Irene Mathyssen

[Universal Children's Day, November 20th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, today, November 20, is Universal Children's Day. In 1954, the day was set aside by the United Nations to promote international awareness of children's issues and to remind us of our obligation to improve child welfare worldwide.

Universal Children's Day offers the opportunity to advocate, inspire, promote, and celebrate children's rights. It is our responsibility to engage in actions to create a better world for our children.

As a member of the all-party anti-poverty caucus, I invite MPs to join in a breakfast panel discussion on child poverty in Canada, in room 256-S Centre Block, tomorrow morning. Everyone is welcome. The panellists are from Campaign 2000, Bread Not Stones, and Citizens for Public Justice. These groups work with all parties to fulfill Ed Broadbent's motion, passed unanimously in this House in 1989, to end child poverty by the year 2000 all across this country.

Mr. Speaker, do not let them tell you it cannot be done.

[Veterans, November 9th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, the current government has repeatedly promised to bring back veterans' pensions, yet it continues to deny that it owes a sacred obligation to our veterans. In fact, the Liberals hired the same lawyers as the Conservatives before them, and have taken these veterans right back to court. So much for their words.

The Prime Minister has a choice. Will he keep his promise and bring back the full pension or will he continue to deny the sacred obligation we owe Canada's veterans?

[Petitions, November 9th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from a number of Londoners who are concerned about and wish to protect the Thames River system. As you will recall, Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government stripped environmental regulations covered in the navigable waters act, leaving hundreds of rivers, streams, and lakes very vulnerable. The Thames is a unique heritage river, with many species at risk along its banks and in its waters.

Unfortunately, the Liberal government has failed to keep its promise to reinstate the environmental protections gutted from the original act, so these petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to support my bill, Bill C-355, which commits the government to prioritizing and protecting the Thames River by amending the Navigation Protection Act.

[Remembrance Day, November 9th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to rise in the House today on behalf of New Democrats to honour the bravery and loyalty of the men and women who have fought for the freedoms we cherish as Canadians. This week we remember the service and sacrifice of all those who have served. We remember those who put their lives on the line for our country and did not return home, and we remember those who did return but were forever changed.

This year is a special year for Canada, as we mark 150 years of Confederation. This year we also reflect on the anniversaries of significant military events in our history. One hundred years ago, 100,000 members of the Canadian Corps took part in the arduous Battle of Passchendaele. In those dark and terrifying days of World War I, the allied forces launched an attack to take back Passchendaele, in the region of Flanders, in Belgium. The battle was long and difficult, and the sacrifices were great. There were 4,000 Canadian soldiers killed and almost 12,000 wounded. Canadian soldiers and their families paid a horrendous price for a battle that was later known for this senseless slaughter. All four divisions of the Canadian Corps took turns in the assault on the ridge. One battalion, Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry, lost most of its junior officers in the first hour of the assault on October 30.

This year we also mark the 100th anniversary of Vimy Ridge. Approximately, 100,000 Canadian soldiers participated in the battle, fighting valiantly to capture the ridge, marking a strategic turning point for the allies in the war. The success of the assault is attributable to the careful preparation by the Canadians and the use of the creeping barrage. The precise and timely use of aimed shellfire forced the Germans to take cover while 15,000 Canadian troops followed behind the barrage and eventually overran and captured enemy positions before the German troops were able to react. The price was heavy: 3,600 Canadians lost their lives, and 7,000 were injured.

In August 1942, 75 years ago, almost 5,000 Canadian soldiers took part in the daring pre-dawn landing at Dieppe, Puys, and Pourville. The raid resulted in heavy losses. More than 900 Canadians lost their lives, and nearly 2,000 were taken prisoner. This summer, Canadians had the honour to be in Dieppe, along with the minister, the staff of Veterans Affairs, and four Canadian veterans who landed on that beach 75 years ago. The people of Dieppe, Pourville, Puys, and France have not forgotten the sacrifice of Canadians all those years ago. Our veterans marched proudly along the town promenade to the applause and tears of the people who remain so grateful to them. I was taken by the fact that there was a young French soldier, armed and in his fatigues, who looked to be about 21, who wept openly when our veterans passed.

These battles left scars on the soldiers, families, and communities, scars that never healed and should never be forgotten.

We should also remember the people on the home front who made incredible and important contributions to the war effort and in support of Canadian troops and personnel. Sadly, many are unknown to us, like the women in Stratford, Ontario, who worked in the rail yard repairing the locomotives and railcars that took the supplies to the troops at the front during World War II. Most are remembered only in a photograph taken while they laboured for the war effort.

Men and women continue to serve this country, and we would be remiss if we failed to recognize their contributions, their bravery and valour. They include those who served in the Korean War, during the Cold War, in peacekeeping missions around the world, and in the war in Afghanistan and those who serve here at home.

We must also recognize those who have served this country with honour, despite facing unique challenges to that service, including those from the LGBT community, indigenous people, and individuals who have experienced military sexual trauma. We honour their service and their dedication to Canada.

Of course there are the families of serving members and veterans that welcome home family members forever scarred, and they support, advocate and care for their loved ones.

On November 11, I invite all members of the House, as well as all Canadians, to honour the valour, devotion, and loyalty of the men and women who have served Canada. They deserve our ongoing support and gratitude, and to be treated with the greatest respect.

It is essential that this week's reflections translate to concrete actions for tomorrow. The transition to civilian life can be difficult and can come with great and many challenges. The road to healing is not a seamless one. Thus, we must listen to our veterans and their families to ensure they receive the support, help, and recognition they need and deserve.

We must honour our sacred obligation to these brave men and women. We shall always remember their courage and valour today and every day. We must make absolutely sure that we have lived up to the obligation we owe them.

Lest we forget.

[Nokee Kwe, November 8th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the outstanding work done by Nokee Kwe in my community of London. Nokee Kwe, in its innovative way, supports indigenous women in their transition to employment and education.

It is devoted to finding solutions to employment and learning barriers through positive voice, a program in which participants learn about social and digital media, photography, and writing. It is a hands-on project dedicated to empowering indigenous women by using storytelling to help them create positive personal narratives.

Not only does this program help build self-esteem, transferrable skills, and relationships, it also conveys positive portrayals of indigenous women in the larger community by sharing the content they create. For once, indigenous women can tell their own stories in their own voice.

Today, I wish to pay tribute to positive voice, its coordinator, and the strong and resilient women who take part in the program.

[Veterans Affairs, October 30th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, I too, am absolutely convinced of the parliamentary secretary's integrity and her desire to help veterans and their families, but I have some concerns along the lines of what is happening to veterans and their families.

We still have veterans who are desperately ill and need help with their mental health issues. We desperately need to know that veterans will be supported financially. An increase in all veterans' pensions would help profoundly. Recently, the DND ombudsman said that financial security would go a long way to help everyone, and I believe that is true.

[Veterans Affairs, October 30th, 2017]

Madam Speaker, last spring, I asked the minister about the infrastructure bank and the fact that it would result in user fees and tolls on Canadians. It is an important issue for a vast majority of Canadians, who deserve a real answer. I hope the Liberals will, despite previous practice, be honest with the people they serve, just as they promised when they came to power.

The 2017 budget, as well as this fall's economic statement, represented great opportunities for the government to build an economy that benefits everyone, not just the wealthiest. Sadly, the Liberals did quite the opposite in both cases. Despite sunny ways, it appears that the current government remains focused on using governance as a means to increase the wealth of its friends at the expense of hard-working Canadians. Where is the promise to be transparent and accountable? The infrastructure bank proves, on several fronts, that the Liberals cannot keep their word.

The infrastructure bank project was included in an omnibus bill that was about 300 pages long. I recall the Liberal promise during the last election campaign to abolish the use of undemocratic omnibus bills, which the Liberals vigorously denounced while the Harper government was in power. Can the minister explain why the use of such undemocratic practices has suddenly become acceptable?

In 2015, the Liberals promised that the Canada infrastructure bank will provide low-cost financing for new infrastructure programs. One year later, we learned that the infrastructure bank will be largely financed by private sector investors, who would demand significant returns on that investment. Projects funded under the infrastructure bank will have to produce revenues, notably by imposing user fees, tolls, and other new costs to citizens throughout Canada. I do not recall the Liberals being transparent about tolls at the time that the legislation was introduced. The bottom line is that Canadian taxpayers will be funding private corporations for public services. The infrastructure bank represents nothing less than the privatization of our infrastructure, privatization that benefits wealthy investors at the expense of hard-working Canadians who rely on public services.

It raises the vital question of whether public services would be deemed unessential if they do not meet an acceptable profit margin for infrastructure bank investors. For example, would the public safety of rural areas and impoverished regions be overlooked because they would not generate enough profit? Once again, profit appears to trump the public good and the sunny ways rule book.

The NDP has been very vocal in its opposition to the infrastructure bank. It does not serve the needs of Canadians. This privatization is disastrous for all of us. Infrastructure should first benefit all Canadians, including workers and families, not the financial elite and corporate friends of the Liberals. We should most certainly not be double billing Canadians with additional user fees and tolls for essential infrastructure that they have already paid for with their tax dollars.

Earlier this month, a report from the Columbia Institute, echoed by Canada's Information Commissioner, argued that Bill C-44, passed in June, will further undermine the public's ability to access information about the infrastructure bank. The report clearly stated that private sector interests are given a veto over releasing information about how public money is spent. It is clear that nothing has improved since I first asked my question in May. In fact, it looks worse than ever.

[Transportation Modernization Act, October 30th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I am very leery and concerned about joint ventures. If he is talking about the infrastructure bank, I have profound concerns in that direction. We have experienced P3s in Ontario. They are more expensive, they are slow, and they do not provide the kinds of services that are intended.

In the case of the infrastructure bank, we would be partnering up with corporate entities that are designed to invest to make profits. Public services are for the public, and they are financed by taxpayers, the working men and women in our country. They should never be subject to extra tolls or extra costs to use their own services. Public services must remain public.

It is like Ontario Hydro. Who in their wildest dreams would have believed that any government would sell off a public entity like Ontario Hydro? This is all part and parcel of that selling out the public for private corporate good.

[Transportation Modernization Act, October 30th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I have been around this place for 12 years, and I am tired of tiny steps. I want something substantive and meaningful that is going to work for the travelling public of our country. In terms of the passenger bill of rights in the airline industry, it needs to be better and stronger. First steps are fine, but we do not get many chances. It is important to do it right the first time.

In regard to rail passenger service, we have an opportunity, with the Minister of Transport, to make real and definitive changes. We need a mandate for VIA Rail. We need it to serve the people of the country. In the last 25 or 30 years, all we have heard about are cuts in service, the closing of routes, and the elimination of the kind of service people would use and would enjoy using and would feel good about, because it would help our environment.

[Transportation Modernization Act, October 30th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, once again this Parliament has been presented with a poorly and hastily crafted omnibus bill that would undermine workers' fundamental rights to privacy and protect the rights of investors.

It is hard to see any difference in policy between the current government and the one that went before. The disparity between Liberal election promises and Liberal actions in government is painful. Where is the promise to end the use of undemocratic omnibus legislation, so decried by the Liberals in opposition? Like the Conservatives before them, the Liberals are subjecting Canadians and members of this House to unworkable and flawed, now Liberal, omnibus bills.

Bill C-49, for all its omnibus bulk, contains only two measures New Democrats can support. We believe in the measures that would improve the rights of air travellers and the protections for grain shippers. These ideas are positive improvements to the status quo. For that reason, we are calling on the government to sever these two initiatives from the pointless and ineffective remainder of Bill C-49 so they can be studied at committee and passed into law.

As for the rest of Bill C-49, we will vote against it, and I will tell members why. Bill C-49 would amend the Canada Transportation Act, giving the minister of transport the power to approve joint-venture arrangements between airlines. This is worrisome, because that type of arrangement could proceed with the minister's approval even if the commissioner of competition found that it was anti-competitive, and it could increase the price of airline tickets. Let me repeat: it would give the minister of transport the final word on proposed joint ventures between airlines, and once an arrangement was approved, the Competition Tribunal could no longer prohibit it.

The NDP proposed deleting clause 14 of Bill C-49, because it would expose consumers to unfair increases in airline ticket prices, yet that clause remains. The bill would also increase the limit on foreign ownership of Canadian airlines from 25% to 49%, despite a University of Manitoba study, published on Transport Canada's own website, that demonstrated that this measure would have no positive impact on competition.

Most concerning, Bill C-49 would amend the Railway Safety Act to allow railway companies to use video and voice recorders, and despite the fact that the bill would risk violating section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by authorizing the government or employers to collect private information without instituting adequate protections, the Liberals rejected NDP amendments to limit the use of these recorders.

Locomotive voice and video recordings should be accessible only to the Transportation Safety Board. There is nothing to stop individual railway companies from using them to attack workers' rights. In fact, there are a number of precedents in which CN and CP have attempted to attack workers' rights and privileges. New Democrats object to clause 14 for this reason.

If the government were truly serious about improving railway safety, it would revise the standards regarding train operator fatigue. Train operators are under pressure from employers to work unreasonable hours, and as such, this demand by employers represents a real danger to the safety of workers and the public.

There is a better way. Canada needs and deserves an affordable, accessible, reliable, and sustainable system of public rail transit, and Canadians have the right to the highest levels of service, protection, and accessibility of travel that can be provided. Instead, we see the erosion of infrastructure due to the neglect and corporate offloading of maintenance responsibilities, and passengers are subjected to the cancellation of rail services across the country.

Canada has a growing population, families with children, disabled Canadians, and senior citizens who need to travel. At the same time, Canadians are conscious of the environmental legacy we are creating for future generations. With proper stewardship and a visionary plan, we have the very real potential to revive our once thriving rail-travel industry. However, that kind of vision requires a federal government focused on national stewardship, rather than what both Liberal and Conservative governments did when they sold off national interests and pandered to those who bankrolled their campaigns.

It is because we need reliable rail service that I have drafted and tabled Bill C-370, which would create a clear mandate for VIA Rail Canada. Canadians are weary of the refusal by the current government, as well as Conservative and Liberal governments in the past, to acknowledge the economic and environmental benefits of a truly enhanced, integrated, accessible, and sustainable rail transit system that would far outweigh and outlive short-term political gain. Past governments have failed to understand that everyone, from the youngest Canadian to the seasoned commuter, benefits if rail travel is part of our future. I can tell members that this reality is not lost on the citizens of London and southwestern Ontario. They are the people who suffer from what is described, in the network southwest action plan, as the “mobility gap”.

Bill C-370 would provide the opportunity for Canadians and the current Parliament to evaluate cases where VIA Rail planned to eliminate a required router station. In addition, my bill would provide a legislative framework for VIA Rail's mandate as a crown corporation to make services mandatory, set minimum frequencies for certain itineraries, and increase levels of service with regard to punctuality. It would provide a transparent and democratic means to evaluate any proposed cancellation of service routes and a framework for managing and funding VIA Rail. It would help prioritize passenger trains where and when there were conflicts with freight trains and would create efficiencies. I encourage members on all sides of this House to support Bill C-370 when it comes to the floor for second reading.

In a previous parliament, the NDP introduced a bill setting out clear steps to establish a passenger bill of rights. The current Minister of Transport supported our bill. He could have followed our lead and introduced concrete measures to protect airline passengers but instead handed off responsibility for making regulations to the Canadian Transportation Agency.

The NDP proposal for a passenger bill of rights included measures to ensure that airlines would have to offer passengers the choice between a full refund and re-routing under comparable conditions when flights were cancelled. Air carriers that failed to comply would have to pay $1,000 in compensation to every passenger affected, in addition to the refund. Also, when an aircraft was held on the ground for more than one hour, the airline would have to provide passengers with adequate food, drinking water, and other refreshments, as well as compensation of $100 for each additional hour the flight was held on the ground.

Witness testimony tells us that such measures could result in flight cancellation rates four times lower than those experienced in Canada. The Liberals heard this testimony in committee, yet they rejected amendments from the NDP based on this solid evidence. It leads me to wonder what their motivation was and where their loyalties lie.

It is unacceptable for the government to shift the responsibility of protecting passenger rights to the Canadian Transportation Agency. Passengers and airlines need clear measures to discourage overbooking, and we need those measures now. The minister promised them for sometime in 2018. That is not good enough.

While our objections to Bill C-49 are many, I want to focus on one final point. Omnibus Bill C-49 would amend the Canada Marine Act to permit 18 port authorities to obtain financing from the Canada Infrastructure Bank. My New Democrat colleagues and I have spoken on the dangers of the Infrastructure Bank and will continue to do so as long as it exists as a loophole for selling off publicly funded infrastructure projects and public services to private corporations. We know that this transfer of public assets will allow private corporations to impose user fees and tolls on Canadians who have already paid hard-earned tax dollars for their public services.

Bill C-49 would allow private investors to provide loans to port authorities using the Infrastructure Bank. It would allow those private investors to charge high rates of interest on those loans, with the consumer footing the bill. In addition, ports whose building projects were valued at less than $100 million may not be eligible for Infrastructure Bank loans and so would be left without any resources. The cost of the required return on investment by these lenders could affect consumers, since many goods are transported through our ports.

New Democrats are wary of any legislation that shrouds the poisoned pill of selling off our valuable public assets and services to private corporations. Governments do not exist to serve private profits. At best, it appears that Liberals do not seem to understand that. At its cynical worst, they do understand and hope Canadians will not notice as they sell this country off to their corporate friends without any consideration for the public good. Either way, Bill C-49 is a flawed and poorly crafted piece of legislation that New Democrats cannot and will not support.