member opposite has spoken about the Parliamentary Budget Officer, because, just a few weeks ago, in his independent analysis, the Parliamentary Budget Officer concluded, “current fiscal policy in Canada is sustainable over the long term.” That is the conclusion of the PBO who was just cited by the member opposite, and it is good news for Canadians.
Jasraj Singh Hallan Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
Mr. Speaker, Canadians cannot have Christmas because she cannot do math.
The Prime Minister lost control of Canada's finances and forced the finance minister cover their devastating deficit. The spending tensions between her and the Prime Minister will have her getting the bill no more treatment, and Canadians have to foot the bill for the spending spree separation.
We know that she already blew through her $40-billion fiscal guardrail promise, but what is the deficit number?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I do really look forward to tabling the fall economic statement in the House on Monday. In the fall economic statement on Monday, we will show that the government is maintaining its fiscal anchor, specifically reducing the federal debt as a share of the economy over the medium term. In addition, I expect that the debt-to-GDP ratio we projected in the spring budget for fiscal year 2023-24 will be met.
Canada has the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7, we have the lowest deficit, and this is good news for Canada and Canadians.
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Mr. Speaker, after nine years of this Bloc Québécois-backed Prime Minister, the Liberal government is a shambles. The Prime Minister and his Minister of Finance are at loggerheads. Both of them have lost control of the country's public spending.
The Minister of Finance promised that the Liberal government's massive deficit would not exceed $40 billion. The Prime Minister could not care less about spending or how it affects Canadian families. While he is still here, I have an easy question for him.
What is the deficit? Who won?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are going to win because our government is united. Our government is working in unison to deliver results for Canadians, whether that means dental care, child care or doctors for Canadians.
We are there for Canadians. We are proud to do it, and we do it as a team.
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not even want to hear the finance minister's explanations any more. There is some bickering going on across the way. Some unhappy Liberals have been talking to The Globe and Mail. It reported that five senior Liberal Party veterans and three political staffers confirmed that tensions have risen between the Minister of Finance's office and the Prime Minister's Office over spending.
The Minister of Finance is standing firm on her enormous $40‑billion deficit. The Prime Minister wants an even more monstrous deficit. Will the Minister of Finance keep her word and reassure Canadians, who are paying the bill, that a $40‑billion deficit is big enough?
How much is the deficit?
Chrystia Freeland LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I will be tabling the fall economic statement in this House on Monday.
In next week's fall economic statement, we will show that the government is maintaining its fiscal anchor, specifically reducing the federal debt as a share of the economy over the medium term. In addition, I expect that the debt-to-GDP ratio we projected in the spring budget for fiscal year 2023-24 will be met.
Bonita Zarrillo NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are hurting, and we saw it expressed in the gallery today. Renters in Canada are facing exploitation and eviction because of corporate greed.
HousingOral Questions
The Speaker Greg Fergus
Colleagues, I am having difficulty hearing the question. It is not for the Chair to agree or disagree with the content of the question, but to make sure that it does follow the rules. I am asking members to please restrain themselves.
The hon. member for Port Moody—Coquitlam from the top, please.
Bonita Zarrillo NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are hurting, and we saw it expressed in the gallery today. Renters in Canada are facing exploitation and eviction because of corporate greed.
HousingOral Questions
The Speaker Greg Fergus
I am going to invite the hon. member to rephrase her question. I want to remind the member that we should not make reference to what has or has not happened in the galleries today to ensure that this behaviour is not repeated.
The hon. member for Port Moody—Coquitlam.
Bonita Zarrillo NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are hurting. We saw it expressed in the gallery today—