House of Commons Hansard #129 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was c-16.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Veterans Affairs Members debate a report from the Veterans Affairs committee recommending an independent review board for military honours. Conservative Blake Richards demands justice for veterans, especially regarding Afghan valour. Liberals, including Pauline Rochefort, signal support for the initiative. The Bloc Québécois backs the proposal, criticizing the government for delayed action on past recognition requests. The House subsequently adopts the motion unanimously. 11600 words, 2 hours.
Bill C-16—Time Allocation Motion Members debate a time allocation motion concerning Bill C-16 on criminal and correctional matters. Conservatives argue the government is stifling debate and breaking promises of collaboration, while Liberals defend the measure as essential to save lives amidst opposition filibustering. After a contentious question period regarding transparency and parliamentary process, the House initiates a recorded vote to limit further discussion. 5400 words, 35 minutes.
Premature Disclosure of a Bill and its Elements to a Third Party—Speaker's Ruling The Speaker rules that there is no prima facie case of privilege regarding the alleged premature disclosure of Bill C-31 provisions to Air Canada, determining that government consultations with stakeholders did not infringe privileges. 600 words.
Minister Statement During Committee of the Whole Kevin Lamoureux argues that the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship did not mislead the House regarding Palestinian student visas and asserts that the question of privilege was raised incorrectly without following established procedure. 1400 words, 10 minutes.
Protecting Victims Act Report stage of Bill C-16. The bill, known as the protecting victims act, aims to modernize criminal law by targeting gender-based violence, including coercive and controlling conduct, and enhancing protection for children against sexual exploitation. While Liberals argue the legislation ensures constitutional compliance through a mandatory minimum "safety valve," Conservatives label this provision a poison pill that undermines sentencing consistency and deterrence for violent offenders. The Bloc Québécois expresses cautious support, focusing on improvements to victim-centered justice and addressing court procedural delays. 28400 words, 3 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.
Fair Representation Act Second reading of Bill C-259. The bill amends the Canada Labour Code to curb employer-dominated unions. The NDP argues this prevents fake unions, but Conservatives warn the proposed low threshold for investigations could induce instability. Liberals emphasize their record of supporting unions while reviewing the bill's mechanics, and the Bloc Québécois supports the measure as necessary to ensure free, independent unions. 7400 words, 1 hour.
Scot Davidson Conservative New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury, ON
Mr. Speaker, the cost of living is so high that living is being put on hold. This is the real Liberal recession, where people cannot afford to enjoy life, make memories or chase dreams. They are spending their whole time just barely getting by. Those are the consequences of 11 years of Liberals and their failed economic policy.
Instead of telling people who are struggling that everything is fine, will the Prime Minister stand up and admit his real Liberal recession is hurting Canadians?
Leslie Church LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Secretaries of State for Labour
Mr. Speaker, let us think about the consequences of Conservative policy on those very Canadians that member is talking about. They would be families without child care. They would be families without dental care. They would be families without a national school food program. They would be families that would not benefit from a cut to middle-class taxes.
These are the policies that our government is putting forward because we are actually on the side of Canadians.
Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON
Mr. Speaker, under this Liberal Prime Minister, Canada is the only G20 country to fall into a recession. While Canadians can delay buying a home or a car, which also hurts our economy, they cannot stop buying food. Families are stretching every dollar at the grocery store, restaurant demand is weakening and our agri-food sectors are facing exploding input costs. Experts have warned that Canada's food economy cannot outrun a shrinking national economy.
Why are the Liberals content to watch Canada's competitiveness and productivity erode? Is this a technical recession or technically a failure of policy?
Heath MacDonald LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, I have the utmost respect for my hon. colleague. We talk to each other quite often about processing in his area, mostly in and around Leamington, and there are going to be vast investments in Leamington. He knows that. There is Ideal Can, which is moving to Leamington, one of the only canning companies in the country using aluminum and steel from Canada.
We are going to continue to invest in the processing sector and in agriculture. There are all kinds of companies. I am talking about Massilly North America's $85-million new food packaging processor and Agropur's plans to invest nearly $1 billion in plants in eastern Canada. We are going to continue to invest in Ontario.
Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON
Mr. Speaker, our “missing middle” processors have been missing. Finally, we are seeing some action, but Canada's productivity crisis did not start this year. Weak investment did not start this year. Declining competitiveness did not start this year. These are the consequences of a decade of bad Liberal policy choices.
As Sylvain Charlebois recently stated: “The greatest threat to Canada's food economy isn't a recession. It's the illusion that someone else is responsible for our economic decline.”
Does the Liberal Prime Minister plan to reverse these declines or just have a new definition of a recession?
Heath MacDonald LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, that gives me the opportunity to talk a little bit about foreign direct investment.
Again, these executives are confident in Canada. Imperial Oil is investing $700 million in Strathcona; Kraft Heinz is investing $250 million in Montreal; Bayer is investing $45 million in canola research in Winnipeg; Froneri, an ice cream giant, is expanding Canadian operations; Mars Canada is investing $180 million across Ontario; and Coca-Cola is investing $141 million in a Brampton facility. They have confidence in this country and our workers.
Why is it that the Conservatives do not?
Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives love to badmouth the Canadian economy, industries, and workers. They completely ignore the historic challenges we are currently facing and the tangible results of our plan.
Instead of these petty partisan slogans and doomsday rhetoric, could the Minister of Finance set the record straight on the state of the Canadian economy?
François-Philippe Champagne LiberalMinister of Finance and National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, that is a good question. It is refreshing for Canadians to hear a good question like that. I want to thank my colleague, who does extraordinary work.
As my colleague from Trois-Rivières said, the people watching us know that we are making generational investments to support the Canadian economy in infrastructure, in housing, in productivity, in innovation and in defence. However, tomorrow is June 5. That is when 12 million Canadians will receive the Canada groceries and essentials benefit.
We will always be there for Quebeckers. We will always be there for Canadians. We will stand up for our industry and we will stand up for the entire country.
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are sick and tired of watching violent criminals get chance after chance while victims pay the price. A non-citizen committed multiple violent crimes in 2019. Seven years later, he is still in Canada. He carried out two robberies at gunpoint and pistol-whipped another victim, yet somehow, these Liberals keep protecting him from deportation. We Conservatives fought to end sentencing discounts for serious criminals. They voted against it.
Why is avoiding deportation more important than protecting Canadians from violent criminals?
Sean Fraser LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Mr. Speaker, it is difficult to take seriously charges of not taking crime seriously with harms falling to victims from a member who, just a few hours ago, was opposing efforts to speed up the adoption of the protecting victims act. We have launched one of the most ambitious agendas when it comes to criminal law reform, when it comes to bail reform, when it comes to strengthening sentencing, and when it comes to protecting victims and combatting hate.
With respect to the issue that the member mentioned, he knows there is no rule that requires sentences to be adjusted for immigration status. We support the decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada and trust the judiciary to implement the law with fit sentences, independent of politics.
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
Mr. Speaker, Canadians continue to watch violent offenders get lighter sentences, avoid deportation and stay in this country year after year. In Kitchener, a non-citizen strangled his wife in front of their child. He was found guilty. The victim and her child are now living in a shelter. He remains in Canada.
Under these Liberals, violent offenders get sentencing discounts, delayed deportation and endless second, third and fourth chances, while victims get nothing but excuses.
When will these Liberals stop bending over backwards to help violent criminals avoid deportation and start standing up for victims for a change?
Sean Fraser LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Mr. Speaker, it is clear, with respect to the individual circumstances that the member referred to, that all members of Parliament must condemn heinous and violent crimes, particularly when it comes to repeat offenders. Now we have to ask ourselves what we want to do about that.
On this side of the House, we want to move forward with the most ambitious set of reforms when it comes to the criminal law in this country that Canada has seen in generations. That includes more serious conditions on bail. That includes stiffer sentences for violent repeat offenders and those tied to organized crime. That includes allowing the courts to make decisions about fit sentences.
When someone commits a serious and violent crime, they should face serious penalties, including deportation—
JusticeOral Questions
Ned Kuruc Conservative Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
Mr. Speaker, two of the five men accused of murdering a teenager in a terrifying Stoney Creek shooting linked to the GTA tow truck wars are refugee claimants. A source from the CBSA told the Toronto Sun that although they want to remove these individuals from Canada, they keep facing countless roadblocks.
The minister does not do anything to make sure that government departments will deport non-citizens who commit serious crimes like murder. The residents of Stoney Creek and all Canadians want to know and demand to know why.
Peter Fragiskatos LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration
Mr. Speaker, time and again throughout the parliamentary session, the Conservatives have stood in the way of genuine, real and historic criminal justice reform. They will continue to do so, I suppose, but they should listen to their constituents, who want to see real reform.
They should review the comments of police chiefs across the country, who have spoken in favour of exactly what the government is doing on these issues. With respect to the issue of non-residents or non-citizens, he knows very well, or should, that in 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada made clear that courts, and justices in particular, can take note of the immigration status of an individual but that does not impact upon sentencing.
Will Greaves Liberal Victoria, BC
Mr. Speaker, across British Columbia, workers and communities know how important the forestry sector is to our economy. As Canada's forest ministers met this week in Langford on southern Vancouver Island—
Forestry IndustryOral Questions
The Speaker Francis Scarpaleggia
The hon. member has a question, and he deserves to be listened to.
The hon. member can start from the top.
Will Greaves Liberal Victoria, BC
Mr. Speaker, across British Columbia, workers and communities know how important the forestry sector is to our economy. As Canada's forest ministers met this week in Langford on beautiful Vancouver Island to discuss the future of forestry, workers face unjustified U.S. softwood lumber tariffs and conditions that will require us to make our forestry sector more competitive.
Can the Minister of Industry update the House on how our government is working with provinces and territories to strengthen the sector and support forestry workers from coast to coast to coast?
Mélanie Joly LiberalMinister of Industry and Minister responsible for Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Victoria for his important work. Indeed, a lot is happening in the forestry sector, which is a complete victim of the illegal and unjustifiable tariffs from the American administration.
That is why the Minister of Natural Resources and I have been working on a plan to really support the sector. While the Minister of Natural Resources is in B.C. with his counterparts from the provinces and territories, we are working on liquidity support, more than $1 billion for the forestry sector. We will be there for the workers in the sector.
Melissa Lantsman Conservative Thornhill, ON
Mr. Speaker, earlier today, the Liberals actually compared the salaries and offices and the economy-class flights of the Leader of the Opposition to the Prime Minister's $835 on orange juice on one trip or the $3,800 he spent on chocolate mousse on a flight. That is on top of the $250 million he spends on his personal office. That is 30 times more than the Leader of the Opposition.
While families are forced to tighten their belts because he is the only leader in the G20 that plunged us into a recession, should he not tighten his own?
Steven MacKinnon LiberalMinister of Transport and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, we now have the answer to the question of what will get the Conservatives to change their script after 38 of the same question, which is to dare touch their dear leader, who squatted at Stornoway for an entire summer while Canadian taxpayers shelled out $2 million to get his sorry you-know-what back into the House of Commons.
I cannot answer for all of this stuff from the Leader of the Opposition. Maybe they can.
The EconomyOral Questions
The Speaker Francis Scarpaleggia
I do not know what. I do not.
The hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway.
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Mr. Speaker, the government's AI strategy is leaving Canadians dangerously exposed. While this technology can produce benefits, it urgently needs effective regulation and strong guardrails. We know AI is driving mass surveillance, facilitating fraud and threatening jobs. It uses huge amounts of water and energy, and children are being targeted. These are real threats, yet the Liberals sprinted through a shallow consultation and are mouthing the lines of tech billionaires.
Why is the government rushing a reckless AI strategy without ensuring real protections for Canadians—
Artificial IntelligenceOral Questions