Charlie Angus

[Divorce Act, January 30th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to be here for the very first bill being brought forward by our new justice minister. I am sure he is extremely talented.

I have to admit that we share a mutual friend in Sandy Pearlman, the late producer of the Clash and Blue Oyster Cult, so I am going to ask that the minister lessen the cowbell when he is trying to get attention in the House.

I found my hon. colleague's discourse very interesting. In our office, the most difficult and saddest issues we deal with time and time again are those of family breakup, when people come in trying to find help. In particular, I am referring to the issues that arise when families are breaking up and whoever has custody is moving to another jurisdiction.

That is an extremely difficult, emotionally fraught situation. The courts never seem to be the healing institutions on this. These are deep, traumatic wounds for families, and some never recover.

From his experience, does my hon. colleague know ways that we can do this to make sure it is always child-centred, less adversarial, and more about trying to find some healing rather than a deeper rupture.

[Indigenous Affairs, January 30th, 2019]

Really, Mr. Speaker. That is his answer to people who are living in squalid conditions at -50° together, to pat himself on the back. What a disconnect.

The problem is that Cat Lake is the tip of the iceberg, because there are communities across this country that are suffering from the mould crisis. He appointed his personal friend as minister. My real deep concern is that if the minister cannot show any leadership or gumption on a crisis like Cat Lake, how can indigenous people across this country trust him or this Prime Minister to stand up on any other issue?

[Indigenous Affairs, January 30th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, we have a humanitarian crisis unfolding at Cat Lake, and unfortunately, the minister has done squat. That is a direct quote from the community. To claim he is making enormous strides in a community where 75% of the homes are so badly off they have to be demolished is a staggering disconnect. It is like a slow-moving Katrina, at -50°. When children are being medevacked out to emergency wards in distant cities, we need a sense of urgency.

I ask the Prime Minister, will he agree that the situation in Cat Lake is a national disgrace, and will he commit that he will meet with the leaders to find a solution?

[Indigenous Affairs, January 29th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I spoke with the chief this morning. He said the government has done “squat”. We have houses that are so toxic that 75% of this community needs to be demolished. We just had a child medevacked out to London because of mould contamination.

The officials in his department have ignored the crisis at Cat Lake for years, so sending him up to put on a Band-Aid solution is not going to cut it.

What is it going to be? Are we going to see leadership from the minister, more jargon from Indian Affairs or an admission that his department has failed the people of Cat Lake, that he is going to take responsibility and he is going to make sure that action happens, yes or no?

[Indigenous Affairs, January 29th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, we are now three weeks into the state of emergency at Cat Lake and the minister has yet to meet with the leadership or visit the community. I am not sure if he fully understands the seriousness on the ground: the need for ground heaters, holding tanks, stand-by generators, 120 emergency units that have to be moved up before the winter road goes out.

Yesterday, he told the House that his officials, who have not yet visited the community, were expecting a community-based solution. This is a community facing a total and complete breakdown of social infrastructure. What on earth is he talking about?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, January 28th, 2019]

With regard to the federal agency Invest in Canada: (a) what is the remuneration range for its Board of Directors; (b) what are the details of all travel expenses incurred by Invest in Canada since its inception, including for each expenditure the (i) traveller, (ii) purpose, (iii) dates, (iv) air fare, (v) other transportation, (vi) accommodation, (vii) meals and incidentals, (viii) other, (ix) total; (c) what are the details of all hospitality expenses incurred by Invest in Canada, including for each expenditure the (i) individual, (ii) location and vendor, (iii) total, (iv) description, (v) date, (vi) number of attendees, including government employees and guests; (d) will the agency’s travel and hospitality expenditures be subject to proactive disclosure and, if not, why; and (e) since Invest in Canada’s inception, what are the details of the contracts awarded, including (i) date of contract, (ii) value of contract, (iii) vendor name, (iv) file number, (v) description of services provided?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, January 28th, 2019]

With regard to federal contracts with SNC-Lavalin: (a) are there any contingency plans in place for the 148 existing contracts in the event that SNC-Lavalin becomes ineligible to receive government contracts; (b) has the government sent tenders, letters of intent, or requests for quotation to SNC-Lavalin since April 27, 2013; (c) if the answer to (b) is affirmative, on what occasions was this done and what were the projects in question; (d) for all contracts awarded to SNC-Lavalin since 2013, what were the successful bid amounts; (e) for all completed contracts awarded to SNC-Lavalin since 2013, what amount of money was actually disbursed for each contract; (f) for any contracts that were amended after being awarded since 2013, (i) what contracts were amended, (ii) for what reason were they amended; (g) in general, what is the process for approving amendments to contracts; (h) which buildings owned by the federal government does SNC-Lavalin currently maintain or manage; and (i) what incidents, broken down by category (e.g. critical, health and safety, security) and date, have occurred in government facilities maintained or operated by SNC-Lavalin, or in SNC-Lavalin facilities occupied by government departments?

[Indigenous Affairs, January 28th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, we are now three weeks into the state of emergency, the deplorable humanitarian crisis in Cat Lake. Temperatures have plunged to -55°, we have hundreds of people huddled in squalid conditions, people are at risk, and yet the best the minister has been able to do after three weeks is to promise to send some bureaucrats to check on the situation. That is not going to cut it.

What steps will the minister take to meet with the leadership, to put in place an emergency response team now and to visit Cat Lake so he can see the deplorable conditions that the people of Cat Lake are living in? What will he do?

[Member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, December 11th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel alleged in the House this morning that the Prime Minister's Office interfered with his attempt to resign. He also stated that the reason he has been so quiet is that the Prime Minister has tasked him with a special duty that overrides his obligation to Parliament while he still runs a business on the side. That makes this an issue of government business. Will the Prime Minister explain to us what this top-secret project is and did his office attempt to interfere with his effort to resign his position?

[Criminal Code, December 10th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member brought up the issue of veterans. When we look at the delivery of services under the purview of the federal government, the two groups that are continually denied rights or that are continually over-promised and under-delivered to are veterans and indigenous peoples.

The Prime Minister will get up and make incredible promises that whatever is needed will be delivered, and then that money will not show up. It is the same with the department of Indian affairs. I remember the member saying, when he was in opposition, that the Liberals would never fight veterans in court, and yet what did they do? They forced the veterans to go to court.

This is not a level playing field. This is the Government of Canada that will spend every dollar it can to fight veterans, just as in the case of the St. Anne survivors, who are among the most marginalized poor people one could meet, some of the most decent, good, caring people who met with the minister of indigenous affairs and asked her to stop their legal battle. She promised that they would all get along together.

The government has endless dollars to fight veterans and indigenous people. If someone is an indigenous person or a veteran, they have to take that cost on themself. The government will go after someone for costs and punishment, whatever it is to intimidate the person not to take the government on. I just say that the justice minister needs to stand for something better than this kind of vindictive legal battle.