Madam Chair, I am not clear if that was a yes or a no. I am looking for an answer as to whether the development finance institute will be explicitly subject to the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act.
House of Commons photoLost her last election, in 2021, with 32% of the vote.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2017
Madam Chair, I am not clear if that was a yes or a no. I am looking for an answer as to whether the development finance institute will be explicitly subject to the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act.
Business of Supply May 17th, 2017
Madam Chair, I will be using my whole time for questions this evening.
The Minister of International Trade does not have the mandate for international aid responsibilities. Could the minister assure us that the development financing institute will be explicitly subject to the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act. Yes or no?
Health May 15th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for expressing his concern, but without action, it is hollow and meaningless to people in our communities who are watching their loved ones suffer and die.
The government cannot focus only on big cities, because action is desperately needed in small towns like LaSalle, Amherstburg, Essex, Kingsville, and Lakeshore in southwestern Ontario, which have no ability to get into those beds, who call up the hospital and cannot get into rehab, because there are no beds available. Where does that leave them with their loved ones who are looking for a rehab facility that does not exist in our region, who have to travel out of town, who have to be on wait-lists? Rural communities cannot be left behind in the government's plan to address the opioid crisis.
How is the government helping rural communities that are being devastated? The government needs to show leadership and declare a national public health emergency.
Health May 15th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, earlier this year in question period, I asked the government for immediate action on the opioid crisis. I said that we cannot afford to wait for Bill C-37 to wind its way through the parliamentary process. Ironically, months later, while this legislation has made progress, it has not yet received royal assent.
At the time, I asked the government to provide immediate and direct support to communities like those I represent in Essex which continue to grapple with this public health emergency. Unfortunately, this crisis continues to spiral. Front-line workers do not have the resources that they need. People in my community are frustrated and angry by the lack of response from the government.
Earlier today, the Minister of Health spoke about emergency funding to B.C. and Alberta. I would like to remind her that communities across Canada need emergency funding. Small communities especially are struggling to deal with this issue when there is not a holistic plan. We need care in this country that sees people from detox through transition and into rehab. That is very difficult to find in small communities. We need the government to step up with the resources necessary to bring this crisis under control.
In my riding of Essex, youth addiction is a significant issue. In fact, our county has the seventh highest rate of youth addiction in the province. People in law enforcement feel that their hands are tied and they are stuck in the cycle as well. They pick up the same person, bring him or her to the hospital, and then the person is back on the street again. They want to be part of the solution, but there is currently no way for them to participate in that.
Families are feeling desperate. When a loved one experiences an addiction, the parents and the family struggle so much. It is life or death. They try to support their loved one in getting help, but there are so many gaps in the system that it often feels like the system is working against them. Families are doing all they can to help each other.
This morning I spoke with a woman from my riding who was trying to help another family save their child. Fortunately, she was able to get her daughter into treatment and her daughter is healthy today, but this is not the case for everyone. If it were not for Narconon and family support systems that are popping up, we would have no formal way for people to be able to find out what treatment is available to them.
When someone with an addiction is ready to detox and then go to rehab, it is often the beginning of a frustrating experience of running up against the common problems of lack of beds, long wait lists, and a complete lack of resources. People with addictions simply cannot get the help they need and sadly, this can have tragic consequences. People not being able to get into help is heartbreaking.
I have met with some of these families. They have visited me in my office. It is a very emotional conversation with people who are struggling to get their loved ones the help that they need. I have heard their pain and sorrow, and more often, their frustration and anger. When families tell me that their only hope is that their loved one will somehow end up in jail so that their loved one can get the treatment that he or she needs, this tells us how incredibly broken our system is.
Since I held a round table several months ago, seven more people have died in our region due to opioid addictions. I implore the government to revisit its five point plan and reconsider the level of resources that this public health crisis deserves. I would like to ask what the government can offer to rural communities like those in Essex to assist with strengthening the response to the opioid crisis.
Softwood Lumber May 15th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, while Liberals claim softwood lumber is a top priority, they have failed to secure a new deal and they have neglected to make a real plan to support forestry workers and communities.
This week, hundreds of Quebec forestry workers will have their hours cut and their paycheques slashed. Instead of more empty words from the government, workers deserve action. Where are the loan guarantees? Where is the direct support? When will the Liberals stop watching from the sidelines and finally do something about this jobs crisis?
International Trade May 10th, 2017
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for providing me with information that stakeholders need to hear. I have been travelling across the U.S. saying those exact same things with the statistics. However, in the House we do not need to be convinced of the importance of trade with the U.S., and certainly I do not need to be convinced of that in my riding of Essex. I understand the importance of it.
My question for the parliamentary secretary was, what is our plan? Where do we see opportunity? Where can we improve NAFTA in a way that is being called for across the board? When the Liberals continue to say that we need to improve this agreement, they need to start showing us how. In what ways do they see us improving it? In what ways do they see we can strengthen that relationship?
Currently, although there are a lot of conversations in NAFTA taking place in the House and at committees, we have no direction from the government of what it is the government is looking at. Again, my question is this: what does the government want to get out of NAFTA negotiations? What opportunities does it see to modernize and strengthen the agreement? How does the government intend to ensure negotiation—
International Trade May 10th, 2017
Madam Speaker, several months ago I asked the government what will be on the table in NAFTA renegotiations with the United States. I spoke about how hundreds of thousands of Canadian jobs depend on trade with the United States, but the Liberals' silence on their priorities for NAFTA renegotiations has been, and continues to be, deafening. There is an incredibly high level of uncertainty that currently exists in the Canada-U.S. trade relationship.
President Trump's repeated rhetorical attacks on key Canadian sectors such as auto and dairy are deeply worrisome for the hundreds of thousands of Canadians whose jobs depend on the strong, integrated Canada-U.S. relationship. Aside from these attacks, the U.S. has, of course, gone ahead with countervailing duties on Canadian softwood lumber exports, and we know that next month anti-dumping duties are expected that will be layered on top of the already devastating duties. These duties will devastate communities, mills, and workers across Canada.
The federal government's response has been extremely weak. Requests for assistance and support have been met with silence. The Liberals talk a lot about progressive trade that benefits Canadians; now it is time to walk the walk. Canadians want fair trade that benefits all Canadians, not just the few at the top. They want a government that has a plan for protecting Canadian jobs in trade-dependent industries like softwood lumber, auto, steel, agriculture, and dairy. They want a government that is not afraid to say yes, we can and must do better than the status quo of the 25-year-old NAFTA.
The United States has communicated a number of priorities for NAFTA renegotiations. We know what they are looking for, so what is Canada looking for? Maintaining Canada's tariff-free market access to the U.S. is priority one—do no harm—but we can take this a step further. There are many opportunities to modernize and strengthen NAFTA to better serve Canada's interests, and now is the time to be having those conversations.
NAFTA's labour and environment side agreements must be brought into the main text of the agreement and given some actual teeth, or Canada will continue to bleed jobs to Mexico, where labour and environmental rights are nowhere near the standard they need to be. Human rights must be central to Canada's trade agreements.
NAFTA's energy proportionality clause needs to be revisited. As for chapter 11 on investment state dispute settlement, the Liberals need to prioritize getting rid of this terrible chapter. Canada is the most-sued country in the world under this chapter, and the only reason this was brought in was to protect us from a corrupt Mexican court system. Canada has become the target, and environmental claims have been brought against us.
I am not suggesting that the Liberals lay their hand on the table and reveal their negotiating plan to the U.S. What I am suggesting is that Canadians are looking to their government to show some leadership and be up front about where NAFTA could be heading.
Therefore, I would like to ask the parliamentary secretary to provide us some additional information this evening. We have not had an opportunity to hear from him or the Minister of Foreign Affairs at committee since Trump's election, so my questions this evening are these: what does the government want to get out of NAFTA negotiations, what opportunities does it see to modernize and strengthen the agreement, and how does the government intend to ensure negotiations are inclusive of Canadians' views, as well as respectful to the nation-to-nation relationship with indigenous peoples in Canada?
Softwood Lumber May 10th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, I think the problem is that there has been no answer.
It has been two weeks and the Liberals still have not woken up to the reality of the softwood lumber dispute. Hundreds of thousands of good jobs are at risk, and mills across this country could shut down. With the Liberals asleep at the switch, provinces have taken it upon themselves to appoint their own envoys, and some are coming up with their own retaliatory threats.
Instead of just handing out the 1-800 number for EI, when will the Liberals come up with a proactive plan to ensure that not a single softwood lumber job is lost?
Softwood Lumber May 4th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, it has been almost two weeks since the U.S. decided to apply duties of up to 24% on Canadian softwood lumber. It has been six months since President Trump's election and 18 months since the Liberals came to office, and the Liberals failed to see this coming. They failed to come up with a concrete plan to deal with this emerging crisis and to help the hundreds of thousands of families impacted.
Can the minister confirm that she walked away from negotiations with Obama, thinking she could get a better deal with Trump?
Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1 May 4th, 2017
Mr. Speaker, something I am very concerned about in this budget, and I am certain that the member has heard it from his constituents, is the lack of transparency from the government.
When we talk about the changes to the PBO that would happen under this omnibus budget bill, they are quite concerning. These changes are not only to how things would be brought to the House—they would now have to go through the Speaker, and the work plan would have to be approved—but they also impact the way we receive information from the PBO. The government would now have one day to look at this before it is released to the public. Again, it would have one day to spin this in any way before the public sees it. Another thing is that parliamentarians would not be able to request the PBO conduct a study anymore. It would have to go through a committee.
These types of changes do not reflect transparency, freedom, and the ability of the PBO to basically look at what the government is doing and provide Canadians with a snapshot of whether that spending is justified or not, and to have that true independent accounting.
Is the member as concerned as I am about our lack of ability as parliamentarians to bring things to the PBO, and the lack of transparency that Canadians would receive?