I am sorry. I have already moved on to questions and comments.
House of Commons Hansard #8 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was economy.
House of Commons Hansard #8 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was economy.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Ukrainian Heritage Month Act First reading of Bill C-203. The bill declares September of every year Ukrainian Heritage Month across Canada to celebrate Ukrainian heritage and contributions to Canadian life. 200 words.
Income Tax Act First reading of Bill C-204. The bill proposes to increase the tax credit for volunteer firefighters and search and rescue responders to help compensate for expenses and recognize their important contributions. 200 words.
Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply Members debate the Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne. New MPs deliver maiden speeches. Conservatives highlight concerns over housing affordability, rising crime, and the economy, criticizing the government's approach to the energy sector and lack of a budget. Liberals defend their record and outline plans for a resilient economy, infrastructure, housing, and national programs. Bloc MPs criticize the centralized "one economy" vision and advocate for provincial jurisdiction and supply management. NDP raise concerns for vulnerable Canadians. 24800 words, 3 hours.
Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne
Shelby Kramp-Neuman Conservative Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
I am seeking unanimous consent for an emergency debate.
Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne
Some hon. members
No.
Helena Konanz Conservative Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for his speech and for not mentioning Prime Minister Carney's name too often.
My question for the member is that in order—
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, you did just ask all of us to behave and follow the rules of the House and not mention colleagues by name. I think the member can take that back.
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Mr. Speaker, we just learned moments ago that former parliamentarian Marc Garneau has passed away at the age of 76.
I would ask for unanimous consent for a moment of silence from the House for that.
Hon. Marc GarneauSpeech from the Throne
Hon. Marc GarneauSpeech from the Throne
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
I would now invite all members to stand and have a moment of silence in memory of Mr. Marc Garneau.
[A moment of silence observed]
Andrew Scheer Conservative Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, my hon. colleague was trying to seek unanimous consent for the House to have an emergency debate on the unjustified U.S. tariffs applied on Canada. It was ruled out of order by the Speaker. The Speaker made his decision earlier, but of course the House can do whatever it agrees to, so we are seeking unanimous consent for the following motion: That, notwithstanding any standing order—
Hon. Marc GarneauSpeech from the Throne
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
Unfortunately, the member does not have unanimous consent. I heard several noes.
The House resumed consideration of the motion, as amended, for an address to His Majesty the King in reply to his speech at the opening of the session.
Helena Konanz Conservative Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Mr. Speaker, our thoughts and prayers are with the family of former MP Marc Garneau.
In order to make Canada a more self-reliant country that is less dependent on the United States and that stands up for its interests, does the member support the building of a pipeline in Canada?
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
Mr. Speaker, that is a very good question. As I tried to indicate in my speech, this is a government that appreciates full well how incredibly important it is to partner with the provinces and the territories. As the member knows, earlier this week, there were some very robust discussions taking place, so we will have to wait to see what the conclusion of those discussions is. I am sure there will be some great news.
Given what we just heard, I want to extend my heartfelt condolences to the Garneau family. I know that for all of us here who had the privilege of working with Mr. Garneau, he really embodied the best qualities and was by all means one of the most honourable people I have had the great privilege of working with.
Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
It being 6:15 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the motion now before the House.
If a member participating in person wishes that the motion, as amended, be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Mr. Speaker, carried on division.
(Motion agreed to)
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion:
That, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practice of the House:
(a) the address be engrossed and forwarded to His Majesty the King;
(b) an address be presented to Her Excellency the Governor General praying that Her Excellency will be pleased to transmit to His Majesty the King an engrossed address, which the Commons of Canada in Parliament assembled, adopted in reply to His Majesty's Speech at the opening of the First Session of the 45th Parliament; and
(c) the address be engrossed and presented to Her Excellency the Governor General by the Speaker.
Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay.
It is agreed.
The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.
The motion is carried.
(Motion agreed to)
A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB
Mr. Speaker, I rise to follow up on a very straightforward question I posed to the government House leader last week in question period. I asked if the Prime Minister has any financial holdings hidden away in offshore tax havens.
It is a straightforward question, which the government House leader very conveniently refused to answer. It is a question the Prime Minister has repeatedly refused to answer. The Prime Minister has refused to come clean. He is a Prime Minister with a history with tax havens.
When the Prime Minister was chair of Brookfield, Brookfield registered $30 billion of investment funds in offshore tax havens in Bermuda and the Cayman Islands. Why? It was all so the Prime Minister's company could avoid paying taxes in Canada. So much for elbows up. Then again, this is the same Prime Minister who, as recently as the fall, led the charge to relocate Brookfield's headquarters out of Canada to New York City, but I digress.
Canadians deserve to know if their Prime Minister is using offshore tax havens to avoid paying taxes in Canada. Instead of being transparent, the Prime Minister continues to take advantage of a loophole in Canada's ethics laws by hiding his assets from Canadians. Why? It really does beg the question, what is it that the Prime Minister does not want Canadians to know about his financial interests?
There is, frankly, a lot of smoke here. I invite the government to finally clear the air. Does the Prime Minister have any financial holdings hidden away in offshore tax havens, yes or no?
Ruby Sahota LiberalSecretary of State (Combatting Crime)
Mr. Speaker, respecting Canada's ethics rules is not optional. It is an essential part of serving in public office. These rules exist to safeguard the trust Canadians place in their democratic institutions. The Prime Minister and every member of the House, regardless of their role or political affiliation, is expected to uphold them.
What Canadians need to know is that the Prime Minister has taken clear and deliberate steps to meet and exceed the expectations set out in the Conflict of Interest Act. He has proactively disclosed the required information to the Ethics Commissioner. That sets the kind of example we should all strive to follow, whether one is in cabinet, on the opposition benches or a newly elected member to this chamber.
That is what Canadians should expect from a prime minister, a standard of conduct that reflects the seriousness of the office and the trust placed in it by the public. We have heard concerns raised by members opposite, and in some instances, we have seen these questions turn into political theatre.
Let us be clear. Without evidence, this does more than just distract from serious debate. It damages the credibility of the House. It erodes public trust, not to serve democracy, but to serve partisan ends.
While the members opposite focus on rehashing and repeating questions that have already been addressed on many occasions and dealt with transparently, we remain focused on delivering for Canadians on the clear agenda they elected us to pursue.
Canada is recognized globally for having some of the strongest ethics and conflict of interest frameworks anywhere. That is not up for debate. These systems are in place to ensure all public officials are held to account, and the Prime Minister has acted fully within this framework. That is what leadership looks like, and that is the kind of leadership the Prime Minister has shown.
On this side of the House, we take seriously the responsibility of earning and maintaining the trust of Canadians. That trust is not automatic. It must be earned through transparency, responsibility and respect for our institutions. While so many choose to focus on spectacle, we will stay focused on the work that matters, upholding the public trust and delivering for Canadians to build a strong Canada. That is our commitment, and Canadians count on us.
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB
Mr. Speaker, that was a complete non-answer. The Prime Minister has a history with tax havens and has not denied that he is currently using them. Instead of clearing the air, the Prime Minister is hiding behind a loophole in Canada's ethics laws and refusing to answer all questions about his financial interests. In the face of that, what conclusion can be drawn other than that Mr. Elbows Up himself is using offshore tax havens to avoid paying taxes in Canada?
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North—Caledon, ON
Mr. Speaker, what Canadians need to know, and I will repeat it again, is that the Prime Minister has taken clear and deliberate steps to meet and exceed the expectations set out in the Conflict of Interest Act, which was passed by Parliament. He has proactively disclosed the required information to the Ethics Commissioner. Canada is recognized globally for having some of the strongest ethics and conflict of interest frameworks anywhere. That is not up for debate.
These systems are in place to ensure that all public officials are held to account, and the Prime Minister has acted fully within the framework. While the members opposite focus on rehashing and repeating questions that have already been addressed on many occasions and dealt with transparently, we remain focused on delivering for Canadians on the clear agenda they elected us to pursue.
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK
Mr. Speaker, this is my first opportunity to rise in the House of Commons, and I just want to thank the great people of Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley for putting their trust in me for a third time after this last election. I also really quickly want to thank my wife, Kyla, and our three kids for their support. I would not be able to do this job if it were not for my wife and all the things she does with our kids. In fact right now she is sitting in the hospital in Swift Current getting a CT scan on our daughter's foot, because she broke her foot last week. I wish good luck to my wife and my daughter. Hopefully everything goes well.
I rose earlier to question the Minister of Environment and Climate Change on the emissions cap, which is essentially a production cap. One of the main issues we are facing is that we are looking at over 54,000 job losses and over $20 billion in lost investment into the Canadian economy. This is on top of the hundreds of thousands of job losses that have already occurred in the energy and resource sector because of the Liberal government's anti-energy policies. That was led by Justin Trudeau for the past 10 years, and now the current Prime Minister is following in his steps.
This is what we are seeing as well from the current environment minister. I have served on committee with her before, and she is actually very vocal about her opposition to any expansion of the oil sands, and quite frankly, on committee, she has been very deliberate in trying to suppress the oil and gas industry.
I was looking at some more numbers. In 2022, for example, $45 billion in revenue from the oil and gas sector alone went to Canadian governments. In 2022, that would have just slightly trailed the cost of health care. If we think about it that way, the money that comes in for governments from the oil and gas sector is equal to right around the same number of dollars as health care costs.
There are many great businesses and companies in the oil and gas sector in our ridings that support the local health care foundations. They sponsor our local hockey rinks. They sponsor our community centres and our seniors centres. This is the money that funds education. It funds nurses. It funds doctors. The government today has tabled a bill on fixing the border and the ports. Funding from the oil and gas sector is what would be used to hire some of the agents needed to fix a lot of the problems.
The Liberals are deliberately trying to cap the single biggest driver of the Canadian economy with their emissions cap, which is a production cap. If this cap stays in place, which the Prime Minister has already committed to, and I would assume his silence on the matter only confirms that, oil production in Canada is actually going to have to be curtailed by 5% in the next couple of years.
We are looking at a 5% reduction, and yet we see what the rest of the world is wanting and needing. The rest of the world has come to Canada numerous times looking for Canadian gas, for Canadian oil and for LNG, and Justin Trudeau repeatedly said there is no business case, despite the fact that numerous countries have come to Canada begging for these things. Industry wants to have export pipeline capacity so we can reduce our dependence on the United States for selling our product. The production cap that is in place is going to further hamper Canada's ability to be the supplier of clean, reliable energy around the world.
I am just wondering whether the government would be willing to admit that the production cap is a terrible idea and that they need to scrap it.