Debates of Dec. 16th, 2024

(Return tabled)

Question No.3150—

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

With regard to government expenditures related to the Prime Minister's trip to New York to attend the United Nations General Assembly in September 2024: (a) what are the expenditures incurred to date, in total and broken down by type of expense; (b) how many members were part of the Canadian delegation; (c) what are the names and titles of the delegation members; (d) what was the total expenditure on hotels in the New York City area during that visit; and (e) what are the details of the expenses at each hotel, including the (i) total amount spent, (ii) name of the hotel, (iii) number of rooms rented each night, (iv) rate paid and the number of rooms at each rate?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3151—

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

With regard to legal costs incurred by the government in relation to litigation against the Information Commissioner since January 1, 2021: what is the total expenditure on outside legal counsel, broken down by legal costs paid out to date and by legal costs scheduled to be paid out, for (i) Attorney General of Canada v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1623-22), (ii) Export Development Canada v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1793-22 and Federal Court of Appeal file A-345-23), (iii) Minister of Public Services and Procurement v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-125-23), (iv) Clerk of the Privy Council v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1090-23), (v) Clerk of the Privy Council v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1091-23), (vi) Information Commissioner of Canada v. President and Chief Executive Officer of the Trans Mountain Corporation (Federal Court file T-1399-23), (vii) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1606-23), (viii) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1607-23), (ix) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1608-23), (x) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1653-23), (xi) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1680-23), (xii) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1728-23), (xiii) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1764-23), (xiv) Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T- 2022-23), (xv) Information Commissioner of Canada v. Minister of National Defence (Federal Court file T-2683-23), (xvi) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-272-24), (xvii) Minister of Transport v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-280-24), (xviii) Information Commissioner of Canada v. Minister of National Defence (Federal Court file T-333-24), (xix) Information Commissioner of Canada v. Minister of National Defence (Federal Court file T-334-24), (xx) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-342-24), (xxi) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-344-24), (xxii) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-371-24), (xxiii) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-397-24), (xxiv) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-970-24), (xxv) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1054-24), (xxvi) Minister of Canadian Heritage v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1060-24), (xxvii) Information Commissioner of Canada v. Minister of National Defence (Federal Court file T-1226-24), (xxviii) Minister of National Defence v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1433-24), (xxix) Minister of National Defence v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1434- 24), (xxx) Minister of Indigenous Services v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-1556-24), (xxxi) Information Commissioner of Canada v. Chairperson of the Immigration and Refugee Board (Federal Court file T-1822-24), (xxxii) Minister of National Defence v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-2013-24), (xxxiii) Minister of National Defence v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-2681-24), (xxxiv) Minister of National Defence v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-2709-24), (xxxv) Minister of National Defence v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-2720-24), (xxxvi) Minister of National Defence v. Information Commissioner of Canada (Federal Court file T-2779-24)?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3152—

[Gerald Soroka, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

With regard to Parks Canada's national fire management program: (a) as of July 22, 2024, what was the breakdown of firefighting equipment available through the program by (i) type of equipment (e.g., fire truck, water tender, helicopter, drone, portable pump, bulldozer, brush cutter, air tanker), (ii) quantity of each equipment type, (iii) storage location, including the quantity of each equipment type at each location; (b) as of July 22, 2024, what was the breakdown of firefighting personnel under the program by (i) qualification level (e.g., certified wildland firefighter, volunteer firefighter, support personnel), (ii) number of personnel at each location; (c) how much of the equipment and personnel specified in (a) and (b) were actively utilized in response to wildfires occurring in National Parks in 2024, broken down by (i) National Park location, (ii) type of equipment and number utilized, (iii) number of personnel deployed; and (d) for all equipment or personnel not utilized in wildfire responses occurring within National Parks in 2024, (i) what was the reason for non-utilization, (ii) what other roles or assignments were designated for this equipment and personnel during this period?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3154—

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

With regard to fires at each place of worship that were caused by arson between 2016-24: (a) for each instance, was the arsonist (i) apprehended, (ii) not apprehended; and (b) for each instance in (a)(i), what were the sentences received?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3155—

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

With regard to wildfires caused by arson, between 2016-24: (a) what charges and sentences were laid for arsonists; and (b) what are the details of each account of which wildfires were determined to be caused by arsonists, including whether or not the perpetrator was apprehended?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3156—

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

With regard to the Order in Council 2024-1112 authorizing Canada Post to transport prohibited firearms: (a) did the government consult (i) Canada Post, (ii) the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, prior to issuing the Order In Council, and, if so, on what date were they consulted and how were they consulted; (b) how is the government addressing the safety issues that Canada Post employees will face as a result of the Order; (c) what safety precautions have been put into place by Canada Post since the Order was issued; (d) why did the government take the position that it is safer for Canada Post employees to transport prohibited firearms rather than firearms owners who have taken the Canada Firearms Safety Course; (e) will the government require Canada Post employees, who will now be required to transport prohibited firearms, to take the Canada Firearms Safety Course in order to ensure safe transport, and, if not, why not; (f) if the answer to (e) is affirmative, how much will this training cost Canada Post; and (g) what mechanisms, if any, are in place so that Canada Post employees, who are uncomfortable with transporting firearms, or are not trained to transport firearms, are not forced to do so against their will?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3157—

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

With regard to government programs aimed at establishing digital credentials or a digital identification (ID): (a) how many employees or full-time equivalents are assigned to working on such a program; (b) how much money has been spent exploring or studying options in relation to such a program in the past five years, in total and broken down by type of expenditure; (c) what is the government's plan for how digital credentials or a digital ID would be used; (d) what options or uses have been studied to date; (e) of the options in (d), which ones have been rejected outright by the government; (f) does the government commit to not establishing any new digital credential or digital ID projects or programs without receiving explicit approval from Parliament prior to starting any such projects or programs, and, if not, why not; and (g) which employees or other individuals has the government authorized to be involved in any related projects or programs, and who is in charge of overseeing the work of the individuals involved?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3158—

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

With regard to complaints received by the CRA related to its assistance by telephone: (a) what is the number of complaints received since January 1, 2022, broken down by month; and (b) of the totals in (a), what is the breakdown by type of complaint, including (i) the line not working or being out of service, (ii) dropped calls, (iii) long hold times, (iv) others?

(Return tabled)

Question No.3160—

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

With regard to the Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund (DMAF): (a) how much of the $2 billion promised through the fund has been delivered to the recipients to date; and (b) what are the details of all projects funded through the DMAF to date, including, for each, the (i) location, (ii) amount of funding, (iii) project description, (iv) start date, (v) completion date, or expected completion date, (vi) funding breakdown, if the project is funded by sources in addition to the DMAF?

(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, please.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Fall Economic Statement

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

I wish to inform the House that I have received notice of a request for an emergency debate from the hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle. I invite him to rise and make a brief intervention.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I have been in this place now for over 20 years. I have never seen a situation like this before. Today is the day the government waited until to table the fall economic update where it would publish the true deficit numbers that Canadians will be on the hook for.

As the House knows, the former finance minister resigned this morning. Things are unclear; there are some media reports indicating that there may be a replacement now, but at the time of the writing of her letter, it was not even clear who the finance minister was.

All this is at a time when Canadians are facing an emergency situation. They are facing the fastest rate of inflation in over a generation with food inflation; food prices are rising 37% faster here in Canada than in the United States. They are facing a housing crisis that the Prime Minister caused by doubling housing costs with mortgage and rent payments. Two million Canadians are lining up at food banks. There is crime and chaos on our streets, and now the government is in shambles.

By waiting until the second-last day of the December sitting, the government was hoping to table the fall economic update and then run and hide for six weeks in the snow, depriving parliamentarians of holding the government to account, the very thing Parliament exists for: to oversee government spending.

Because of the situation, we find ourselves in an unprecedented case where some new person is going to table the fall economic update, we believe. It is still unclear, according to media reports. It is unclear how the economic update will be presented, and it is unclear whether or not any parliamentarians will be able to participate in any kind of questioning of whichever minister ends up delivering it or tabling it, if one actually does. Then the House will rise at the end of the day tomorrow for six weeks.

Because of this unprecedented and emergency situation, I believe that the best thing you, Mr. Speaker, can do to uphold the integrity of Parliament as an institution that exists to oversee, scrutinize and approve government taxation and spending is to grant an emergency debate. That is what my letter to you outlines.

When we look at the situation facing Canada, including threats from abroad; 25% tariffs; staring down the barrel of a gun pointed at us by a U.S. President-elect with a strong and fresh new mandate, who can smell weakness from a mile away; and a cabinet in chaos, with one-fifth of the government caucus demanding that the Prime Minister resign, we believe that it is now time for you, Mr. Speaker, to grant the House at least the opportunity to question the government for a few hours this evening on what should be its fall economic presentation.

The former finance minister herself said that going past the $40-billion guardrail would plunge the country into another round of nightmarish inflation and interest rate hikes. Media reports are speculating as to how high the deficit will go.

I know that there are precedents and guidelines you, Mr. Speaker, might look to as to whether you should approve an emergency debate. However, given the fact that there is really no other opportunity for parliamentarians to debate the issues, to scrutinize the economic update that is scheduled to happen this afternoon, I believe it is incumbent upon you now, Mr. Speaker to consider the rights of individual MPs and the House as a collective to be the representatives of Canadian taxpayers and to hold the government to account for its economic update later on today.

Speaker's Ruling

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

I thank the hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle for his intervention, to which I listened very carefully. However, I am not satisfied that the request meets the requirements of the Standing Orders at this time.