Pierre Paul-Hus

[Justice, February 7th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada's notes are looking a little worn. We know that he did not receive any directives. He has repeated that 20 times.

Did the Prime Minister put pressure on the former attorney general of Canada to ask the director of public prosecutions to drop criminal proceedings? That seems fishy. Did the Prime Minister make her pay for his mistakes?

[Justice, February 5th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for the government's response to my question.

I understand why he answered that way and the legal aspect of this matter. There is a political aspect too, however. The Prime Minister has the power to lift the publication ban for certain documents. He has the power to require that the documents requested be turned over.

I would like to know if my colleague believes the Prime Minister should use that power to help Admiral Norman.

[Justice, February 5th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, there is a very sensitive matter before the House of Commons: the trial of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman. It would take me two hours to go into all the details, but for now I will just briefly review what has happened so far.

First of all, I want everyone to remember that Vice-Admiral Norman's case began while he was the commander of the Canadian navy. On November 18, 2014, Admiral Norman informed the House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence that there was a problem with our supply ships and that the navy was no longer able to meet its operational needs. The navy was unable to acquire one or two supply ships to supply our frigates around the world. Then, the government of the day, the Harper government, said solutions would have to be found because contracts awarded under the national shipbuilding strategy to Vancouver's Seaspan were not yet under way. The shipyard had not even begun building the supply ships the Conservative government of the day had ordered.

We started to look at what had to be done. There was an operational problem. Federal Fleet Services, a partner of the Davie shipyard in Lévis, in the Quebec City region, had a genius idea to convert a civilian supply ship for the Royal Canadian Navy at a good price and within a short deadline. This would get the Royal Canadian Navy its equipment as quickly as possible. On August 1, 2015, then prime minister Mr. Harper decided to award the contract to build the Asterix to Federal Fleet Services and to the Davie shipyard. The following day was the start of the election campaign, which lasted until October 19, 2015. A new government came in after the election and inherited the file. The contract had been awarded, but the official decree had not been signed.

I have here a document containing all of the details so far. This record of events shows that different stakeholders were putting enormous pressure on the new government to prevent the Davie shipyard from getting the contract. The deadline for signing the contract was November 20, 2015. Right up until the very last minute, everything was being done to prevent the contract from being signed.

That is when the problems began.

Then, Vice-Admiral Norman, who became second in command at the Canadian Armed Forces, was charged and is now being tried.

We understand that this matter is currently before the courts. What matters to us right now is the political game being played. We know it and we see it. We are no fools. Everyone knows it.

We want Admiral Norman to have all the evidence and all the exchanges that were made between the various stakeholders to ensure that he has a full and complete defence. This man must not pay for political games. If he made a mistake, then he will pay the price, but for now he has to be able to properly defend himself and we want to know why the government is refusing to provide this information.

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

That is exactly what I was saying earlier. We did the work on the ground. We met with people across Quebec. The 40 Liberal MPs from Quebec are missing in action. Their excessive, negative reactions today prove that they are completely out of touch with the reality of Quebeckers.

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Trois-Rivières for his question.

The NDP agreed that Quebec should have a single tax return. Unfortunately, under pressure from the unions, the leader of the NDP decided to change his mind and refuse this request. We cannot play that game. Our position is clear. We know where we are going, we know what we want, and we know what Quebeckers want. Our Conservative colleagues agree.

I cannot change everything I have to do here because the NDP has internal communication problems about its position. I cannot ask my colleague from Richmond—Arthabaska to change his motion because the leader of the NDP has a position opposite of that of the NDP members from Quebec.

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Lac-Saint-Louis for the question. I would simply say that we listened to Quebeckers. Maybe that does not happen in his riding or maybe the people there do not talk about it, but people across Quebec were unanimous.

We truly listened to Quebeckers. We did not get into unnecessary consultations. We held round tables and people were unanimous. What is more, the National Assembly held two votes on this, once under the previous government and once under the current government. If my colleague consulted his constituent and asked them the question, he would get the same response.

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2019]

I can hear the New Democrats shouting, but does anyone really believe that, deep down, we would want to make a decision like that to eliminate jobs? Come on. That is why today's debate has become so emotionally charged. That is why members are trying to attack us, to the turn the debate around and make it political. I cannot count on the NDP because it has changed its mind two or three times. Can I count on the Liberal government and the Prime Minister who refuse every time Quebec asks for something?

We all remember Premier Couillard. Quebec drafted a document to reopen certain constitutional issues. It was very complex work. Mr. Couillard very calmly and dispassionately said he would just like to talk about the issues. The Prime Minister looked at reporters and said he had no intention of talking. That is how this government operates: emotionally. Reactions like that from the Prime Minister and his government drive me up the wall. I cannot stand seeing 40 Liberal MPs from Quebec not give a damn about what Quebeckers think. As I Quebecker, I just do not get it. If they want me to get mad, I will get mad. Every time a Quebec issue comes up, the government reacts negatively.

I am just asking members of the House to be open to discussion. There are steps that need to be taken, of course, and there are ways to do that if we behave like grown men and women, but that is not at all what I have seen today.

Let us look at the answers given by Quebec premiers. Obviously, Mr. Couillard supported the motion. The National Assembly motion was passed by the provincial Liberals of the day. Now the CAQ and Premier Legault are in power, and it is the same thing, of course. Our motion builds on the work already begun in response to Quebec's demands. The Government of Quebec and the National Assembly know Quebeckers better than anyone. We went out to listen to Quebeckers first-hand, and so we are in a position to confirm Quebec's wishes.

It is also important to point out that all members of the Conservative Party support this initiative. It is not only the 11 members from Quebec who are rising to speak to this matter. The entire Conservative caucus supports this initiative to help Quebeckers. At the Conservative Party convention in Halifax last August, the 3,000 delegates in attendance voted over 99% in favour of the motion for a single tax return in Quebec.

Let us stop being emotional and let us be rational. Jobs are important, but we can manage the situation and, basically, there are eight million Quebeckers who are expecting not to have to fill out two tax returns any more, just like all other Canadians, who only file one.

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, what an emotional day this has been. It is a day when Quebec is in the spotlight, and that comes with a lot of emotion.

I would like to calm things down a bit and get back to the facts. We are here today debating a motion moved by my colleague from Richmond—Arthabaska. This motion was not drafted just for fun. It was tabled following some very real events for us.

First, as my colleague from Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix said, we remember Stephen Harper. My colleagues opposite love to try to destroy what he did, but he did one important thing for Quebeckers in 2006, which was to get the House of Commons to recognize Quebec as a nation.

Over the past year and a half, we have been wondering what Quebeckers now expect from a motion like that one. My 10 Conservative colleagues from Quebec and I have toured Quebec. We went everywhere, all the way to northern Abitibi and to the North Shore. We went to listen to Quebeckers. We told them that we recognized Quebec as a nation in 2006 and that we wanted to know what that meant for them now. The tax return issue was one of the major points that kept coming up.

Again, this is not about emotion, but about administration. It is about paperwork. There is nothing emotional about that. The emotion that we are feeling is only anger at having to fill out tax returns.

When we came back from our tour, we thought that it was clear. We did not invent anything. We just listened to Quebeckers. Around the same time, the Quebec National Assembly decided to turn it into a unanimous resolution, adopted by all members of the National Assembly, regardless of party. Members on the left and right all said that they wanted this. Again, this is rational. Let us take a deep breath.

By listening to Quebeckers, our leader, who is very interested in learning what Quebec really wants, said that as prime minister, he would ensure that the Conservative government negotiates with Quebec and finds a way to do it. It is still a matter of administration.

The motion moved by my colleague today seeks to create a relationship of trust with the provinces, to listen to our provinces so that we can work well with them. We are prepared to say that we will work effectively with the Government of Quebec on establishing guidelines for administering a single tax return.

What is so emotional about all of this?

It is simple. We are being asked about jobs. Of course there are challenges any time a measure is introduced. Any measure or any important political decision will always involve considerations related to jobs, expenditures and revenues, depending on what is being done. That is to be expected.

The basic principle that is driving us today, the purpose of our motion, is the fact that there are 8 million Quebeckers. That is a lot of people, one-quarter of Canada's population, who have to fill out two tax returns. We merely want to simplify things. We will manage the impact that this will have on jobs. We will figure out how to handle it. The leader of the Conservative Party has already said that we would manage the situation appropriately. Some federal employees may be assigned to different tasks or have to deal with restructuring. That is for sure. Such a big decision is bound to have consequences. However, we are all aware of that and we want those people to keep their jobs.

How will it work? That remains to be seen.

[Northern Affairs, February 5th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness misled the House and that this is not the first time he has done so. Today, he misled the House in response to a question from my colleague from Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill regarding ISIS fighters.

Under the Conservative government, charges were laid against three individuals in February 2015. They are Awso Peshdary, John McGuire and Khadar Khalib—

[Public Safety, February 5th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, this was reported by the Toronto Star today, not the Conservatives. Is the minister saying that the Toronto Star is instilling fear in Canadians? We will have to see.

We know that some of the asylum seekers have been identified as dangerous criminals. We also know that 11,000 people are awaiting proper security checks. In less than three years, our Prime Minister has managed to create a situation with our immigration system and our borders that is untenable for our officers.

Will the Prime Minister guarantee that the individuals who have not been screened do not represent a threat to Canadians?