Colin Carrie

[Transport, June 14th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, Oshawa's port is an economic driver in my community. The Liberals ignored the GM plant closure, and now they are trying to take away our right to manage our own port. The Minister of Transport actually claimed that this is going to be good for Oshawa, but now he is trying to impose a management board that will likely have zero representation from the people of Oshawa. That is right: zero say in the management of our own port. This is what happens when they do not have any meaningful consultation.

My ask is this: When will these top-down Liberals actually and finally listen to local stakeholders and commit to having local representation on this board?

[Customs Tariff, June 10th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I want to quote the most progressive president in United States history, Barack Obama, who said at the APEC summit just two weeks after the Prime Minister was elected, that Canada and the United States would both soon be signatories to the TPP. The 12-country Trans-Pacific Partnership was signed October 5, and it was one of the topics they were discussing.

I would like my colleague to talk about this. If the Prime Minister had signed the original agreement, which was also the renegotiation of NAFTA, that would have been 13 or 14 months before Mr. Trump was even in office. The deal could have been done, but he could not get that deal done because Australia, New Zealand, Japan and all of the Asian members were upset at Canada.

Could the member please comment on the incompetence that started almost from day one with the government?

[Customs Tariff, June 10th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I hear the Liberals and it has been a litany of disasters on the trade file.

Two weeks after the Prime Minister was elected, he was in Manila and U.S. President Barack Obama said that Canada—

[Customs Tariff, June 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, this is very disturbing. In my community, there is a big steel recycler, Gerdau Ameristeel. The minister knows how important the auto sector is, as well as certainty with regard to prices and inputs.

He talked about these illegal tariffs. The minister was at committee and we found out that the Liberals actually knew that Mr. Trump was going to be using a tariff strategy for steel and aluminum a year before he put these tariffs in place, and the current government did absolutely nothing about it, though there were things put forward.

We have talked about the importance of debate as opposed to closure. I would like to ask the minister about a certain number: $2 billion. The Liberals have collected a huge amount in tariffs from the steel and aluminum community, but they really have not disbursed very much of it. The minister is quite aware that the regional challenges in Ontario are quite different from those in British Columbia. I wonder if the minister could address the $2 billion and how the government is going to utilize that to support the areas of the country that are going to be disproportionately affected by moving forward on this bill.

[Transportation, June 7th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, the Port of Oshawa is one of my riding's crown jewels. The transport minister announced the amalgamation of the port authorities of Oshawa and Hamilton this week, and it will take effect on June 18, just 11 days from now. This decision was made without any meaningful consultation with the Oshawa Port Authority, the regional and city governments, port users, customers, tenant operators, labour groups or the public. While the government once promised transparency, it has not been as advertised.

When will the minister table the business case for the port amalgamation in this House?

[National Security Act, 2017, June 7th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the minister for his clarification, but there was one thing he did not really clarify. My colleague asked about part 7. I want to ask him about threat disruption. Part 7 raises the threshold for recognizance orders and peace bonds, making it more difficult for law enforcement to disrupt threats before they occur.

This section proposes to change the Criminal Code from “the peace officer suspects on reasonable grounds that the detention of the person in custody is likely to prevent a terrorist activity” to “the peace officer suspects on reasonable grounds that the detention of the person in custody is necessary to prevent a terrorist activity.”

This is an extremely high bar when times are very short. Our Conservative Bill C-51 aligned with our allies, including countries like Norway and Finland. Why has the minister made it more difficult for information sharing and also taken away the reasonableness that is in agreement with our allies, as far as that point is concerned?

[Criminal Records Act, June 6th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I hold my colleague in great esteem, and I appreciated his speech.

One of the questions I am hearing is, “What is the cost going to be for this?” More importantly, many of these convictions were plea bargained. In other words, a more serious offence was pleaded down, and now these people may have these options available to them, as well as the people who have convictions for simple possession.

Could the member comment on that issue? The government really has to look at this carefully, because no prosecutor would have accepted a plea bargain knowing that it was going to be washed away in the future.

[Customs Tariff, June 6th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Hamilton Mountain, the place where I was born. I have to say that I still have that steel guy inside me. In my community of Oshawa, steel is so important for the auto sector. He mentioned a friend of mine, Roger Paiva, from Gerdau Ameristeel Corporation, and how important the steel and aluminum sector is to my community.

Earlier on, the member mentioned the uncertainty and the mess the current government has created, and I am extremely concerned. I know both our communities are very happy this bill is being debated in the final days of the current government. It is a very important issue.

My colleague from Durham spoke about how this is something the bigger companies want to see moved forward as quickly as possible, but for regional suppliers, fabricators and different communities there needs to be something else done. We talked about this $2 billion the Liberals are sitting on and holding. That could be spread to the companies that are going to be so negatively affected, especially if we go forward and implement this bill as is.

In order to decrease the uncertainty out there, I was wondering if the NDP would be supporting our amendment, which my colleague from Durham read into the record. He said he agreed with my colleague from Durham. Because there is such a short period of time, we do not have the time to debate this as well as we could. Therefore, could he give us some certainty and let Canadians know if the NDP will be supporting our amendment, which would make this better by working together?

[Customs Tariff, June 6th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy that the government is moving on this.

We in the Conservative Party wanted the government to take action over two years ago. As a matter of fact, when we had the minister in committee, we found out that a year before the Americans put tariffs on our steel and aluminum sector, the Americans asked Canada to come on board and help out. Basically, because of dithering and incompetence, Canadian companies have been suffering with these steel and aluminum tariffs since that time.

The bill is extremely important, especially in my community, where we build automobiles and have Gerdau Ameristeel.

The government has collected over $2 billion in tariffs, and because of the way it is enacting the bill, some companies may be affected negatively. What is the government going to do to dispense, perhaps regionally, this $2 billion, this massive amount of money? The government has collected it and has promised to get it out to the affected companies, but it has really done absolutely nothing. What is the government going to do to address any inadvertent harm from the bill and get money out to the producers and manufacturers that require that support?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1, June 4th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague made the comment that people cannot visualize what $1 billion is. Well, the Liberals this time around this year had a $20-billion deficit. They also had $20 billion in extra revenue because the world economy is doing so well. That is $40 billion they spent that they did not plan on and that no one planned on having. To put that in perspective, that is like giving one million Canadians a cheque for $40,000 and allowing them to sit at home doing nothing. If this is the Liberal idea of a job creation plan, I think we have to question that.

I would like to ask my colleague a very important question. If the Liberals continue to go down this route of deficit spending, which we have seen in Ontario, where Ontario became the worst sub-national government in the world, and these deficits become the taxes of the future and the cuts of the future, what does the member think will happen to our country? Will it be exactly what has happened to Ontario?