Hélène Laverdière

[Business of Supply, May 17th, 2017]

Madam Chair, clearly there is no answer as to whether the Government of Canada will or will not adequately respond to a resolution adopted by the United Nations Security Council. That is a new one. I will move on to another topic.

About the ATT, the bill that has been tabled to implement the ATT still does not include the military export to the U.S.A., which is a problem. One other big problem is that the assessment criteria for export permits are not strengthened in Bill C-47, as is the intent of the ATT. In fact, the government backgrounder that accompanied the bill suggests that standards for assessing export will be listed in a new regulation following royal assent of Bill C-47.

Why did you table a bill that puts such a vital part of the enacting legislation in the regulations and not in the legislation proper?

[Business of Supply, May 17th, 2017]

Madam Chair, for lack of a clear answer, I would like to repeat my question.

The UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2334. Is Canada going to abide by the UN Security Council resolution?

[Business of Supply, May 17th, 2017]

Madam Chair, will Canada abide by UN Security Resolution 2334 on Israeli settlement?

[Business of Supply, May 17th, 2017]

Madam Chair, apparently the minister does not have enough time to answer. I did not get an answer about the promise to create an independent, impartial, and credible ombudsman. I am going to let that go for now because there is not much time.

I will ask my question again: What concrete action is Canada taking to prevent illegal settlements in occupied territories, which are an impediment to the two-state solution and an impediment to peace?

[Business of Supply, May 17th, 2017]

Madam Chair, I am concerned that the government side seems to think that this is essentially a trade issue, because it is much more than that.

That being said, in February, the minister released a statement on illegal Israeli settlements, expressing Canada's deep concern by the expansion of settlements. Nowhere in the statement was any concern expressed about demolition of Palestinian homes, or relocation of Bedouins, to name just a few examples.

What concrete actions is Canada proposing to prevent illegal Israeli settlements, which we know are an impediment to a two-state solution and an impediment to peace?

[Business of Supply, May 17th, 2017]

Madam Chair, as I was saying earlier, this issue is also about human rights and Canada's reputation. I would like to know whether the Minister of Foreign Affairs is also involved in this file and whether she will also hold meetings on that issue.

[Business of Supply, May 17th, 2017]

Madam Chair, I thank the ministers for being here this evening. I will use my speaking time to ask questions. However, I would first like to point out that I am encouraged by the government's decision to take steps to impose sanctions for serious violations of human rights and acts of corruption.

I hope that the government is also willing to implement the other recommendations of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development in order to strengthen implementation of existing sanctions.

I would like to begin with another matter. The human rights violations perpetrated by certain mining companies operating abroad are damaging to Canada's international reputation. A report released in October 2016 by the Justice and Corporate Accountability Project entitled The “Canada Brand”: Violence and Canadian Mining Companies in Latin America describes more than 400 incidents of violence at Canadian mining sites in the past 15 years in Latin America alone. This issue is about human rights and Canada's reputation, and as such warrants the Minister of Foreign Affairs's consideration.

The Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability together with other civil society organizations published model legislation showing how the government could consider creating the position of extractive industries ombudsperson.

Can the minister promise today that her government will appoint an independent, impartial, and credible ombudsperson to monitor the overseas activities of Canada's mining companies?

[Air Transportation, May 17th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, that was a year and a half ago. When he was an ordinary member, the Prime Minister said urgent action was needed to repeal the Conservative regulation that prohibits airlines from allowing a person to board a plane if their appearance does not match the gender on their identification.

After a year and a half in power, the Prime Minister has done nothing on this. The solution is simple; he does not even need to pass legislation. Will the Prime Minister commit today to repealing this discriminatory regulation, a direct affront to the trans community?

[Rail Transportation, May 15th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, last Thursday, the minister himself admitted what everyone already knows, and that is that more fatalities occur when people cross railway tracks illegally than when they do so at safe railway crossings. What has he done to date to ensure that there are safe crossings in the locations where people need them the most? Absolutely nothing. Perhaps it is because he does not have the proper authority.

My bill gives him the authority he needs to ensure that people across the country are able to cross railway tracks safely. Why is he refusing to commit to support my bill?

[Railway Safety Act, May 12th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague's comments with interest.

Notably, I listened to the comments of my colleague on the Conservative side.

He seemed to be saying that only Montreal has this problem, but that is not true at all. This is a serious issue in places like Toronto too, and a lot of people have taken an interest. It is also a big deal in Saskatchewan and British Columbia. Several organizations in those provinces have expressed support for this bill.

Interestingly, my colleague started off by saying that this is a problem in communities in his riding and that crossings have been closed with no right of appeal and no consultation. My bill can help with situations like that. My colleague said that these situations should be resolved locally. That is the problem.

This has been an issue in Montreal for 25 years, and negotiations have been going on that whole time. My colleague said these decisions should be left to municipal authorities. In Montreal's case, the City has been asking for strategically located crossings for 25 years, but nothing is happening because the company is refusing to co-operate. I think it is the government's job to intervene in situations like this. I am not saying that because we like big government. I am saying it because a government's primary purpose is to keep citizens safe.

There are twice as many accidents at illegal crossings than there are at safe crossings. If the minister sits down to examine the situation, takes responsibility, takes action if he sees fit, and saves only one life by building crossings in certain locations, then I would feel as though my bill had served a useful purpose. That is one of the minister's key roles.

What is more, it is a simple matter of logic. The minister has the authority to close a level crossing or any other crossing for safety or other reasons. We are talking about level crossings, but sometimes there are bridges or other ways to cross railways. He has the authority to modify them, but he does not have the authority to open a new one grade crossing for safety reasons.

We are not saying that a crossing must be built in a certain location. The bill simply says that the minister should have the same authority to close, modify, or open a crossing.

At one point, the parliamentary secretary indicated that the minister already had the authority to open a crossing. I do not want to question his word, but other government members have had different interpretations of the legislation. We asked for a legal interpretation, and the opinion that we were given is that the existing legislation is unclear. It does not make much reference to the minister's authority.

Why not clarify the act and give the minister equal authority to close, modify, and open level crossings?

I will end there because I can see that I am running out of time. If this bill were to save even one life, I think it would be worth it.