Guy Caron

[Veterans Affairs, December 11th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, things have been going downhill for veterans ever since this government came to power two years ago. Sooner or later, the government is going to have to take responsibility for that.

It is the Government of Canada's responsibility and duty to ensure that those who have served our country are not left out in the cold, but apparently 71% of veterans are still waiting longer than three months to get their pension. That has a significant negative impact on their finances and their lives.

Will the Prime Minister ensure that pensions and support for veterans and their families are in place before they leave the army?

[Canada Revenue Agency, December 7th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, an internal report from the CRA dating from 2014 shows that before the election, 25% of Canadians received bad advice when they contacted the CRA. Now the Auditor General tells us it is 30% under the minister's watch, despite spending $50 million to respond to this problem. The CRA has shown time and time again that it is more interested in protecting itself than the taxpayer. This needs to change.

As it stands now I have to ask this question, because I really cannot tell. Is the minister controlling the CRA or is the CRA controlling the minister?

[Canada Revenue Agency, December 7th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to come back to the Auditor General's scathing report on the Canada Revenue Agency.

According to that report, half of all calls Canadians make to the Canada Revenue Agency are not being answered, and when callers do get through, they get the wrong answer 30% of the time.

The Canada Revenue Agency is proving just how incompetent it is, and the minister needs to face up to her responsibilities.

When will the minister take this situation seriously and insist that the Canada Revenue Agency serve taxpayers properly?

[Foreign Affairs, December 7th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, the United States' decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is reckless and will not only jeopardize the rights of Palestinians, but also scuttle any hope for peace in the region. This decision shows total disregard for international law and has already sparked clashes in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

France, Germany, and Italy are among the many countries to have expressed disapproval. Canada seems to have very little to say on the subject.

Will the government join the international community in condemning this totally irresponsible decision?

[Canadian Heritage, December 6th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, they are already there. They have transitioned to digital, but if that is so popular, why are the cultural sector and the media speaking out against this reform?

Liberals have done nothing to fix the situation our local papers are in. They are threatened with closure because the minister is giving digital giants preferential treatment. After two years, in fact, the only thing she has done is to postpone a support strategy and tell the industry that it will just have to get used to the new reality. She does not seem to get it.

Why does she not understand that her inaction is jeopardizing a fundamental pillar of our democracy: a free and independent press?

[Canadian Heritage, December 6th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Canadian Heritage decided not to subject digital giants to the same rules and constraints as Canadian companies, to disastrous effect.

As a result, our media have lost virtually all of their advertising revenue and are in danger of closing. Our broadcasters and content creators are at a distinct disadvantage. That is the business case. Democracy is also an issue. We need a free and independent press to maintain our democracy.

Why does the minister not understand that her inaction is jeopardizing a pillar of our democracy: a free and independent press?

[Violence Against Women, December 6th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, on December 6, 1989, 14 female engineering students were gunned down at École Polytechnique in Montreal. An entire generation is still grieving as a result of this horrible act of violence.

Twenty-eight years ago, 14 young women were killed and another 14 were injured simply because they were women.

Every year we have a duty to honour the memory of these women who were so brutally robbed of their future.

Every day, women experience persistent and disproportionate violence that men will never have to face. On this National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women, let us stand up and commit to building a Canada where women and girls can live without the fear of violence.

Together, let us build a country where women and girls can move about freely without fear, work without fear, and study without fear.

[International Trade, December 5th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, the problem is that when the Prime Minister was asked what he was doing to raise the issue of human rights in China, he said, and I am not joking, that he was holding press conferences with Canadian journalists.

News flash: that is what the Prime Minister does every time he travels; he talks to Canadian journalists.

Could the minister tell us exactly what the Prime Minister is doing, aside from media scrums, to raise the issue of human rights in China?

Any free trade agreement must include respect for human rights.

[International Trade, December 5th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, as was the case with the Prime Minister's last trip to Vietnam, no one knew the goal of his trip to China. The Liberals talked about tourism, SMEs, and so on and so forth.

Last week, the Prime Minister's Office did everything in its power to try to deny that this was about free trade.

If the government intended all along to enter into negotiations for a free trade agreement with China, why did it try to hide that from Canadians?

[Ethics, December 4th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, one problem is that working with the Ethics Commissioner does not mean the same thing as being under investigation by the Ethics Commissioner.

The finance minister has responded to criticism with the classic Liberal sense of entitlement. He has dismissed the questions asked by the opposition and journalists, threatening legal action against to those who would even dare challenge him. Well, the Ethics Commissioner does not think these questions are absurd, because for the third time she will be following up with the finance minister.

How can the finance minister stand there and say with a straight face that everything is fine when everything obviously is not fine?