Debates of Dec. 13th, 2024

(Return tabled)

Question No.3136—

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

With regard to government statistics on Canada's incarcerated or prison population, since 2016: (a) as of the start of each year, how many individuals were incarcerated in Canadian prisons or correctional facilities, in total and broken down by type of correctional facility; (b) currently, how many individuals are incarcerated in Canadian prisons or correctional facilities, in total and broken down by type of correctional facility; and (c) what is the breakdown of (a) and (b) by violent and non-violent offenders?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3137—

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

With regard to government statistics on church burnings in Canada, broken down by year since 2016: (a) how many churches have burned down that the government is aware of, in total and broken down by province or territory; and (b) does the government have any specific plan to prevent future church burning-related arson attacks, and, if so, what are the details, including the date when the plan will be implemented?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3141—

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

With regard to funding provided by the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) to the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care: (a) how much money has the PHAC provided to the task force, broken down by year for each of the last five years; and (b) in the last fiscal year, what is the breakdown of how the task force spent its funding allotment by line item?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3142—

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

With regard to successful business applicants to the Employment and Social Development Canada Apprenticeship Service Program between June 1, 2022, and October 28, 2024: (a) how many successful applicants had a qualified first-year apprentice, broken down by the 39 Red Seal trades of the apprentice; (b) how many of the successful applicants had a qualified first-year apprentice (i) complete their apprenticeship and become a full-time employee with the applicant, (ii) complete their apprenticeship, (iii) start, but not complete, their apprenticeship, (iv) not start their apprenticeship; and (c) how many of the successful applicants had their grant refunded for failure to fulfill an apprenticeship agreement?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3144—

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

With regard to the Canadian Dental Care Plan: what is the number of beneficiaries enrolled in the program, broken down by (i) province or territory, (ii) federal electoral district, (iii) Quebec municipality, if available?

(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.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, John Nater]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Foreign Affairs and International Development

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

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to be able to rise and speak to the concurrence motion. I would tell the member for Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston not to worry as my feelings are not hurt.

At the end of the day, it is somewhat ironic that the Conservative Party would move a motion expressing concern about the lakes in Canada. Canada literally has millions of lakes. When I was in opposition, one of the most bizarre budgetary measures that Stephen Harper took when the current leader of the Conservative Party was either parliamentary secretary to the then prime minister or sat around the cabinet table, was a decision to cut the funding to the Experimental Lakes Area.

Anyone with knowledge, even the member for Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston opposite in the Conservative Party, should be able to recognize the hypocrisy here. On the one hand, they are expressing concern in regard to what is taking place in the lakes. They are saying there should be more work done with respect to some of the studies and actions being taken, yet the leader of the Conservative Party today directly participated in the budget cuts for the ELA programs. It is truly amazing. It is almost as if the Conservatives completely forgot about their actions a number of years ago. Not only were Canadians upset about it, but it actually had an effect around the world.

People could not understand how the leader of the Conservative Party would dump the programs in the Experimental Lakes Area, which was worked out of Kenora. We also had scientists in the city of Winnipeg who were dealing with it. A few dozen scientists were all looking at areas such as acid rain, which used to be important to the Conservative Party, but it does not necessarily care about it anymore. They talked about toxic metals, climate change, mercury pollution and all the other types of things that we find in our lakes that we should all be concerned about.

This is the type of work that was being done through the ELA programs for decades. It made it through Progressive Conservatives like Brian Mulroney and through Liberal governments. It only stopped when it hit the government of Stephen Harper and the current leader of the Conservative Party, who had the so-called internal wisdom between the two of them to decide it was time to cut the budget, throw the science out the window and let the lakes go whatever way it is the lakes would go. It was truly amazing.

Now the Conservatives bring forward a motion for concurrence that says that we are not doing justice to the issue of lakes and it makes reference to the Great Lakes Fishery Commission. The commission, no doubt, does fabulous work. There are representatives of both Canada and the United States on it. It is advanced in the Liberal caucus and by others who talk so much about our Great Lakes. We have a very strong and powerful advocate for our Great Lakes in the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport. I find it strange that we now have a far-right Conservative Party that has now taken an interest in science and lakes. That is an absolute joke.

The leader of the Conservative Party demonstrated very clearly what he thought about our lakes in Canada when the Conservatives made the decision to fire and get rid of dozens of scientists who were looking at ways to ensure that we have not only healthier lakes in Canada but also a globally strong footprint through the ELA and the programs it was providing. I introduced petitions on the issue when I was in third-party status with the Liberal Party. Therefore, for the Conservatives to try to pretend that they are concerned with this issue at this moment in time is a stretch.

I asked questions of the two presenters on it, and we found out why they have really brought forward this concurrence report. I want to get to the motivation behind their choosing this particular report. It was not to try to convince Canadians that they are concerned about the many lakes in Canada. It is far from that. I recall the two questions that I asked of both the member who introduced the concurrence motion and the member who followed the person who introduced the motion. Both are Conservative members who have been given their marching orders by the self-serving Conservative caucus, led by the leader of the Conservative caucus, who has one objective this session. That is to play a destructive force here on Parliament Hill to prevent legislation from passing, whether it is government legislation or private members' legislation, because the leader of the Conservative Party is more interested in himself and the Conservative Party than he is in Canadians.

I posed the question, and what kind of response did I get from the two speakers earlier? Well, we got an admission. The first member said that I was right. It is not necessarily about the concurrence motion. He said that the heart of the concurrence motion is accountability, and accountability is really what this is all about. Then the member went into talking about how we need to directly hand the documents over to the RCMP and that would be accountability. That was the response that I got from the individual who moved the motion. Then, the second member reiterated the issue of accountability with respect to the motion. He said that we might not be here for this particular report. This is a mechanism by which they can stick to their guns to say to produce the documents and that, if we were to just produce the documents, well, then they would not have to do this.

I want to spend some time on those members' answers to the question because that is the motivation and the reason we are debating this issue. Obviously, they really did not think through the issue at hand, which is the concurrence report. When I heard it, the first thing that came to my mind was the hypocrisy of the leader of the Conservative Party because he participated in the cutting of the Experimental Lakes Area program. Had the members thought it through, they would have realized that and saved their leader some embarrassment. I would like to think, but that is not what they were thinking. They are more focused on the grander scheme of the multi-million dollar filibuster here on the floor of the House of Commons, which has been taking place for the last nine weeks. In the words of members of the Conservative Party who spoke today in response to my question, it is, for them, about accountability and the government needing to provide the papers. If we were to provide the papers, they would stop this self-serving Conservative game.

Let me address that point. To be very clear, it is very much not about Canadians but rather the self-interest of the leader of the Conservative Party. That is number one. As my colleague says, it is always about that when it comes to what is taking place here and outside the chamber. Secondly, this self-serving Conservative mentality is actually hurting Canadians.

As Conservatives try to go out and about, not only inside the chamber but outside the chamber, they like to say that Parliament is dysfunctional. Parliament is not dysfunctional; the Conservative Party of Canada is dysfunctional. It has gone so far to the right that it is a dysfunctional party that does not reflect anywhere near the interests of average Canadians.

We saw this when they stood up one by one and voted against giving a sales tax break to Canadians during the holiday season, even though they campaigned on it in the last federal election. In the last federal election, every one of them campaigned on giving a holiday GST tax break. The leader of the Conservative Party actually tweeted on the issue. However, when the time came to stand up and make their votes count, they voted against giving a holiday tax break from the GST on a wide variety of commodities. Shame on them.

[An hon. member]

It is a trick.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, yes, it is. I look at this session and the trickery, as one member said, of the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada. When the Conservative member gave me the answer that it was about accountability and to produce the papers and the game would stop, that is not true.

Let us talk about the multi-million dollar game. What the Conservatives are saying is that we are supposed to take unredacted documents and give them directly over to the RCMP. Why? The Conservatives say there was a motion passed many months ago saying that we had to do this. Well—

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I might be asking for the impossible, but on the point of relevance, the member is saying nothing to the motion of concurrence we have before us. Could you please try to do what you can to tidy him up?

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

I appreciate the input. I will say that we should be sticking to the debate at hand.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, since this morning I have been sitting here listening to my Conservative colleagues speak on everything other than the main motion.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, I would encourage the member to read the responses that I received when I posed the question on the concurrence report. The response I was given, in essence, was that this is all about accountability and all we have to do is produce the papers. If we produce the papers, the game would—

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

This is just extending the debate. The more that we do this, the more the clock does not actually run. We are just debating.

I will recognize the hon parliamentary secretary.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am just going to assume the member never heard the answers that were given by the Conservatives when they said to me, in response to questions about the report, that it was all about accountability and the fact that all we have to do is produce the papers. All I am doing is indicating why it is not as simple as the members opposite say it is for us to produce the papers. If the member were listening, he would have heard how abysmal Stephen Harper and the current leader of the Conservative Party were on the ELA programs that they cut. Hopefully I will get a little extra time to be able to provide further comment on that.

I appreciate the interruption, but it was not necessary—

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. If you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to let this member go on and on forever. With such wisdom dispensed from his lips with every word he says, surely we can cancel our Christmas holidays to enjoy the pearls of wisdom that he continues to drop upon us—