House of Commons Hansard #63 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was treaties.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation Act Second reading of Bill C-10. The bill proposes creating a Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation to review and monitor federal performance on modern treaties. Conservatives argue it is unnecessary bureaucracy that duplicates the Auditor General's role and a "leadership failure" by the government. Liberals, NDP, and Bloc Québécois largely support the bill, emphasizing it is Indigenous-led and crucial for accountability and reconciliation by ensuring treaty obligations are met. Some Bloc members also seek improvements to reporting timelines. 17600 words, 2 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.
Admissibility of Committee Amendments to Bill C-12 Arielle Kayabaga raises a point of order regarding nine amendments to Bill C-12, arguing they were inadmissible at committee due to violating the "parent act rule." Conservatives indicate they will dispute this. 400 words.
Respecting Families of Murdered and Brutalized Persons Act Second reading of Bill C-235. The bill seeks to amend the Criminal Code to allow judges to increase parole ineligibility from 25 to a maximum of 40 years for offenders who abduct, sexually assault, and murder the same victim. Proponents argue this would spare families of murdered and brutalized persons from repeated parole hearings. Opposition and Liberals raise concerns about its constitutionality, citing the Supreme Court's Bissonnette decision, while suggesting amendments to ensure compliance. 7400 words, 1 hour.
Tatiana Auguste Liberal Terrebonne, QC
Madam Speaker, NATO has long been a cornerstone of the rules-based international order that has ensured peace and stability since the Second World War. Our allies and partners will be meeting in Brussels next week to discuss the conflicts and challenges facing our alliance.
Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs share with the House how she intends to represent Canada and work with our allies to advance our interests in the lead-up to this important meeting?
Anita Anand LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.
I will be at NATO next week to discuss very important issues with our allies, including topics like Ukraine, the Arctic and our collective defence.
With an $80-billion investment in budget 2025, we are here for the Canadian Armed Forces and our defence sector. Canada will always play its part in collective defence and in protecting our country.
Dane Lloyd Conservative Parkland, AB
Madam Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister promised Canadians a pipeline, maybe, someday. He is not sure. Meanwhile, the environment minister cannot even say the word “pipeline”, and another minister just jumped ship. This is not a grand bargain; it is a grand ransom.
The only thing certain is that Canadians' industrial carbon taxes are going up. Canadians have sacrificed a lot, and all we have received so far are vague Liberal promises. Will the Prime Minister tell us what year we will see shovels in the ground on a new oil pipeline to the west coast?
Steven MacKinnon LiberalMinister of Transport and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Madam Speaker, we had, yesterday, a very comprehensive display of meeting the ambitions and meeting the moment in western Canada in Alberta, making sure that we have a better path to fighting climate change and a higher price on industrial carbon. Premier Smith has signed on to a radical set of new measures to make sure we have clean electricity, to make sure we build data centres and to make sure we build nuclear energy.
Do members know who is going to do all that? Canada's building tradespeople will do that, the men and women of Canada's building trades. We are going to build Alberta strong and build Canada strong.
Dane Lloyd Conservative Parkland, AB
Madam Speaker, notice he did not say the word “pipeline”. As part of the great ransom, taxpayers will be required to invest billions of dollars to pump air into the ground.
Meanwhile, by pure coincidence, I am sure, the Prime Minister's company Brookfield is the largest investor in Entropy, a carbon capture company. The Prime Minister is using taxpayer funds to underwrite his company's investments. Brookfield's $300-million investment in Entropy is already backed by $200 million in taxpayer funds. That is not Canada strong, that is Brookfield strong. How much does the Prime Minister stand to gain by forcing Canadians to fund his carbon capture projects?
Corey Hogan LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources
Madam Speaker, tinfoil is actually made of aluminum, so I would like to thank the member for his first act in supporting that sector in the House.
The fact of the matter is this: Yesterday, we announced an MOU with Alberta that increases economic prosperity for this country, increases environmental sustainability and the durability of environmental action in this country, and makes us less reliant on the United States.
That is a good day for Alberta. That is a good day for Canada. I welcome the members opposite to get on board.
Sukhman Gill Conservative Abbotsford—South Langley, BC
Madam Speaker, this week, we saw reports that the B.C. Liberal caucus is “seething”, “anxious” and “angry” about the Prime Minister's pipe dream to the Pacific coast. To keep them quiet, he even gave the B.C. Premier a veto on the project, and will increase the industrial carbon tax, which will only make everything worse.
When the Prime Minister said that he would build at a scale and speed not seen in generations, did he mean taxes, not projects?
Corey Hogan LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources
Madam Speaker, yesterday was a great day for Canada because it got us onto a better course of action and a more common ground and confederation between Alberta and Canada, which will also lead to a better course of action across the entire country. Part of the agreement was that we would work with British Columbia, that we would work in a tripartite table, and of course, that we would all respect the indigenous rights of peoples.
This is great for Canada. This expands our markets. This expands our economy, and this makes environmental action more durable.
Sukhman Gill Conservative Abbotsford—South Langley, BC
Madam Speaker, families need stronger paycheques and affordable energy, but instead of building pipelines to the Pacific, the Prime Minister gives us more paper, more delays and more vetoes. The MOU guarantees nothing except seven months of waiting and two years of federal studies.
When will the Prime Minister finally get out of the way and give Canadians a firm construction date for the west coast pipeline, or will this be another Liberal broken promise?
Yasir Naqvi LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade and to the Secretary of State (International Development)
Madam Speaker, the Prime Minister is focused on making sure that we are creating good-paying jobs for all Canadians. We are investing and building things like they have never been done before. We are making sure that we diversify trade, so we are investing in our ports right in British Columbia so we can export more to other markets, such as the Indo-Pacific.
That is the focus of the government. That is the focus of the Prime Minister. We will not rest until we create good-paying jobs for all Canadians.
Helena Konanz Conservative Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Madam Speaker, Liberal MPs in B.C. are telling the media that they are “seething,” “anxious” and “angry” about a pipeline that would end Canada's economic dependence on the United States. The Liberal caucus is falling apart over this.
The Prime Minister must not give his “keep it in the ground” caucus or Premier Eby a veto. Only he has the constitutional and legislative power to approve a pipeline today.
Will he ignore the naysayers and approve it today, or will he offer more delay?
Jaime Battiste LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations
Madam Speaker, we are committed on this side of the House to co-operative federalism with the province of Alberta, but we remain committed and we remain respectful of aboriginal and treaty rights, as well as the free, prior and informed consent of communities that is entrenched in UNDRIP. We are going to continue to respect these rights. It is not only the right thing to do; it is also the law.
Helena Konanz Conservative Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Madam Speaker, let us be clear on what was signed yesterday. It was a memorandum that will hike the industrial carbon tax and, in exchange, the Liberals will allow a pipeline proposal to be further studied for the next two years. There are no timelines for approval, and many Liberals are demanding that the timelines be never. The Liberal caucus is divided.
Will the Prime Minister ignore them, forget the tax hikes and just approve a pipeline today, or is this pipeline a pipe dream?
Peter Fragiskatos LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration
Madam Speaker, the slogans continue on the other side. What is lacking is seriousness. They condemn a decision signed by the Premier of Alberta. Yesterday was a great day for Alberta and for Canada. The government was elected on a policy vision to ensure more jobs in this country, economic stewardship and environmental stewardship at the same time.
We will maintain that vision from start to finish. I invite the member to join us.
Scott Anderson Conservative Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee, BC
Madam Speaker, we hear that the B.C. Liberal caucus is “seething,” “anxious” and “angry” about a possible pipeline, so the Prime Minister is appeasing them by hiding behind the provincial NDP, just like Brookfield hides behind Caribbean tax laws.
After nine years of Liberal energy mismanagement, Canadians want a pipeline.
Will the Prime Minister do his job, stop the political games and immediately get shovels in the ground on this oil pipeline?
Corey Hogan LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources
Madam Speaker, the far-reaching memorandum of understanding with Alberta includes a number of timelines. I invite members to read it. By July 1 of next year is when a pipeline proposal will come from the Province of Alberta. There are timelines, and we are seeing that there is not just talk about pipelines, but talks about AI data centres, nuclear energy, and many ways we can grow the Canadian economy in a clean way, in a big way and in a way that does not rely as much on the United States of America.
This is a good day for Alberta. This is a good day for Canada. I invite members opposite to get on board.
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Madam Speaker, the Liberal government is not just divided, it is cracking. B.C. Liberal MPs are publicly venting. Unnamed ministers are warning of serious problems, and now the Quebec lieutenant has walked out of cabinet entirely. While the Prime Minister struggles to hold his team together, Canadians are left paying the price. We sell almost all our oil to one customer, the U.S., because we have no pipeline to the Pacific.
When will the Prime Minister stop putting political damage control ahead of the national interest and give us a date for when the pipeline will be built?
Sean Fraser LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Madam Speaker, the Liberal caucus is only cracking open wide enough to welcome Conservatives to come join us.
My hon. colleague would like a date for a pipeline to the west coast. How about May of last year, when the Trans Mountain expansion got new Canadian products to markets, which is driving up the price of Canadian resources?
The Conservatives failed to get anything built when they were last in government because they ignored the role of provinces and because they ignored the rights of indigenous peoples in this country. By working together with different levels of government and indigenous rights holders, we are able to advance major projects. This is not some idea; this is our record.
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Madam Speaker, a pipeline to the west coast is not just another project; it is a nation-building decision that falls squarely under the federal government's authority. Canadians expect the Prime Minister to act, but instead, he has given the NDP Premier of B.C. a veto in an effort to manage the uproar in his caucus, a caucus that is now losing senior ministers over the issue.
When will the Prime Minister stop passing the buck and use the federal authority that rests with him alone to ensure that this pipeline gets built?
Sean Fraser LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Madam Speaker, the member is talking about the constitutional authority of the Prime Minister. If she actually read the entirety of the section that she is referring to, she would notice that it also gives the constitutional authority to provincial governments to build or not build the infrastructure, the roads, the electricity and the water services that would make it possible to have a pipeline actually operate in the first place. In addition, section 35 of that very same constitution demands that governments respect the inherent and treaty rights of indigenous peoples in this country, including by consulting them on advancing major projects.
By working together, we can get big things done. That is a path forward.
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Madam Speaker, Atlantic Canada is a culture of innovation, and my riding of Dartmouth—Cole Harbour is home to leading ocean technology and maritime defence researchers and innovators, many of whom are located strategically along the shores of beautiful Dartmouth Cove. These companies and partners are driving major advances in ocean tech and strengthening Canada's national defence and security.
Can the minister highlight the work the government is doing to support these important security and defence initiatives in Dartmouth—Cole Harbour?
David McGuinty LiberalMinister of National Defence
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his work and for his advocacy for Atlantic Canadian excellence.
This past weekend, we announced Canada's first maritime defence innovation secure hub, or DISH, at COVE in Dartmouth—Cole Harbour. This is a brand new, $30-million hub. We will bring together, for the first time, defence and security partners, industry, academia and naval operators to develop, test and transition new maritime technologies. From coast to coast to coast, we are investing millions in building up a resilient innovation industry right here at home.
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Madam Speaker, millions of Canadians do not have a family doctor, and Canada's emergency rooms are overflowing, but non-citizens who have had their asylum claims rejected are eligible for all sorts of federal health benefits that Canadians are not entitled to, such as mental health support and vision care. It is unfair to offer people with no legal reason to be in Canada better federal health benefits than what Canadians have access to.
Why are the Liberals giving bogus asylum claimants, who have no legal reason to be in Canada, access to better health services than Canadians rather than simply deporting them?
Peter Fragiskatos LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration
Madam Speaker, the member knows very well that those who are not eligible to be here will face the consequences of Canadian law. We trust authorities to carry that out.
As for services in this country, we understand that there has been a strain on services and that the immigration system has a part to play in that. What is also at stake is that we put policy on the table to address those issues. A sustainable, responsible immigration system is exactly what we are pursuing to address those service challenges.
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Madam Speaker, people with no legal right to be in Canada should not have access to federal health benefits.
The Liberals have given yet another chance to stay in Canada to a Dutch Somali national who gave multiple false names and birth dates to immigration officers and who also lied about being in a polygamous marriage. Lying to immigration officers should immediately invalidate somebody's ability to stay in Canada. The decision to let someone enter or stay in Canada should be made on truthful information; this is a no-brainer.
Why are the Liberals rewarding non-citizen liars with the right to stay in Canada?