14523 OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) House of Commons Debates VOLUME 147 NUMBER 223 2nd SESSION 41st PARLIAMENT Wednesday, June 3, 2015 Speaker: The Honourable Andrew Scheer HOUSE OF COMMONS CANADA (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) COMMONS DEBATES June 3, 2015 DEBATES Edited Hansard * Table of Contents * Number 223 (Official Version) Official Report * Table of Contents * Number 223 (Official Version) Compte rendu officiel * Table des matières * Numéro 223 (Version officielle) 147 223 03 06 2015 2015/06/03 14:05:00 House of Commons Débats de la Chambre des communes House of Commons Debates 41 2 The House met at 2 p.m.

Prayers Statements by Members (1405) [ English ] The Speaker : It being Wednesday, we will now have the singing of the national anthem, today led by the pages. [ Members sang the national anthem ] STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Statements by Members [ Translation ] Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada Mr. Jean-François Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, FD) : Mr. Speaker, I was astounded by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's report on residential schools.

That dark time in history during which entire generations of aboriginal children were uprooted from their families and communities is a gaping wound in our relationship with aboriginal peoples. Now that the report has put a fine point on what happened, clearly stating that it was cultural genocide, we have a duty to fundamentally alter our relationship with aboriginal peoples to help heal the wound. Let us put an end to the federal government's paternalistic attitude. Let us put an end to its condescension toward first nations, Inuit and Métis people.

Let us get rid of the Indian Act, an archaic law that upholds a regime that inspired others to create apartheid. Let us give aboriginal peoples the tools they need to keep their languages and cultures alive and ensure the economic, social and environmental development of their communities. That is the least we can do.

[ English ] Status of Women Mr. Jeff Watson (Essex, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be part of a Conservative government that is doing so much for Canadian women. We have gotten tough on violent sexual offenders while supporting victims' rights. We have taken on those who traffic in girls. We have targeted prostitution laws at the men who exploit women, while offering their victims an exit from exploitation. I have worked with Women's Enterprise Skills Training of Windsor Inc. to secure funding for an action plan, devised by young women, to overcome barriers to women in the skilled trades.

I have secured funding to bring women and local banks together to ensure that women have specialized services for their financial preparedness, and I have secured funding for a program targeting the advancement of women to the highest levels at major local employers. I am proud to support our budget, with its action plan to help women access capital and mentorship to create jobs. As a husband to a strong woman, a father to four strong young women and girls, and the MP for Essex, I know that it is the Conservatives who are standing up for Canadian women.

[ Translation ] World Environment Day and Clean Air Day Mr. François Choquette (Drummond, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to underscore an important date for the environment. On June 5, people all over the world will celebrate World Environment Day and Clean Air Day. Unfortunately, environmental issues are usually ignored by the Conservative government. However, according to a recent study by the consortium Ouranos, inaction on climate change could cost us billions of dollars in health care.

Speaking of the environment, I would like to congratulate the Conseil régional de l'environnement du Centre-du-Québec, the Bloc vert and the Groupe d'aide pour la recherche et l'aménagement de la faune at the École Jean-Raimbault, which are all doing an excellent job in Drummond. Fortunately, on October 19, 2015, the NDP member for Outremont will make Canada an environmental leader on the world stage. I want to wish everyone a happy World Environment Day and Clean Air Day.

[ English ] Aviation Hall of Fame Inductee Mr. Mark Warawa (Langley, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to pay special tribute to Langley's own retired Royal Canadian Air Force Colonel George Miller upon his induction into Canada's Aviation Hall of Fame. George joined the Royal Canadian Air Force in 1953 at the age of 18 and became a top Canadian fighter pilot. He was the base commander in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. He was the team leader of the Canadian Snowbirds aerial demonstration team and is currently the team leader of the Fraser Blues Formation Flying Team, which is renowned for its Remembrance Day flyovers.

In 1990, George became the manager of the struggling Langley Regional Airport. With vision, hard work, and commitment he transformed the airport in Langley into an outstanding community asset and one of Canada's top community airports, with multimillion-dollar businesses that are renowned for helicopter operations. George has been a huge contributor to many successful community events over the years, including Canada Day celebrations and The Sky's No Limit - Girls Fly Too, an event designed to instill in young girls a passion for flight and a career in aviation. Congratulations to George Miller.

Birthday Congratulations Hon. Wayne Easter (Malpeque, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the presence in the gallery of JoAn Yvonne Pendergast, a lovely American lady who is celebrating her 80th birthday with her Canadian husband, Michael. Having experienced the splendors of western Canada as they travelled on the Rocky Mountaineer, they were joined by Michael's niece, Anne, and her husband, Hermann Wallner. It turns out that Michael and Anne have a link to Parliament Hill.

As a young girl of 20, Mary Evelyn Thompson, who was Michael's mother and Anne's grandmother, was a personal secretary on Parliament Hill. She was here the night Centre Block, save for the Library of Parliament, burned in 1916. They both recall with considerable fondness the stories she told about the fire and other exciting happenings on the Hill. I ask members to join me in wishing JoAn a happy birthday and in recognizing a Canadian family with a Hill connection, who she has with her here today.

(1410) Prescription Drugs Mr. Guy Lauzon (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, a recent survey found that one in eight Ontario youth reported using a prescription drug for non-medical purposes, and approximately 70% said they obtained the drugs from home. I want to thank our local law enforcement and pharmacies across the country that are working together to combat those types of troubling statistics and to make a difference.

Through a partnership between the Cornwall Community Police Service and the Eastern Ontario Health Unit, several Medi Drop boxes have been placed throughout the city of Cornwall. Medi Drop is a program that offers a safe place for the public to dispose of unused, unwanted, or expired medication. To date, they have safely disposed of 1,461 pounds of prescription medication. I want to thank the originator, Danielle Lauzon, of the Cornwall Police, and all those involved, not just locally but across the country, for encouraging people to clean out their medicine cabinets.

Let us continue to raise awareness about this simple task and save and protect the health of so many.

[ Translation ] Saint-Lambert Mrs. Sadia Groguhé (Saint-Lambert, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I want to use my last member's statement of this Parliament to take the time to thank all my constituents, all the volunteers and all the organizations I have worked with for the past four years. All these people have the courage to believe that we can change the world and are generous enough to get involved to achieve that. I commend all the organizations in my riding that work hard to improve the lives of others. On Sunday, I was witness to the remarkable dedication of the members of the south shore Alzheimer's Society.

I also want to acknowledge the volunteers who work in my riding every day: Janine, Diane, Bechir, Louise, Christina, Josée and all the others who give of their time and energy to meet with people. They give freely of themselves to convince others that those who engage in politics with passion and altruism can change people's lives. I am very proud to have worked with them for the past four years. My friends, let us be loving, engaged and hopeful, and we will change the world.

[ English ] Dr. John Andrew Balkwill Mr. Gordon Brown (Leeds—Grenville, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, His Worship Dr. John Andrew Balkwill passed away peacefully on May 14, 2015. He leaves behind his loving wife, Janet, and daughters Anne and Kristy. John enjoyed a varied and esteemed career. John practised dentistry in Kanata for 28 years. He was a former national vice-president of the Conservative Party of Canada and a former president of the Kanata Carleton Rotary Club.

For many years, John served as a member of the board of directors of the Canada Ports Corporation and further served as chairman of the police committee of Ports Canada Police. John then served for several years as the vice-chair of the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services. From 2003 until the time of his passing he served as a justice of the peace with the Ontario Court of Justice. John was a good friend and mentor to me and to many others, and he will be dearly missed.

Anniversary Wishes Mr. Wladyslaw Lizon (Mississauga East—Cooksville, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to rise in this House to recognize a very special person in my life, my wife Gosia. Thirty-seven years ago today, we both said “yes” and became husband and wife. Ever since, I have been blessed with her unconditional love and support. When I decided to enter public life, she became my great mentor and supporter. I thank Gosia for our two wonderful children we raised, our son Marcin and daughter Kinga.

Gosia is the best wife, mother, and now grandmother of our amazing grandchildren: Benjamin, Jan, and Alexandra. This is a little poem for Gosia: I don't know what it is that you saw in me, What I saw in you was the utmost happiness that can ever be, Even more so on the day when you and I became “We”, I can still smile and say with love and truth, Honey, I love you. Happy Anniversary.

(1415) The Speaker : The hon. member may be raising the bar for the rest of us. The hon. member for Acadie—Bathurst.

[ Translation ] Acadie—Bathurst Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, it is with great emotion that I rise to speak today. It has been an honour for me to represent the people of Acadie—Bathurst and defend the interests of Canadians across the country in the House of Commons these past 18 years. It is not easy to leave this House. I have experienced great moments and felt a lot of emotions in this place, but as I already mentioned, there is a time to begin and a time to leave.

I would like to thank my children, Céline, Nadine and Stéphanie, and also my spouse Lyna and her children, Cindy, Christian and Valérie, who supported me in 1997 when I decided to stand for election for the first time. I would like to thank my staff, Françoise, Roxane, Chantale, Nadine and Sonia, and all those who came before them. I would like to thank all the House of Commons staff who work behind the scenes: the security services, the interpreters who managed to interpret my heartfelt speeches for 18 years, the maintenance staff and everyone else.

I would like to thank the NDP and my colleagues for accepting me into their big political family. To the people of Acadie—Bathurst, I say thank you for putting your trust in me. I love you all.

[ English ] Michael Dika Mr. Chris Warkentin (Peace River, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, this Friday, family and friends will gather to celebrate the life of Michael Dika following his sudden passing last month. Mike was born and raised in the farming community of Rycroft, Alberta, a community in which he was proud to raise his family, a community that he spent his life helping build.

Mike's commitment to public service started in his youth, when in April 1941 until December 1946, Mike served our country in World War II as a private in the Royal Canadian Ordnance Corps, the Royal Canadian Electrical and Mechanical Engineers, the 1st Light Anti-Aircraft Regiment and finally in the 3rd Division Occupation Force. Mike served across Europe during his military service.

Upon his return, his love for farming, incredible imagination and creativity, the skills and discipline as well as a strong work ethic that he brought from his childhood as well as from his military service yielded a passion for inventing farm equipment that transformed the industry in the Peace Country and throughout the Prairies. Mike was a man who loved his family, his community and his country. We thank him for his contribution. We thank him for his service.

Gender Equality Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, in the words of Rosemary Brown, “Until all of us have made it, none of us have made it”. While women represent just over 50% of the Canadian population, we occupy just 25% of the seats in this House. I am proud that the NDP makes equity a priority. We know that informed, engaged and active women can be successful in affecting real change. We saw it this week in the abolition of the federal sales tax on feminine hygiene products.

Without the female MPs on all sides of this House who understood the experiences of Canadian women, and an amazing constituent community, I believe this victory would not have been possible. However, our work is not yet done. As the satiric online journal The Beaverton points out, this victory leaves 3,424 areas of gender inequality remaining in Canada. I look forward to the 42nd Parliament, where we have the opportunity to elect more women to represent this country's vast and magnificent diversity. Just watch what we can do then.

Taxation Mr. Terence Young (Oakville, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, auto companies are one of the many job creators that are starting to push back against the irresponsible ideas of the Liberals in Ontario and the Liberals on the other side of this house. The mandatory expansion of the Canada pension plan would kill jobs and dramatically hike taxes on all hard-working Canadians. The leader of the Liberal Party is suggesting that income earners who earn just $60,000 a year should have to pay $1,000 extra a year instead of spending it on their priorities. Job creators are pushing back.

We reject this plan and Canadians will never accept it. On this side of the House, we do not raise taxes on the middle class. We cut them.

(1420) Pensions Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government is like a fish out of water when it comes to the Canada pension plan. Do not trust the Prime Minister . He would like to see this plan killed. Today Conservatives talk about the voluntary contribution, but in 2010, their finance minister said that the federal government ruled out voluntary contributions to the CPP. They said it was not a good idea back then. The Conservatives also claim they are going to consult with the provinces, but their record on consulting is even worse.

The Prime Minister has not held a first ministers conference since 2009. The truth is that the Conservative government is not serious about pension reform. It was nowhere to be found in its unfair budget. The Prime Minister has done nothing but criticize any and all attempts to improve the CPP. Canadians want to be able to retire with the security and dignity that they deserve. A Liberal government would lower the age of OAS back to 65 and would work with the provinces to find ways to improve retirement for all Canadians.

Taxation Ms. Lois Brown (Newmarket—Aurora, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we know the Liberal leader's solution for the middle class: a dramatic tax hike. He was clear when he said the Liberal Party is looking at a mandatory tax increase to the Canada pension plan like the increase proposed by Kathleen Wynne in Ontario. We know that someone earning $60,000 a year will be paying $1,000 more in taxes. The good people of Newmarket—Aurora do not want to pay more taxes. They want more of their own money in their own pockets. They want to choose how they save for their retirement through increases to the tax free savings account. We respect that choice. Canadians simply cannot afford the Liberal plan.

Aboriginal Affairs Mrs. Carol Hughes (Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, it is important for us to acknowledge that we are on unceded Algonquin territory. Yesterday, on this territory, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission issued its final report. [ Translation ] The testimony was clear: we need to put an end to previous governments' inaction in order to move toward reconciliation and healing. Too many aboriginal children are still suffering today as a result of chronic underfunding of education and a lack of access to quality health care, clean drinking water and housing.

In 2015, it is high time we put an end to this cycle of poverty starting right now. That is what an NDP government will do. We will not forget the testimony given by the thousands of survivors. We will not forget the 6,000 or more children who never came home. [ English ] In the words of the commissioners, “Collective efforts from all peoples are necessary to revitalize the relationship between Aboriginal peoples and Canadian society – reconciliation is the goal”.

Foreign Affairs Mr. John Carmichael (Don Valley West, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday the NDP lifted the veil on its anti-Israel agenda. The member for Ottawa Centre questioned why our government would stand against policies that would only serve to isolate Israel. We remain committed to upholding and strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. However, like the U.S. and the U.K., we could not support consensus at the conference. We will never support any policy whose sole purpose is the isolation or the embarrassment of our greatest ally in the region.

The question yesterday from the member for Ottawa Centre is hardly surprising, given the long anti-Israel history of the NDP. Let us not forget that it was member for Vancouver East who said that Israel represents “the longest occupation in the world”. Unlike the NDP, this Conservative government not only recognizes Israel's right to exist but its inherent right to defend itself by itself.

ORAL QUESTIONS Oral Questions [ Translation ] Aboriginal Affairs Ms. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday, we heard a clear message from the survivors and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: words are not enough. There also needs to be concrete action. However, the Prime Minister is once again refusing to implement key recommendations, such as the recommendation to apply the principles set out in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Why is he refusing to take this opportunity to move toward reconciliation? (1425) [ English ] Mr.

Mark Strahl (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we again thank the TRC for its work. We thank the former residential school students for the courage and strength they showed in sharing their stories with Canadians. Canada is one of the only countries in the world where aboriginal and treaty rights are entrenched in its Constitution. We have endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as an aspirational document, and a significant step forward in improving our relationship with aboriginal peoples.

We will continue to take concrete measures to improve the living conditions of aboriginal peoples. Ms. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, it is too bad the government lacks the courage and strength to act. It said no to an inquiry on missing and murdered indigenous women. It passed legislation affecting aboriginal rights without any consultation. It voted against implementing the UN declaration. It has underfunded first nations education and social services. It has spent hundreds of millions of dollars fighting aboriginal and treaty rights. As Justice Murray Sinclair has said, “Words are not enough”.

Will the Prime Minister commit to real change and real reconciliation? Mr. Mark Strahl (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it was our government that signed the residential schools agreement, made the apology on behalf of all Canadians, and created the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. It was this Prime Minister who made the historic apology to former students of Indian residential schools, their families and their communities.

Our government has implemented many initiatives to improve the lives of first nations living in this country. Our government will keep working with aboriginal communities and individuals to improve their lives. We would like the opposition to actually get on board and support those concrete measures that we have taken to improve the lives of aboriginal peoples. Ms. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, reconciliation is not just about what happened in the past, it is about what is still happening today.

Twenty years after the last residential school closed, the state of first nations education in Canada is a disgrace. There are too many first nations children who do not have a safe, quality school to attend in their local community. First nations students still receive an average of $8,000 less than students in the rest of Canada. Will the government act now to close the gap before another generation suffers from these discriminatory education policies? Mr. Mark Strahl (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, our government remains committed to a fair and lasting resolution to the legacy of Indian residential schools. As acknowledged by the Prime Minister 's historic apology on behalf of all Canadians in 2008, there is no place in Canada for the attitudes that inspired Indian residential schools to ever prevail again. We continue to make significant investments in aboriginal education. Our recent budget committed substantial funding for education on reserve, and builds upon an investment of $500 million that was announced last year by the Prime Minister for first nations education infrastructure.

We will continue to work with first nations, parents, teachers, schools and leaders to improve the quality of first nations education on reserve. Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, more words are not needed; action is needed. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission was clear that in order to achieve reconciliation, we need a new relationship based on mutual respect, a nation-to-nation relationship. However, despite the many moving stories Canadians heard yesterday, the Prime Minister is still insisting that he will not implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

In the spirit of reconciliation, I ask the Conservatives again, will they listen to the commission and implement the UN declaration? Mr. Mark Strahl (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, as I said, Canada is one of the only countries in the world where aboriginal and treaty rights are recognized in its Constitution. We have endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. We have also done more than that. We have extended the rights on reserve to women.

Women living on reserve were given the same rights as women living off reserve. We brought the Canadian Human Rights Act to bear on reserve. When we do that, the opposition always votes against it. [ Translation ] Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, reconciliation is about more than just words. It is also about taking concrete action. We need to start fresh, in a nation-to-nation relationship, and that is what the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples would allow us to do. However, the Prime Minister is still caught up in his ideology.

Why is he refusing to protect the fundamental rights of aboriginal peoples? Why? (1430) [ English ] Mr. Mark Strahl (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, actions do speak louder than words. Every time we take action to improve the lives of first nations people, the NDP votes against it. We have brought in matrimonial property rights for women living on reserve. We have brought in water and waste water standards, like all other Canadians expect, for Canadians living on reserve.

We have brought in the Canadian Human Rights Act to protect people living on reserve. The NDP always votes against aboriginal Canadians whenever it is presented with the chance in the House. [ Translation ] Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada shows how much work we need to do to repair the harm suffered by first nations, Métis and Inuit peoples. This government appointed Justice Sinclair, who made 94 recommendations to really close this sad

chapter in our history, which has been described as cultural genocide. The Liberal Party immediately accepted those 94 recommendations. Will this government do the same? [ English ] Mr. Mark Strahl (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we do thank the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the commissioners for their work and salute the former residential school students who shared their stories with Canadians. We appreciate that being documented for all Canadians.

We will take the time to consider the recommendations in the light of the full report, which will be released at the end of this year, so we can carefully consider those. Unlike the Liberal Party, we believe that we need to take a close look at those recommendations and consider them in the light of the full report. Hon. Ralph Goodale (Wascana, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the chair of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Justice Sinclair, says the abhorrent system of residential schools was an exercise in cultural genocide.

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada agrees, as do previous prime ministers, and Canadians more generally. However, judging by comments made by Judge Sinclair yesterday, after his meeting with the Prime Minister , the government is not yet on the same page. Would the government explicitly acknowledge the cultural genocide that has taken place and will it agree with the TRC's recommendations? Mr. Mark Strahl (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, when the Prime Minister made the historic apology on behalf of all Canadians in 2008, the government recognized that the Indian residential schools caused great harms to individuals, to communities and to an entire society, and that the attitudes that gave way to that policy had no place in Canada. While we cannot undo the past, we can learn from it. We have taken the steps necessary to bring closure to the legacy of Indian residential schools.

We will continue to promote reconciliation between aboriginal and non-aboriginal Canadians, and we will consider the recommendations of the report in the context of the full report, which will be released later this year.

[ Translation ] International Trade Mr. Marc Garneau (Westmount—Ville-Marie, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of State for Small Business said that Canada would promote supply management during the trans-Pacific partnership negotiations. That same day, his colleague from Edmonton Centre called supply management an anachronism that needs to disappear, and the Prime Minister 's Quebec lieutenant spoke about compensating Canadian producers who could be penalized in the trans-Pacific partnership negotiations. Is the government truly committed to protecting supply management, yes or no? Hon.

Maxime Bernier (Minister of State (Small Business and Tourism, and Agriculture), CPC) : Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Aboriginal Affairs Mrs. Carol Hughes (Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the report issued by the commission yesterday was clear. A public inquiry into missing and murdered women is a step towards reconciliation. Once again, the minister is refusing to show respect and sensitivity. This is not the time to remain seated, arms crossed. Now is the time to show some leadership and launch this inquiry. Why does the minister keep refusing to listen to victims? [ English ] Mrs. Susan Truppe (Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, we do not need another study on top of the 40 we already have. It is this government that continues to stand up for victims of violence. Since coming to office, we have toughened sentences for murder, sexual assault, kidnapping and imposed mandatory prison sentences for most of the crimes, and that member and that party votes against everything we do. We also passed the historic legislation that gave aboriginal women on reserves the same matrimonial rights that they have, including emergency protection orders. Again, those members vote against everything we do to help aboriginal women and girls. Mrs.

Carol Hughes (Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the minister did not stand; he stayed in his seat. Shame on them. During Justice Sinclair's address, the room erupted with cheers when he called for a national inquiry on missing and murdered indigenous women, yet the minister pointedly stayed in his seat. There are now more than 1,200 missing and murdered indigenous women in Canada. Without justice for these women and their families, there can be no reconciliation. Will the minister do the right thing and commit to immediately launching a national inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women?

(1435) Mrs. Susan Truppe (Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it was this government that brought in the action plan to address family violence and violent crimes against aboriginal women and girls, as well as the family violence prevention program. Again, the opposition members voted against it. Since coming to office, we passed more than 30 criminal justice and public safety initiatives, including tougher sentences for murder, sexual assault, kidnapping and mandatory prison. The opposition members continue to vote against every single thing we do to help women and girls in Canada.

International Trade Mr. Malcolm Allen (Welland, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of State for Agriculture claimed that he would defend supply management, but at committee the hon. member for Edmonton Centre said, “supply management needs to disappear”. It seems some members of the Conservative caucus have actually been telling the truth lately. Farmers no longer really trust the government when it comes to supply management. Will the minister denounce the member for Edmonton Centre , or have the Conservatives truly given up on egg farmers, poultry farmers and dairy farmers across our country? Hon.

Ed Fast (Minister of International Trade, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government will continue to promote Canada's trade interests across all sectors of our economy, across every region of our country, including supply management. That has never prevented us from successfully completing trade agreements with countries like the United States, the European Union and South Korea. We make no apologies for ensuring that any deal reached must be in Canada's best interests. As always, we will only sign a trade agreement that is in the best interests of Canadians. [ Translation ] Ms.

Ruth Ellen Brosseau (Berthier—Maskinongé, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday another Conservative gave farmers yet more reason to worry about whether our supply management system will be protected. In committee, the member for Edmonton Centre said that supply management should disappear. Negotiations are going on behind closed doors, and farmers are in the dark. This will jeopardize 3,500 farms in Quebec alone. The industry is worth $3.2 billion per year. Have the Conservatives decided to sacrifice supply management, yes or no? Hon.

Maxime Bernier (Minister of State (Small Business and Tourism, and Agriculture), CPC) : Mr. Speaker, earlier, I told my Liberal Party colleague that we will continue to defend supply management. I said yes. In answer to this question, I have to say no because the question was whether we will dismantle supply management. We will continue to promote supply management. Ms. Ruth Ellen Brosseau (Berthier—Maskinongé, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the minister responsible for Quebec said that concessions would have to be made for the trans-Pacific partnership to work.

The minister of state is playing word games by saying that he will promote supply management without guaranteeing that he will maintain it. For his part, the Prime Minister said that Canada will have to make difficult choices. Farmers deserve honesty. My question is simple. Will the Conservative government preserve supply management within the context of the trans-Pacific partnership, yes or no? Hon. Maxime Bernier (Minister of State (Small Business and Tourism, and Agriculture), CPC) : Mr. Speaker, yes, we will continue to preserve supply management.

The Economy Mrs. Sadia Groguhé (Saint-Lambert, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, clearly, the Minister of Finance keeps burying his head in the sand. Our economy shrank by 0.6% in the first quarter, but the minister has brushed off any concerns about Canada possibly moving into recession. This morning the OECD downgraded its forecasts for Canada's economic growth. When will the minister pull his head out of the sand and admit that the economy is in trouble? Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, at the G7 meeting last week, it became clear that the global economy remains fragile.

The United States had a tough first half of the year, China's growth declined and Europe continues to struggle. However, the Bank of Canada, the IMF and private sector economists are predicting a recovery for Canada's economy and solid growth throughout the year. Our economic action plan has been highly praised.

Taxation Mr. Pierre Dionne Labelle (Rivière-du-Nord, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, while the middle class is struggling to make ends meet, the Conservatives are allowing Canadian companies to put billions of dollars in tax havens with total impunity. This year Canadians companies will hide $200 billion from the taxman. Of the five most popular destinations for Canadian direct investment abroad, three are tax havens. That is not right. Instead of cutting thousands of jobs at the Canada Revenue Agency, will the Conservatives do something to combat offshore tax evasion? (1440) [ English ] Hon. Kerry-Lynne D.

Findlay (Minister of National Revenue, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the government has zero tolerance for tax evasion. From 2006 to March 31, 2014, the CRA audited over 8,600 international tax cases, identifying over $5.6 billion in additional taxes. There has been no cut to auditors. In fact, we have increased the number of auditors at CRA. Our unprecedented investments have provided the CRA with enhanced tools to pursue tax evaders like never before. Additionally, our government has introduced over 85 measures to improve the integrity of the tax system. The NDP has voted against all— The Speaker : Order, please.

The hon. member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley.

The Economy Mr. Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Canadian economy actually shrank in the first quarter, yet the finance minister's only plan is to buy more ad time. An OECD report out today is downgrading Canada's growth even further and warns of serious future risks to our economy. However, the minister refuses to take off the rose coloured glasses and face reality. The truth is that Canadian families are worried about how to pay the mortgage. The truth is that Canadians are worried about losing their jobs.

The truth is that this is the worst economic growth performance outside of a recession in 40 years. When will the Minister of Finance finally wake up and acknowledge that his plan is failing Canadians? Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the OECD confirmed Canada's sound fiscal situation and indicated that the economy next year would be growing by 2.3%. The fact is that there was a dramatic decline in the price of oil, the U.S. economy fell by 2.7%, and all this impacts on the Canadian economy.

This is not the time for high taxes, be they a $20-billion carbon tax or a payroll tax increase through a mandatory CPP. Mr. Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, we know the Conservatives are getting desperate when they reach back for that old nugget. New government numbers show that top earners keep getting wealthier, while working and middle-class Canadians fall further behind. The Conservative's income-splitting scheme will only make matters worse, yet the minister seems confused about his own plan.

Yesterday at committee he claimed that the scheme would not kick in until next year, but his own budget documents show that he blew $2.4 billion on income splitting this year while actually running a $2-billion deficit. Now that the facts are in front of the minister, will he finally admit to the truth, that he chose to run a deficit just to help wealthy Canadians? Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, first, I said no such thing. In fact, he is confusing my answer with that of someone else, and it was not me.

Statistics Canada reported that the average net worth of Canadian families grew 73% in the last 15 years, approximately. The economic action plan is working. However, what the Liberals and the NDP propose are reckless spending and high taxes. This is not the time for that; it never is. We are going to continue our low-tax plan for jobs and growth, which is working and making us the envy of the world.

International Trade Hon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, supply management is good for our farmers and our consumers. It puts nutritious eggs, chicken, turkey and dairy products on our plates every day at a reasonable price. Yesterday in question period, the member for Beauce cynically said that the Conservatives were only going to promote supply management and not protect it in treaty talks. Then, at the foreign affairs committee, the member for Edmonton Centre said that it should disappear altogether. The Conservatives now have confirmed what we always knew.

They want to scratch supply management. How much are they going to give away in the next trade negotiations? Hon. Ed Fast (Minister of International Trade, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I do not accept the premise of that question. I have made it very clear in the House many times that our government will continue to promote and defend the interests of our supply managed farmers. There is no government that has done more for Canadian farmers than this Conservative government. Our government understands that expanded trade will be a key driver of economic growth for Canada.

That is why we are participating in the TPP negotiations. We are opening up a market of 800 million consumers, a market that is worth somewhere in the order of $29 trillion a year. On this side of the House, we understand what is important for Canadians, and that is economic growth and long-term prosperity.

(1445) [ Translation ] The Economy Mr. Emmanuel Dubourg (Bourassa, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, last week we learned that the Canadian economy shrank, and this week CIBC and the OECD adjusted their forecasts for Canada to the alarming growth rates of 1.45% and 1.5%. That falls far short of the Conservative government's pitiful objectives. That will mean more cuts, and the government will not be able to balance the budget. Are the Conservatives waiting for a recession before they do something? Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, as I said, Canada is not immune to the financial turmoil affecting the global economy. We know that Europe's growth is weak and that in the first half of the year the United States posted a 0.7% decline. Canada must follow its low-tax plan for economic growth. [ English ] Hon. Ralph Goodale (Wascana, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the finance minister's latest economic forecasts, less than two months ago, are already wrong. The country has just recorded the worst two months ever for trade deficits.

The OECD has slashed Canadian growth prospects for 2015, now down to a meagre 1.5%, meaning three-quarters of OECD countries are doing better than Canada and the current government is likely already back in deficit once again. Before this House adjourns in three weeks, will the government table a new fiscal update to tell the truth about its deficit and its no-growth economy? Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I am not sure why the opposition members continue to want to talk down Canada.

We believe that our low-tax plan for jobs and growth will result, as it has in the past, in significant economic growth. We have created 1.2 million net new jobs; we are doing better than most developed countries; and the prospects are for solid growth this year and continuing growth next year. That is the view of all economists. That is the view of the Bank of Canada and the IMF.

[ Translation ] Ethics Ms. Ève Péclet (La Pointe-de-l'Île, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister began by assuring us that Mike Duffy was a resident of Prince Edward Island. However, he was never able to prove it. Then, we learned that his office was directly involved in making changes to a report on senators' spending. The cherry on the sundae is that the Prime Minister agreed to have a senator do fundraising for the Conservative Party on the taxpayers' dime. Will the Prime Minister finally explain what role he played in the Senate scandal? [ English ] Mr.

Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, they have already addressed the fact of senators' appointments. The practice has been clear on that for close to 150 years. It is also very clear that it is against the rules of this House to use the resources of the taxpayers to fund partisan political offices. That is something that the NDP did.

I am sure that taxpayers, those in the gallery and across Canada who are watching, are shocked to learn that the NDP is actually taking the taxpayers to court because it refuses to pay back the $2.7 million that it owes them. Instead, the New Democrats will be spending their summer in court refusing to pay it back. I hope they will do the right thing and pay it back. Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague loves kangaroo courts because the Conservatives keep getting convicted in real courts.

It took the RCMP to tell us that the cover-up was orchestrated in the Prime Minister's Office. It was the RCMP that told us that the Prime Minister's Office tried to whitewash the audit. As more stuff comes out on Mike Duffy, it is becoming clear why the Conservatives were such busy little beavers. In fact, the member for Oak Ridges—Markham relied on Mike Duffy to help get him elected when he was abusing the public trust. I would like to ask when the Prime Minister is going to finally come clean about the orchestrated cover-up of abuse of taxpayer money that was done in his office to benefit his party.

(1450) Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, when I campaigned in my riding, I campaigned openly and honestly about the things that I wanted to accomplish for the people of my riding. I never broke my word to my constituents like that member did, on the campaign trail saying one thing and then coming into this House and doing the exact opposite. In fact, he got caught and then tried to gerrymander his riding to get rid of the people he did not like so he could try to win his seat back.

Now he is part of the crew that owes— Some hon. members: Oh, oh! The Speaker : Order, please. We need a bit more order. The hon. member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca.

National Defence Mr. Randall Garrison (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of National Defence said that our request for an apology to LGBT members of the Canadian Forces who were forced out of their jobs was new to him. That is surprising because this motion was tabled more than a year ago. Just to ensure he did not miss it, we wrote to the minister again this February to draw his attention to it. He had plenty of time to consider this request on behalf of hundreds of veterans. Will he now honour the service of these women and men, apologize and correct their service records? Hon.

Jason Kenney (Minister of National Defence and Minister for Multiculturalism, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, again, gay and lesbian Canadians have served openly in the Canadian Armed Forces, and proudly, for nearly 25 years. They do a great job, like all of our men and women in uniform. We are proud of all of them. [ Translation ] Ms. Élaine Michaud (Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of National Defence said that our request for an apology for the discriminatory policies against LGBT members of the CF was new to him.

However, over a year ago, a motion was moved to that effect and the NDP informed the minister about this several times. Clearly he is not top of these issues. Will the government finally acknowledge the unacceptable policies that were in effect in the army for 25 years and apologize to the LGBT members? Hon. Jason Kenney (Minister of National Defence and Minister for Multiculturalism, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, as I just said, gay and lesbian Canadians have served openly in the Canadian Armed Forces for nearly 25 years. We are proud of their service and the service of all Canadians in our armed forces.

[ English ] Foreign Affairs Mr. Mark Adler (York Centre, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration . Yesterday, once again, we saw the true colour of the NDP's foreign policy when it questioned our government's support for a policy that seeks to prevent the isolation of Israel. Can the minister please update the House on the government's position on the outcome of the recent United Nations non-proliferation treaty? Hon. Chris Alexander (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I fully accept the premise of that question.

I would like to thank the member for York Centre for his leadership on this issue. Canada remains fully committed to upholding and strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Under this Conservative government, Canada will only support a legitimate Middle East weapons of mass destruction conference process that addresses the concerns of all countries in the region, including Israel. Unlike the NDP, which pursues policies that isolate Israel in the Middle East, Canada and this government will continue to stand with our friend and ally for democracy, freedom and the rule of law.

[ Translation ] Consumer Protection Ms. Annick Papillon (Québec, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the NDP has worked hard on getting rid of the unfair pay-to-pay fees that the banks are charging. Yesterday, the Conservatives decided to support our motion in the House. That is good. That is the first step, but the next step is legislation. As always, we are offering our full co-operation to ensure we can quickly pass a bill before the end of this session. Will the minister accept our offer in order to put an end to these unjustified bank fees? Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, our government understands the concerns of Canadians who feel they are not getting their money's worth out of these bank fees. That is why we supported the opposition motion. The banks have already committed to stop charging pay-to-pay fees. That is why we supported the opposition motion. This is the type of measure that we are planning to include in our mandatory financial consumer protection code that we promised to establish in economic action plan—

(1455) The Speaker : The hon. member for Davenport . [ English ] Mr. Andrew Cash (Davenport, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the only thing standing between now and the end of unfair pay-to-pay fees is these Conservatives right here. While I appreciate their support for the motion, let us be clear. If the government is serious about standing up for hard-working people, will the minister pass legislation before the summer that stops banks from picking the pockets of Canadians with these unfair fees? Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, as I have already said, we have obtained a voluntary agreement from the banks not to impose pay-to-pay fees. I am not sure whether the opposition is listening. It is also the kind of issue that we may include in the mandatory consumer protection framework. We have also introduced tough measures to protect Canadians, including implementing low-cost banking accounts and free banking services for over seven million Canadians.

Citizenship and Immigration Mr. Andrew Cash (Davenport, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I am not sure where that agreement came from with the banks. Is it some kind of nudge, nudge, wink, wink deal? We do not know. We have not seen it. We want a mandatory code. That is what the government agreed to yesterday. We want to see it happen. Now, onto another issue. The government has supported adoptions from many Muslim countries. Nusrat Munshi has been working for two years to bring her child home with no success.

Other countries, like the United States and the United Kingdom, have figured this out and allowed legal recognition of guardianship for children from Muslim countries. Why has this government not? Hon. Chris Alexander (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the member opposite would do well not to spread disinformation. Adoptions continue to happen in Canada in large numbers, including from many Muslim majority countries. However, those adoptions have to respect the national law of those countries, international conventions on adoption and the law of children, and Canadian law.

When any of those requirements is not met, the adoption will not take place. [ Translation ] Ms. Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the minister would have us believe that there is nothing more he can do in this case, and that is shameful. The situation can and must be resolved. If the minister does not know how to do that, he can look at what is being done in the United States and the United Kingdom because they managed to solve this problem.

In 2013, this government stopped recognizing adoptions of Pakistani children, which means that parents have been separated from their adoptive children for months or even years. Will the minister show some leadership in this matter, solve the problem and allow these parents to live in Canada with their adopted children? Hon. Chris Alexander (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, we have here two New Democrat MPs who, instead of looking after the interests of real people and real families with concerns by coming and talking to us about specific cases, would rather talk about these situations in the House. They know full well that we cannot comment on individual cases in the House. They are also quite familiar with the adoption rules. If they have cases they need help with, they should come and talk to us about them instead of turning other people's family lives into a partisan issue.

[ English ] The Economy Ms. Chrystia Freeland (Toronto Centre, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the OECD has cut its 2015 GDP forecast for Canada to a dismal 1.5%. By way of excuse, the minister today claimed, “We are doing better than most developed countries”. That is simply not true. The OECD puts us behind Australia, Germany, Ireland, Israel, the Netherlands, South Korea, Sweden, the U.K., the U.S. and yes, even Spain. This is no global problem, as the government likes to pretend to excuse its shoddy management. This is a made-in-Canada runway to recession. When will the finance— The Speaker : The Minister of Finance.

Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, if I understand the member opposite correctly, she seems to think that Canada is an island and that we are not in any way affected, even though we are great trading nation, by what is going on in the rest of the world. That may be the Liberal view, but we live in a global world and of course we are affected by it. Our government is focused on what matters to Canadians: jobs and economic growth. Our plan is training, trade and low taxes. We have created 1.2 million net new jobs.

According to the International Labour Organization global wage report, Canada has the second best paid—

(1500) The Speaker : The hon. member for Kings—Hants. Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the Canadian economy shrank last quarter. We are halfway to a recession. TD, BMO, CIBC and the OECD have all downgraded their projections for Canada. TD is saying that while the headline growth number was bad, the underlying details were worse, yet yesterday the Minister of Finance , ignoring mounting evidence, predicted growth this quarter. Why will he not tell Canadians the truth, that the economy has flatlined and we are teetering on recession?

Why is he refusing to provide a real plan for jobs and growth? Does he think wishful thinking is a replacement for a plan? Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Finance, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it is really rich for the Liberals and the NDP to be accusing our job creation record. They have voted against every job creation measure our government put forward, including freezing EI rates, tax cuts for manufacturers, $75 billion in stable and predictable job creating infrastructure, the LNG, accelerated capital cost allowance. The Liberals would introduce increased taxes through payroll taxes, an increase in mandatory CPP.

His leader thinks that budgets— The Speaker : The hon. member for Burnaby—Douglas.

Science and Technology Mr. Kennedy Stewart (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I am proud to say thousands of Canada's top social scientists are in Ottawa today sharing their latest innovations in their field. They conduct exceptional research on the defining social and economic issues of our time. Social science research is critical to understanding our society and growing our economy, but of course the Conservatives do not share this view. Since 2007, base funding for the three research granting councils has been slashed by millions, not to mention killing off the long form census.

Why are Conservatives undercutting Canadian social scientists with their reckless cuts to research? Hon. Ed Holder (Minister of State (Science and Technology), CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I absolutely have to say that what that member just said is just not true. We have made record investments in science, technology, and innovation. We have massive, significant legacy funding in the 2014 economic action plan and the 2015 economic action plan. When it comes to support for scientists and innovation, this government stands tall and stands proud. [ Translation ] Ms. Laurin Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, the minister of state is the one who is wrong. The current government does not provide adequate support for the humanities and social sciences, and the figures speak for themselves. Between 2007 and 2015, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council saw its budget cut by nearly $50 million. Furthermore, in 2013, a Conservative Party insider said that there were too many young people in university and not enough young welders. When will this government stop denigrating our humanities and social science researchers and start recognizing their contributions? Hon.

James Moore (Minister of Industry, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we have made unprecedented investments to support our scientists, particularly in budget 2015. [ English ] My hon. colleagues, both the member for Burnaby—Douglas and the member who just spoke, talked about social sciences.

We are very proud, for example, of the appointments that we have just made to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council: Julia Foster, the new chair, and Tracy Summerville, from our home province of British Columbia, a brilliant academic from Prince George who is going to do fantastic work there for all Canadians in the advancement of science and the advancement of discovery for all Canadians.

Health Mr. Brad Trost (Saskatoon—Humboldt, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to read that in my province of Saskatchewan, police know it is their job to enforce the law and shut down marijuana storefronts operating in our cities. Can the Minister of Health please update the House on the serious health risks of smoking marijuana? Hon. Rona Ambrose (Minister of Health, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his question.

Of course, the report from the health committee that outlined expert testimony makes it clear that when youth smoke marijuana, there is an increased risk of mental health issues, including psychosis and schizophrenia. Unlike the Liberal leader, who wants to normalize the smoking of pot by legalizing it and making it available in storefronts just like alcohol and cigarettes, this Conservative government will make sure that storefronts selling marijuana remain illegal. We expect all police to enforce the law.

Public Safety Hon. Wayne Easter (Malpeque, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, tomorrow will be the sad anniversary of the tragic shooting in Moncton in which three RCMP officers were killed in the line of duty. The report on that tragedy made many of the same recommendations found in the report on the shooting in Mayerthorpe, where four officers died eight and a half years earlier. Now the RCMP faces charges under the Canada Labour Code for inadequate training and equipment. Ultimately, responsibility rests with the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness .

Why has the minister failed the RCMP and its funding needs? Why is the government not providing enough money to the RCMP for training and equipment so that its officers can protect themselves?

(1505) Ms. Roxanne James (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it is rather unfortunate that the member has posed that question on the eve of the day that we should be honouring the three fallen RCMP members who lost their lives in the line of duty. That said, our Conservative government has full confidence in the RCMP to enforce the laws of Canada and keep all Canadians safe. The RCMP commissioned a report into this incident and is acting upon those recommendations.

Citizenship and Immigration Ms. Peggy Nash (Parkdale—High Park, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, Tibetans in my community are worried about their loved ones following the devastating earthquake in Nepal. They are concerned that their families, even those who qualify for expedited family reunification, might not get to Canada, because as refugees, many do not have the necessary travel documents. Tibetan refugees in Nepal are facing exceptional and urgent circumstances. What will the minister do to cut through the red tape and help reunite these families? Hon. Chris Alexander (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, we continue to be very concerned about the situation in Nepal, about reuniting families affected by the disaster there, and about Tibetan populations facing hardship at home, in Nepal, and in India. That is why, thanks to an initiative of my predecessor, we have committed ourselves to the largest resettlement program of Tibetan refugees in Canadian history. I was pleased to organize an information session very recently in that member's riding to help resolve these issues of documentation.

Employment Mrs. Pat Perkins (Whitby—Oshawa, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, Ford, Chrysler, and GM have written to Premier Kathleen Wynne warning that her plan to expand mandatory pension contributions would kill jobs and increase the cost of doing business. Could the Minister of Employment and Social Development please update this House on our government's plan to support job growth in the auto industry? Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I thank that member for her hard work on behalf of auto workers.

I am happy to report that according DesRosiers Automotive Consultants, “The Canadian new vehicle market remains to be on track for the bestselling year ever”. Our low-tax plan is working. However, the Liberals are planning a new tax that will throw auto workers out of a job. The Windsor Star stated: The local Chamber of Commerce and auto sector companies are warning Premier Kathleen Wynne a new provincial plan could lead to layoffs or cutbacks in Windsor's fragile auto sector. The Liberal leader has endorsed that proposed payroll tax of $1,000 for every worker. We will fight to stop it.

[ Translation ] Air Transportation Mr. Pierre-Luc Dusseault (Sherbrooke, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, although the House unanimously adopted my motion regarding non-designated airports on April 29, the government has yet to take action and has said nothing on this issue. This motion called on the House to create, as soon as possible, a mechanism that would allow for security screenings at non-designated airports, such as the Sherbrooke airport. The people of Sherbrooke are entitled to an airport that helps our region's economy flourish. They are also entitled to answers from the Minister of Transport .

How is it that nothing has been announced five weeks after my motion was adopted? What is the Minister of Transport doing about this? [ English ] Hon. Lisa Raitt (Minister of Transport, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we have been working on this issue far longer than the member has put forth his motion in the House of Commons. In fact, that is why we are so far along in the curve and having these discussions on a one-to-one basis with airports that are interested in taking the opportunity to have a pilot project with respect to being able to pay for CATSA services.

We will update the airports as we move along, but this is really a matter for Transport Canada officials to discuss with the local area and not a matter for political interference.

[ Translation ] Intergovernmental Relations Mr. Louis Plamondon (Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, BQ) : Mr. Speaker, once again, the federal government is acting unilaterally without any concern for the impact on Quebec. This time, Ottawa wants to interfere in France-Quebec relations bluntly, heedless of the formal request from Quebec ministers Weil and St-Pierre and the international agreements Quebec has with its partners. The federal government changed the visa rules for foreign interns. Ottawa's lack of subtlety will deprive nearly 300 French students of internships in Quebec.

This is “Ottawa knows best” at its finest. Is this the latest version of the federal government's policy on collaboration? Does it intend to flatly reject formal requests from Quebec ministers—and federalist ones at that?

(1510) Hon. Chris Alexander (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it is funny that the member opposite sees no need to ensure that Canadians and Quebeckers get priority in the labour market. That is why we changed the temporary foreign worker program. The reason we have new fees is to ensure the integrity of the new program. We will continue to seek reciprocity in the exchange program with France and to ensure that Quebec and Canadian workers get priority.

[ English ] Presence in Gallery The Speaker : I would like to draw to the attention of hon. members the presence in the gallery of His Eminence Cardinal Raymond Burke, Cardinal Patron of the Sovereign Order of Malta. Some hon. members: Hear, hear!

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Routine Proceedings [ English ] Commissioner of Official Languages The Speaker : I have the honour to lay upon the table the annual reports on the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act of the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages for the year 2014-2015. [ Translation ] These reports are deemed permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

[ English ] Government Response to Petitions Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's responses to 128 petitions.

Safer Vehicles for Canadians Act Hon. Lisa Raitt (Minister of Transport, CPC) Bill C-62. Introduction and first reading moved for leave to introduce Bill C-62,

An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act . (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[ Translation ] Interparliamentary Delegations Mr. Bernard Trottier (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and for La Francophonie, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the reports of the delegation of the Canadian branch of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie respecting its participation in the 15th summit of La Francophonie, held in Dakar, Senegal, from November 25 to 30, 2014; in the bureau meeting of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie and in a bilateral meeting, which were held in Paris and in Clermond-Ferrand, France, from January 21 to 27, 2015; and in the meeting of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie Political Committee, held in Siem Reap, Cambodia, from March 23 to 26, 2015.

Committees of the House Official Languages Hon. Michael Chong (Wellington—Halton Hills, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Official Languages entitled “Immigration as a Tool for Enhancing the Vitality and Supporting the Development of Francophone Minority Communities”. Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.

[ English ] Natural Resources Mr. Leon Benoit (Vegreville—Wainwright, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 12th report of the Standing Committee on Natural Resources regarding the supplementary estimates (

A) for 2015-16.

Public Safety and National Security Mr. Daryl Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, today I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 13th report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security in relation to Bill C-637,

An Act to amend the Criminal Code (firearms storage and transportation) . The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House without amendment. Motion As well, while I have the floor, I move: That the House proceed to orders of the day.

(1515) The Speaker : Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some hon. members: Agreed. Some hon. members: No. The Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will please say yea. Some hon. members: Yea. The Speaker: All those opposed will please say nay. Some hon. members: Nay. The Speaker: In my opinion the yeas have it. And five or more members having risen: The Speaker: Call in the members.

(1550) (The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:) (Division No. 416) YEAS Members Ablonczy Adler Aglukkaq Albas Albrecht Alexander Allen (Tobique—Mactaquac) Allison Ambler Ambrose Anders Anderson Armstrong Ashfield Barlow Bateman Benoit Bergen Bernier Bezan Blaney Block Boughen Braid Breitkreuz Brown (Leeds—Grenville) Brown (Newmarket—Aurora) Bruinooge Butt Calandra Calkins Cannan Carmichael Carrie Chisu Chong Clarke Clement Crockatt Daniel Davidson Dechert Dreeshen Duncan (Vancouver Island North) Dykstra Eglinski Falk Fantino Fast Findlay (Delta—Richmond East) Finley (Haldimand—Norfolk) Fletcher Galipeau Gallant Gill Glover Goguen Goldring Gosal Grewal Harper Harris (Cariboo—Prince George) Hawn Hayes Hiebert Hillyer Hoback Holder James Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission) Keddy (South Shore—St.

Margaret'

s) Kenney (Calgary Southeast) Kent Kerr Komarnicki Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings) Lake Lauzon Leef Lemieux Leung Lizon Lobb Lukiwski MacKay (Central Nova) MacKenzie Maguire Mayes McColeman McLeod Menegakis Miller Moore (Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam) Moore (Fundy Royal) Norlock Obhrai O'Connor Oliver O'Neill Gordon Opitz O'Toole Paradis Payne Perkins Poilievre Preston Raitt Rajotte Reid Rempel Richards Rickford Saxton Schellenberger Seeback Shea Shipley Shory Smith Sopuck Sorenson Stanton Storseth Strahl Sweet Tilson Toet Trost Trottier Truppe Uppal Valcourt Van Kesteren Van Loan Wallace Warawa Warkentin Watson Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country) Weston (Saint John) Wilks Williamson Wong Woodworth Yelich Young (Oakville) Young (Vancouver South) Yurdiga Zimmer -- 149 NAYS Members Allen (Welland) Andrews Angus Atamanenko Aubin Ayala Bélanger Bennett Benskin Bevington Blanchette Blanchette-Lamothe Boivin Borg Boulerice Boutin-Sweet Brahmi Brison Brosseau Caron Cash Charlton Chicoine Chisholm Choquette Christopherson Côté Cotler Crowder Cuzner Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) Day Dion Dionne Labelle Doré Lefebvre Dubé Dubourg Dusseault Easter Eyking Freeland Freeman Garneau Garrison Genest Genest-Jourdain Giguère Godin Goodale Groguhé Harris (Scarborough Southwest) Hsu Hughes Hyer Jones Julian Lamoureux Lapointe Latendresse LeBlanc (Beauséjour) LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard) Leslie Liu MacAulay Mai Marston Masse Mathyssen May McCallum McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) Michaud Morin (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord) Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine) Morin (Laurentides—Labelle) Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) Murray Nantel Nash Nunez-Melo Papillon Péclet Perreault Pilon Plamondon Quach Rafferty Rathgeber Ravignat Raynault Regan Saganash Sandhu Scott Sellah Sgro Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor) Sims (Newton—North Delta) Sitsabaiesan St-Denis Stewart Sullivan Toone Tremblay Valeriote Vaughan -- 106 PAIRED Nil The Acting Speaker (Mr.

Barry Devolin) : Motion agreed to I declare the motion carried.

GOVERNMENT ORDERS Government Orders (1555) [ English ] Yukon and Nunavut Regulatory Improvement Act Bill S-6—Time Allocation Motion Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) moved: Motion That, in relation to Bill S-6,

an act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and the Nunavut Waters and Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal Act, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration at report stage of the bill and one sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said bill; and That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for government orders on the day allotted to the consideration at report stage and on the day allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the stage of the bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Pursuant to Standing Order 67(1) there will now be a 30-minute question period. I invite hon. members who may wish to participate in the debate to rise in their seats at this time so I can get a sense of how much involvement there will be. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Northwest Territories. Mr. Dennis Bevington (Northwest Territories, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, this is the 98th time in this Parliament that we have had a time allocation proposal by the government. This one is on a particular bill that is opposed by most of the people in Yukon in four specific areas.

The government has chosen not to go back to the first nations in Yukon that have well-established relationships there based on existing laws and existing environmental legislation. The government has chosen to unilaterally put four new amendments in the bill that were not part of the larger review process. This has led to a situation where both Yukoners and first nations Yukoners are combined in their opposition to these four amendments. We saw that when we had the committee hearings in Yukon. The room was full. Hundreds of people listened to our committee. Many people spoke to it, including industry.

They said not to do it, that it was silly, that it was not correct to break the relationship that existed now and was working quite well. The time allocation motion is an insult. The government will answer for this in Yukon in the next election, which is five months away. It is a pity that the government has taken this road. It is going to cause disruption and uncertainty in the Yukon economy for the next number of years until we straighten it out. Hon. Bernard Valcourt (Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, if this is the 98th time that such a motion has been proposed to the House, it means that this Parliament, our party, our government will have accomplished a lot of work for the benefit of all Canadians. Bill S-6 is the final legislative step to fully implement the action plan to improve northern regulatory regimes. The bill would complete the northern regulatory improvement legislative agenda. The agenda has included the passage of the Northern Jobs and Growth Act, Bill C-47 , and the Northwest Territories Devolution Act, Bill C-15 .

I understand the member for the Northwest Territories wanting to keep Yukon on a different playing field than the Northwest Territories. He should be more generous. The bill would level the playing field for all the territories in the north. The regulatory regime would be the same as south of 60, so northerners could benefit from the certainty this would bring to their regulatory regime in that territory.

(1600) Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, for those who watch the proceedings of the House, I am sure they cannot help but be disappointed in the Conservative-Reform style government. It is a government that since it acquired a majority has had a different attitude in the House of Commons. It is one where it feels it does not need to consult with people, that it can just walk over some very basic democratic principles. It is one that does not understand the need for diligence. It is one that does not understand the need for working with people or working with members of Parliament.

In dealing with important legislation like Bill S-6 and the northern regulatory regime, the government has failed on so many counts. The government, by once again relying on a time allocation motion to get its agenda passed, speaks of incompetence. It speaks of a genuine lack of respect for parliamentary procedure and ultimately for Canadians. It continues to try to prevent members of Parliament from being engaged and representing their constituents on the floor of the House of Commons.

My question is not for the minister but rather for the government House leader who is the minister responsible for forcing this legislation through, as he has done on so many pieces of legislation. Why does the government need to use time allocation in such a fashion that it has created a record, which cannot even remotely come close to being matched, as the worst government in Canada's history in using time allocation or closure to get its legislative agenda passed? Hon. Bernard Valcourt : Mr. Speaker, the comments of the hon. member betray his lack of understanding and knowledge of what led to Bill S-6 .

He says there was no consultation. Improvements to the regulatory system have been contemplated since 2007, and they were informed by a review by Neil McCrank, the federal government's special representative for the northern regulatory improvement initiative. In his review of the regulatory systems across the north, he consulted widely with aboriginal groups, governments, and industry. These consultations resulted in his 2008 report, entitled “The Road to Improvement”.

In 2012, the Government of Canada subsequently announced the action plan to improve northern regulatory regimes, which drew upon recommendations in this 2008 report. The short answer as to why we have this motion today is that it is to give the northerners the benefit of its impact. Mr. Peter Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the minister forgot to mention the 98 times the government has imposed closure and time allocation. It is a record. It is the worst governmental record ever in Canadian history. It also has the worst record of rejected legislation.

The Conservatives bring shoddy legislation into the House, and the courts reject it. A dozen times now the courts have simply thrown out the junk the government has put on the floor of the House and then forced through the House. The government has the worst legislative record in Canadian history. Now, we are talking about Bill S-6 . Here we have a Yukon News editorial from June 13, 2014, which tells us all what people in Yukon think about this bill. It says: A long list of people deserve raspberries for this needlessly shady behaviour.

At the top of the naughty list are Senator Daniel Lang and [the member for Yukon], who are supposed to ensure that the interests of Yukoners are represented in Ottawa. Instead, they’ve kept the public out of the loop, other than [the member for Yukon] uttering vague generalities about the forthcoming changes without offering any meaningful specifics. Shame on them. That is a voice from Yukon. Those Yukoners should have been listened to by the government. Why did the government not listen? Why is it trying to force a bad bill through the House of Commons?

(1605) Hon. Bernard Valcourt : Mr. Speaker, a serious parliamentarian, a serious party, and a serious government do not inform their agenda by headlines in newspapers. They inform their policy agenda by the needs of Canadians. This government is creating jobs, creating economic growth, and ensuring the long-term prosperity of not only Canadians south of 60 but of all Canadians from coast to coast to coast. That includes Yukon, that includes Nunavut, and that includes the Northwest Territories.

The regulatory changes from the action plan this government has put forward are designed to achieve four fundamental and beneficial objectives. The first is making reviews of development projects more predictable and timely. The second is reducing duplication in the review process, something that we know the NDP does not believe in. It strives for duplication. The third is strengthening environmental protection. The fourth is achieving meaningful aboriginal consultations. This is what Bill S-6 is all about.

Throughout this process, we have fully engaged with the first nations, who are our partners under the umbrella agreement. It is with those signed first nations and the Government of Yukon that we will continue to work in partnership to create more wealth, more jobs, and long-term prosperity for all Yukoners. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed today to see that the government is trying to push this bill through the House of Commons and is calling time allocation, not unlike what it has done throughout this whole process on Bill S-6 .

This is supposed to be an improvement of the regulatory process for Yukon. While many of the recommendations that were put forward were accepted by first nations and Yukoners, there were four that were not. They were not accepted because they were not in the best interests of the first nations governments, nor were they in the best interests of Yukoners, not did the government consult them in a fair way. When we went to Yukon and held hearings and heard testimony from the many people who came out, the member of Parliament for Yukon was there.

When we came back to Ottawa and sat in committee and made the amendments to this bill that Yukoners and first nations were asking for, their own member was not there to even vote on them or support them, and none of the government members supported them. There is an injustice being done to the individuals who have protested this bill and have concerns about it. I ask the minister why he is calling time allocation today. Why is he stifling the people who have legitimate concerns regarding Bill S-6 , namely the people of Yukon? Hon. Bernard Valcourt : Mr.

Speaker, juste en passant, I would like the hon. member to acknowledge that this is not about amendments to just the Yukon process. Important changes to the regulatory system in Nunavut are also contained in Bill S-6 , and all Nunavummiut have endorsed these holus-bolus. I would invite the hon. member to consider that aspect of the bill also. On the issue of consultation, the member is totally wrong. That is the leadership of the Liberal Party. The Liberals follow the crowd. Wherever the wind blows, that is where they go. We are a principled party and a principled government. This is about job creation.

This is about economic growth. This is about protecting the environment. This is about long-term prosperity. At the moment, there is an imbalance. The government of the Yukon has asked us to pass this bill, because it wants to get to a level playing field with the other territories and with the provinces south of 60. This is about creating certainty. This is about securing investment in the natural resources sector, where first nations, I wish to remind the House, are co-managing the YESA Board with the Government of the Yukon and the Government of Canada.

(1610) Mr. Ryan Leef (Yukon, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to clear up just a bit of revisionist history coming from the other side of the House right now. We hear the members feign interest and concern for northern Canadians, but of course, we all know that I had a study before the fisheries committee to go north to study important cultural, social, and ceremonial impacts on northern fisheries. It was obstructed by the NDP. I had an important bill on fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. We wanted to travel to the north to hear directly from Yukoners and northerners on that important piece.

It was obstructed by the NDP. Of course, the Liberals will sit in this House of Commons and talk about whether their amendments were supported in committee. They did not put any forward, so it is interesting how we revisit that piece. Let me just read something into the record from the NDP in the Yukon: once a mine is in operation...the actual procurement of everything from, I would say, toilet paper to lettuce to whatever comes in on big trucks, on pallets, from Outside, and nothing is sourced locally. That was the Leader of the Opposition and of the NDP in the Yukon.

Of course, he completely forgot that $78 million was spent— The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Order, please. The hon. member for Gatineau on a point of order. Ms. Françoise Boivin : Mr. Speaker, I know that the Chair gives a lot of leeway to members, but we are on time allocation, and the member is completely off base on that one. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Before I go back to the member for Yukon, I would agree with the member for Gatineau that the matter before the House at this point is the issue of time allocation as opposed to the bill itself.

She is also correct in saying that the Chair often gives leeway for members to reference the bill, but the matter before the House is time allocation, and I would like the member for Yukon to quickly put his question. Mr. Ryan Leef : Mr. Speaker, my point is that this is important to move forward for Yukon. It is important to move forward for the people of Yukon. In the sense of having to allocate the time, the examples I gave were really in regard to the fact that those members have had no problem obstructing things in the past.

We need to move this forward, and their history has set the course for the actions we need to take in terms of moving all bills, including this one, forward. I wonder if the minister could comment on the benefits to the north this bill could bring to all Yukoners and indeed to Yukon first nations. Hon. Bernard Valcourt : Mr. Speaker, let me thank the hon. member for his question but mostly for his work on behalf of Yukoners. He is always at work to ensure that Yukoners do indeed participate in Canada's prosperity.

As I said, our government's top priority is creating jobs, growth, and long-term prosperity, and this is no different in the north. The reason we must allocate time to pass Bill S-6 as rapidly as possible is that it will establish conditions in both Yukon and Nunavut that will encourage continued investment and ensure that Canada's north remains an attractive place for industry investments in an increasingly competitive global market. For example, Bill S-6 introduces timelines that will create consistency and predictability in environmental assessments and the issuance of water licences.

Another piece of the bill makes sure that once a project has been assessed once, it will not require another assessment unless there has been a significant change to the project, reducing duplication. Provisions like these will attract investment to Yukon and Nunavut, which will act as a major driver of jobs across the territories. [ Translation ] Ms. Françoise Boivin (Gatineau, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a few minor points we heard regarding this 98th time allocation motion, more commonly known as a gag order, because that is what the government is trying to impose on us.

I heard the minister say that the Conservatives are principled. However, people who are principled do not say one thing one day and the opposite the next, 98 times. Principled people do not condemn the imposition of time allocation motions when they are not in government, and then turn around and impose more such motions than any other government. It will be interesting to hear what the minister has to say about that. The Conservatives are mocking us with these 98 time allocation motions, as though this were a good thing, as though they have proven that they can get things done.

What I want to say to people watching at home is that with these 98 gag orders, the Conservatives have instead proven that they cannot convince anyone to get anything done in the House while respecting our existing democratic systems. As for the member for Yukon , he had the nerve to tell us that we refused to go along, when he is the one who abandoned his own bill, at the government's request, because he did not have the guts to go ahead with it, even though he had the unanimous consent of those people in the House. I will not take any lessons from the member for Yukon. (1615) [ English ] Mr. Mark Strahl : Mr.

Speaker, I rise on a point of order. This member just made a point about relevance and sticking to the issue of time allocation and then went off onto another issue. I think she should listen to her own words and perhaps stick to the issue at hand before the House. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : As always, the Chair appreciates the assistance of members with these matters, and again, I would remind all hon. members that the matter before the House is time allocation, not the bill itself. The hon. minister. [ Translation ] Hon. Bernard Valcourt : Mr.

Speaker, I am surprised that the member is saying that the procedures of the House are undemocratic. As far as I know, according to the Standing Orders of the House the government can move this motion if it is in the interest of Canadians. We know very well that the opposition party's fundamental objective is to prevent the government from moving forward with its political agenda. If we are creating jobs, if we have reduced the tax burden on Canadian families, and if we have created millions of jobs since the end of the recession, it is because of our political agenda, which translates into legislation.

The NDP will rise and try to sabotage our political agenda. Yukoners' best interests must prevail, and it is for that reason that we must adopt this motion. The bill must pass so that the people of the Yukon can benefit from it. [ English ] Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP) : Mr. Speaker, mere hours ago, I was in Rideau Hall with the hon. minister for a very moving ceremony for the end of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Certainly, reconciliation requires, at a minimum, respect for first nations and respect for treaties. Bill S-6 does the opposite.

I would plead with the minister not to use time allocation to limit debate. It adds insult to injury, once again, for Canada's first peoples. Hon. Bernard Valcourt : Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her comments, and I will tell her and tell the House that the Government of Canada has maintained an open dialogue with the Government of Yukon, the Government of Nunavut, NTI, the Yukon first nations, industry associations, and other stakeholders.

As a matter of fact, on the consultation issue, maybe she does not know, but financial assistance was offered to aboriginal groups and boards throughout the consultation process for the review of these legislative proposals. The vast majority of these provisions are being endorsed by the Council of Yukon First Nations. It is true that it has expressed concern about four particular amendments, but it is important to state that these four particular amendments do not take away from the spirit and intent of the umbrella agreement.

These amendments are in full compliance not only with the letter but with the spirit and intent of the umbrella agreement. I want to assure our partners in this treaty, the first nations, the Yukoners, as represented by the Government of Yukon, that we are going to continue to work with them, in partnership, to implement these changes for the benefit of Yukoners. (1620) [ Translation ] Mr. Dany Morin (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, there is going to be an election in the fall.

What will the Conservative minister say to his constituents when they criticize this 98th time allocation motion, which is an affront to democracy and Canada's parliamentarians? I am convinced that there will be other such motions before the end of the session. Will he be able to say to his constituents that he is proud to have adopted so many time allocation motions and cut short speeches and debate? I am convinced that people across Canada are upset by the Conservatives' behaviour with respect to good governance and democracy in the House of Commons. Hon. Bernard Valcourt : Mr.

Speaker, we have here another member who is getting all worked up about the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, which we did not invent. I had the privilege of being an MP over 20 years ago, and the same rules were in place then. Canada is still seen as a vibrant democracy that serves Canadians well. As my colleague said, there is going to be an election this fall. However, Canadians will have been served by a serious government that is committed to creating jobs in our country, growing our economy and making sure that Canadians' quality of life continues to improve.

Thanks to all of the measures that this government has put in place, Canadians have the lowest tax burden in 50 years. Since the depths of the recession, we have created over 1.2 million good jobs. Were it not for this tool that allows us to close debate when an issue has been debated enough, Canadians would not be reaping all of those benefits. Bill S-6 is important because the people of the Yukon deserve to be on a level playing field with the other northern regions and the rest of Canada. [ English ] Mr.

Mark Strahl (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it is an undeniable fact that no government in Canadian history has done more for Canada's North than this Conservative government. Certainly, our northern strategy includes four pillars: two of them protecting our environmental heritage, and promoting social and economic development. Could the minister explain how Bill S-6 promotes the regulatory improvements that we can build on in the North? Hon. Bernard Valcourt : Mr.

Speaker, the parliamentary secretary, whom I want to thank for his strong support, is absolutely right when he said that it is an undeniable fact that no other government in the history of this great country of ours has done as much for northerners as this Conservative government. Bill S-6 is just the latest example of how we are delivering on our northern strategy. This bill is about enhancing and strengthening the social, economic and environmental assessment process in Yukon, as well as the water licensing process in Nunavut.

The bill builds on two pillars that the parliamentary secretary mentioned and is intended to both protect the environment and promote economic development in these two regions. It also ensures that northerners are equipped with an effective, timely and predictable regulatory system that is able to contribute to attract investments into their regions for generations to come. (1625) [ Translation ] Ms. Rosane Doré Lefebvre (Alfred-Pellan, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise today on behalf of the people of Alfred-Pellan to debate the time allocation motion on Bill S-6 .

In his answers, the minister just said that he had been in the House of Commons for 20 years. This means that he has been in the opposition and he took offence at the time allocation motions moved by the Liberals at the time. Now he is proud to move one in the House. My question for the minister is very simple. How has Ottawa changed him so much? Hon. Bernard Valcourt : Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to point out to the member that I have not been a member of Parliament for 20 years. I was a member of the House of Commons from 1984 to 1993, and then I was re-elected in 2011 and have sat here since then.

What I said was that 20 years ago, the rules of the House of Commons allowed this type of motion. I have never had the opportunity to sit in the House as a member of the opposition. That is all I can say. The sole purpose of this motion is to promote the interests of the people living in the Yukon and the companies that want to do business there, in order to create jobs and economic growth and attract investments. This will improve the standard of living for everyone who lives in this beautiful territory. [ English ] Mr. Rodger Cuzner (Cape Breton—Canso, Lib.) : Mr.

Speaker, I want to go back to the question posed by my colleague from Chicoutimi. I do not think he was suggesting that the current government is breaking the rules, but that the Conservatives manipulate the rules. They stretch and they bend, and we have seen that time and time again. Somebody made a reference the other day to the NHL playoffs in 2009 when Sean Avery, who played for the New York Rangers, stood in front of Martin Brodeur, world-class Hall of Fame goaltender, and screened him. However, he faced the goaltender, contrary to how everybody else screened the goaltender.

He stood in front of Brodeur, waved his arms around, shook his stick at him and all of that. The referee did not know what the heck to do. The referee would call a penalty, but there were no rules. It was clearly against the spirit of the game. Therefore, the rules committee for the NHL met the next day and came up with a rule called the “Sean Avery rule”. The sad

part is that the current government makes the rules and abuses the rules. This is just another example of how the Conservatives have abused this chamber, imposing closure 98 times. They should be ashamed of themselves. Hon. Bernard Valcourt : Mr. Speaker, I have total confidence in the Speaker and I am sure that if ever any parliamentarian breached the rules, the Speaker would see to it that it did not happen. Canadians can remain secure in their belief that we have a parliamentary system that is delivering results.

Obviously, we can look at the last four years and at the benefits that Canadians enjoy today in terms of lower taxes, benefits for families, increased benefits for seniors, and an improved standard of living for all Canadians. Our system works well and we will continue working for Canadians with the same vigour, interest and intent. [ Translation ] The Acting Speaker (Mr.

Barry Devolin) : It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for York South—Weston , Citizenship and Immigration; and the hon. member for Surrey North , Public Safety. [ English ] It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings at this time and put forthwith the question on the motion before the House. The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some hon. members: Agreed. Some hon. members: No. The Acting Speaker (Mr.

Barry Devolin): All those in favour of the motion will please say yea. Some hon. members: Yea. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): All those opposed will please say nay. Some hon. members: Nay. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): In my opinion the yeas have it. And five or more members having risen: The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin): Call in the members.

(1710) (The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:) (Division No. 417) YEAS Members Ablonczy Adler Aglukkaq Albas Albrecht Alexander Allen (Tobique—Mactaquac) Allison Ambler Ambrose Anders Anderson Armstrong Ashfield Barlow Bateman Benoit Bergen Bernier Bezan Blaney Block Boughen Braid Breitkreuz Brown (Leeds—Grenville) Brown (Newmarket—Aurora) Bruinooge Butt Calandra Calkins Cannan Carmichael Carrie Chisu Chong Clarke Clement Crockatt Daniel Davidson Dechert Dreeshen Duncan (Vancouver Island North) Dykstra Eglinski Falk Fantino Fast Findlay (Delta—Richmond East) Finley (Haldimand—Norfolk) Fletcher Galipeau Gallant Gill Glover Goguen Goldring Gosal Grewal Harris (Cariboo—Prince George) Hawn Hayes Hillyer Hoback Holder James Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission) Keddy (South Shore—St.

Margaret'

s) Kenney (Calgary Southeast) Kent Kerr Komarnicki Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings) Lake Lauzon Leef Lemieux Leung Lizon Lobb Lukiwski MacKay (Central Nova) MacKenzie Maguire Mayes McColeman McLeod Menegakis Miller Moore (Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam) Moore (Fundy Royal) Norlock Obhrai O'Connor Oliver O'Neill Gordon Opitz O'Toole Paradis Payne Perkins Poilievre Preston Raitt Rajotte Reid Richards Rickford Saxton Schellenberger Seeback Shea Shipley Shory Smith Sopuck Sorenson Stanton Storseth Strahl Sweet Tilson Toet Trost Trottier Truppe Uppal Valcourt Van Kesteren Van Loan Wallace Warawa Warkentin Watson Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country) Weston (Saint John) Wilks Williamson Wong Woodworth Yelich Young (Oakville) Young (Vancouver South) Yurdiga Zimmer -- 146 NAYS Members Allen (Welland) Andrews Angus Ashton Atamanenko Aubin Ayala Bélanger Bellavance Bennett Benskin Bevington Blanchette Blanchette-Lamothe Boivin Borg Boulerice Boutin-Sweet Brahmi Brison Brosseau Caron Cash Charlton Chicoine Chisholm Choquette Christopherson Comartin Côté Cotler Crowder Cullen Cuzner Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) Davies (Vancouver East) Day Dewar Dion Dionne Labelle Doré Lefebvre Dubé Dubourg Duncan (Etobicoke North) Dusseault Easter Freeland Freeman Garneau Garrison Genest Genest-Jourdain Giguère Godin Goodale Groguhé Harris (Scarborough Southwest) Hsu Hughes Hyer Jones Julian Lamoureux Lapointe Latendresse Laverdière LeBlanc (Beauséjour) LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard) Leslie Liu MacAulay Mai Marston Masse Mathyssen May McCallum McGuinty McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) Michaud Morin (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord) Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine) Morin (Laurentides—Labelle) Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) Mourani Murray Nantel Nash Nunez-Melo Papillon Péclet Perreault Pilon Rafferty Rathgeber Ravignat Raynault Regan Saganash Sandhu Scott Sellah Sgro Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor) Sims (Newton—North Delta) Sitsabaiesan St-Denis Stewart Sullivan Toone Trudeau Valeriote Vaughan -- 113 PAIRED Nil The Acting Speaker (Mr.

Barry Devolin) : Motion agreed to I declare the motion carried. Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. With respect to order paper Questions Nos. 1148, 1150, 1153, 1154, 1155 and 1158, I wish to table, in both official languages, documents containing the government's responses to these questions.

Ways and Means Motion No. 24 (On the Order: Government Orders:) June 1, 2015—Consideration of a Ways and Means motion to introduce

an Act to give effect to the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts—the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I would also like to advise that there have been discussions among the parties and if you seek it I believe that you will find unanimous consent for the following motion related to the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement. Motion I move: That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, Ways and Means motion No. 24 to introduce

an Act to give effect to the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts be deemed adopted; and that the bill on notice entitled “

An Act to give effect to the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts be deemed introduced and read a first time, deemed read the second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole, deemed considered in Committee of the Whole, deemed reported without amendment, deemed concurred in at report stage and deemed read the third time and passed. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Does the hon. government House leader have unanimous consent to move this motion? Some hon. members: Agreed. The Acting Speaker (Mr.

Barry Devolin): The members have heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some hon. members: Agreed. (Motion agreed to, bill read the first time, bill read the second time, considered in committee of the whole, reported without amendment, concurred in at report stage and read the third time and passed) Mr. Scott Reid : Mr.

Speaker, there have been consultations over the course of about a month, and I think if you seek it, you may, and I hope you may, find unanimous consent for the following motion: That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, on Thursday, June 4, 2015, the House shall continue to sit beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment for the purpose of debating a motion for concurrence in the 21st report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs presented on Friday, October 3, 2014, which shall, following the conclusion of private members' business, be deemed to be moved and seconded, provided that (

a) the debate shall be subject to the provisions of Standing Order 66(2); (

b) during the debate, no quorum calls, dilatory motions or requests for unanimous consent shall be received by the chair; and (

c) any recorded division which is demanded shall be deemed deferred to the expiry of the time provided for government orders on Wednesday, June 10, 2015, and shall be taken in the same manner as an item of private members' business. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Does the hon. member have unanimous consent to move this motion? Some hon. members: Agreed. Some hon. members: No.

[ Translation ] Points of Order Oral Questions Points of Order Mr. Pierre Dionne Labelle (Rivière-du-Nord, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I feel like my privileges as a parliamentarian have been breached. During question period, we were introduced to Cardinal Raymond Burke, who is known for spreading homophobia and for his anti-gay campaigns. I deeply regret that the House was not informed of the situation and that we applauded such a person. (1715) [ English ] The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : I am not sure whether that is a point of order.

The chair will give it consideration and, if necessary, return before the House with a response. At this time, I also wish to inform the House that because of the proceedings on the time allocation motion, government orders will be extended by 30 minutes.

Yukon and Nunavut Regulatory Improvement Act Government Orders Bill S-6. Report Stage The House resumed from May 25 consideration of Bill S-6,

An Act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and the Nunavut Waters and Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal Act , as reported (without amendment) from the committee, and of the motions in Group No. 1. Mr. Ryan Leef (Yukon, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to stand in the House today and speak to the motions put forward to the House on Bill S-6 . I am going to get to the contents of the bill shortly and in direct respect to the motions that have been tabled here in the House. Before I do that, I want to quickly express my thanks to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs .

I was present in the House today listening to many of the speeches and the questions and answers that followed. It was appreciated that he recognized that our government has tremendous commitment to continued trilateral partnerships with both our public governments in the Yukon and with our first nations leadership in our territory. From that point of view, I am optimistic and confident that the piece of legislation that we have before us, subject of course to continued dialogue and discussion, will be one that will indeed be in the best interests of all Yukoners.

I want to point out a couple of things before I get to the direct pieces of this legislation that are clearly worth highlighting. Some of that came in discussion today, some of it has been in prolonged discussion over the course of the bill, but it is absolutely worthwhile for us drilling right down to these very key pieces so that we can boil away some of the political rhetoric that has been generated by the opposition side.

I do take some offence to the opposition's positions where members have clearly feigned concern for the wants, needs and expectations of the Yukon people broadly and specifically for the Yukon first nations community. I say that, not tongue in cheek, with clear-cut examples that I will give now. I put forward a study at the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans some time ago where we would travel north and see what was going on with the challenging state of Yukon River salmon in a transboundary relationship with Alaska and those waters.

There are some issues that we really needed to seize as parliamentarians in undertaking that study. However, guess who blocked travel for that study? Guess who voted that it was not important? The NDP. This is a social, ceremonial and traditional way of life for Yukon first nations, with Yukon River salmon of critical importance, and the NDP would not support that travel. Then I had a study and a bill before the House for fetal alcohol spectrum disorder which is a topic seized by all Yukoners, an important issue to Yukon people and northern Canadians in particular and we wanted to travel for that.

Guess who blocked that? The NDP. The members are continuing to block all these things, yet at the same time, they say they have care and concern for Yukon people and northern people. Their record is clear. They really do not. In this case, I was proud to ensure that as we undertook the study for Bill S-6 , I made it clear that we needed to bring the committee to the Yukon to hear directly from Yukon people to allow a balanced story, a balanced perspective and a balanced input, so we could seize ourselves with the concerns of Yukoners, understand them and hear that directly from them in testimony in our territory.

Of course, the NDP members agreed to travel for that, but only for the fact that they thought they might have some political advantage on this. It is a shameful use of Yukon people and northern people for their own political purposes. There is not true care and concern and that point needs to be made crystal clear. I witnessed that before noon on the first day of committee study on Bill S-6 , a member from the Liberal Party and a member from the NDP had clearly chosen a side and it is on record when we were interviewed by the CBC.

They said their minds were made up and this was done at noon, before we had even heard from half of the people prepared to testify. Before we had heard a full and balanced perspective from Yukoners on this topic, the NDP members had their minds made up about the direction they were going to go. They said as much on CBC. The Liberals had their minds made up long before. They say they came to hear from all the Yukoners, but their minds were made up before they arrived in my territory and they tried to drive their political agenda.

It is important to me to communicate that very effectively here today; everything to this point from their side of the House has been nothing but politics. There has been no care and concern for the people of the north.

(1720) We are trying to bring balance and parity in our territory so that Yukoners have equal opportunities for jobs, growth, and economic prosperity like the rest of Canada, so they have equal opportunities like those shared in the Northwest Territories under its devolution agreements and resource development agreements, which, interestingly enough, the member for Northwest Territories was standing behind. However, when it comes to bringing parity to the Yukon, somehow he is objecting to that.

As we tasked ourselves with the bill and understood the evolution and the process, it has been clear that there are concerns, and our government has seized itself with those concerns. We have heard them clearly, and today we heard the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs say clearly that he fully understands that a trilateral relationship is important with the federal government in the Yukon, the Yukon territorial government, and Yukon first nation peoples. I applaud him and thank him for that, because that will ensure effective implementation of the bill.

It will ensure that we honour the spirit and intention of the modern treaties that we have in our territory, those modern treaties that we are very proud of and that will continue to bring prosperity to our territory, prosperity that New Democrats really know nothing about. People are going to ask if I can prove that statement. Sure I can.

On the record, in the Yukon legislature, the leader of the territorial opposition had this to say about mining development in the Yukon: ...once the mine is in operation—has been for some time—but the actual procurement of everything from, I would say, toilet paper to lettuce to whatever comes in on big trucks, on pallets, from Outside, and nothing is sourced locally. That is what was said by Liz Hanson, the leader of the NDP in the Yukon. She was specifically referencing one mine.

That mine spent $78.1 million in the Yukon Territory in 2013 and $58.2 million in 2014 on goods and services, and that was before wages were paid out to Yukon first nation people and non-Yukon first nation people. Then those employees in turn spent that money in their communities, their homes, on goods and services, so the dollars continued to rotate around that community to the benefit and prosperity of all Yukoners.

My point is that if one starts with a fundamental misunderstanding of how mining and resource development actually contribute to our economy, then I guess it makes perfect sense that one would not want development to carry forward. However, the facts are clear. One mine alone contributed $78.1 million in one year to Yukon's GDP, to Yukon's economy, to the socio-economic fabric of our territory. It was done so, I might add, in an environmentally responsible manner to protect and preserve the environmental heritage of our territory. Why is that? It is because these companies participate in environmental reviews.

They have care and concern about reclamation and development. They engage with their first nation communities, and they do not always do that out of a legislative requirement. They do it because they form a social relationship and an important working relationship through IBAs, through direct community engagement and participation in the Yukon with first nation communities, who do indeed invite them in.

The NDP, the no development party, has no fundamental understanding at all of the direct value that resource development brings to our territory, to the north, and to our country, so from that point of view it makes sense that it would want to obstruct these things. We have heard the concerns of Yukon first nations. Our minister is committed to continuing to work with them in a trilateral relationship to make sure we engage in productive and co-operative implementation to honour the spirit and intention of those modern treaties.

The motions I see being put forward would actually do the reverse to many of the things that Yukon first nations, the Yukon government, and Canada have already agreed to in the five-year review of YESSA. I look forward to any questions and I look forward to the passage of the Bill S-6 and our continued relationship-building with all partners in the Yukon on a very important message and bill.

(1725) Mr. Dennis Bevington (Northwest Territories, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his

interpretation of history. I always find it humourous when people want to interpret history in a way that ignores the facts of the matter. Every politician sometimes falls into that habit. In this case, he was talking about issues that Yukoners are very well apprised of. I was amazed at the depth of knowledge and the engagement that Yukoners had on these issues when we conducted committee meetings in Whitehorse and 150 people filled the room from morning until night.

My colleague was there to hear Yukoners, but I want to ask him if he was there to listen to Yukoners and understand what they were saying about the nature of the relationship between Yukoners, first nations, and the environment? Mr. Ryan Leef : Mr. Speaker, indeed I was, and I was very proud of all of the Yukoners who participated in that hearing, from our first nations right through to our industry. Indeed, it was my intervention that ensured that Yukon first nations were strong participants in that committee.

If the member for Northwest Territories wants to talk about whether I was there to hear them, indeed I was, and I did. I acknowledged that in my speech. I heard their concerns. However, guess who did not hear them. Guess who was not prepared to hear them. It was the member for Northwest Territories , who by noon that day had said publicly on CBC that his mind was made up. He said that he knew what he was going to do. He knew where his decisions lay, and that was before he had heard from even half of the people invited to testify.

Yes, I was there to hear them, but clearly the member for Northwest Territories was not. That is stamped on the record of that interview on CBC's noon show. He can stand by that deplorable record when it comes to standing up and listening to the Yukon people and the people of the north. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that if you want to hear political platitudes, you will hear it today.

I make no apologies for any remarks that I made on CBC up there, but the member for Yukon should be making a lot of apologies, starting with some to his constituents for, first of all, not even showing up at committee to support the recommendations that they basically drafted and asked members of the House of Commons to put forward on their behalf. They are his own constituents, yet the member for Yukon never showed up to vote on these amendments and his colleagues did not support them either.

If we want to talk about who made up their mind on this bill, it was the government opposite when it went through the Senate with the support of all of the Conservative senators and was forced into the House of Commons without consultation from members in the Yukon and from first nations governments. I would like to ask the member opposite why he did not support the amendments that his own constituents asked for at the committee stage of the bill if he was so committed to listening to them and doing what they felt was just and right. Mr. Ryan Leef : Mr.

Speaker, while I would have loved to be there, I am not going to apologize for being in Washington, DC, to represent my constituents when it comes to important issues like the Arctic Council. The previous member was talking about hearing and listening. Interestingly enough, I acknowledged in my speech the four areas of concern that Yukon first nations have. We heard those loud and clear.

I acknowledged that the minister is committed to working in a trilateral relationship with them to ensure that the implementation meets their needs and meets the spirit and intention of their agreements, and this government is very much committed to that. I look forward to that continued dialogue. However, it is interesting that of the four points of concern, at report stage the Liberal member did not address two of the most significant ones at all. She did not even put those amendments forward. She either did not hear or did not listen. It must be one of the two, but why did she not do that?

Furthermore, it was the Liberal senators who passed this bill out of the Senate and into the House of Commons absolutely unamended and with unanimous consent. She is going to have to square that circle, quit playing politics with this issue, and start listening to northern Canadians.

(1730) The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : The hon. member for Labrador on a point of order. Ms. Yvonne