OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)

House of Commons Debates VOLUME 147 NUMBER 039 2nd SESSION 41st PARLIAMENT Friday, January 31, 2014 Speaker: The Honourable Andrew Scheer HOUSE OF COMMONS CANADA (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) COMMONS DEBATES January 31, 2014 DEBATES Edited Hansard * Table of Contents * Number 039 (Official Version) Official Report * Table of Contents * Number 039 (Official Version) Compte rendu officiel * Table des matières * Numéro 039 (Version officielle) 147 039 31 01 2014 2014/01/31 10:05:00 House of Commons Débats de la Chambre des communes House of Commons Debates 41 2

The House met at 10 a.m. Prayers

Government Orders Government Orders (1005) [ English ] Combating Counterfeit Products Act Bill C-8. Report stage The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-8,

An Act to amend the Copyright Act and the Trade-marks Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts , as reported (with amendments) from the committee. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : There being no motions at report stage the House will now proceed without debate to the putting of the question on the motion to concur in the bill at report stage. Hon. Candice Bergen (for the Minister of Industry) Motion for Concurrence moved that the bill be concurred in. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Some hon. members: Agreed. (Motion agreed to) The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : When shall the bill be read the third time? By leave, now? Some hon. members: Agreed. Hon. Candice Bergen (for the Minister of Industry) Bill C-8. Third Reading moved that the bill be read the third time and passed. Hon. Mike Lake (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise today to speak to Bill C-8 , the combating counterfeit products act. I am happy to say that the bill passed through the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology with all-party support.

The committee heard many witnesses and introduced a number of amendments that improve this important piece of legislation. However, before I speak to the particulars of Bill C-8 , allow me to remind the House of the important measures that our government has already taken and will continue to take to support Canadian consumers. In the recent Speech from the Throne, the government committed to taking strong action to protect consumers and families that is aimed at lowering prices, enhancing access and choice, and ensuring fair treatment.

The modernization of our intellectual property laws has also brought real benefits to consumers. Last year, Canada's long-standing copyright laws were updated and brought into the 21st century through the Copyright Modernization Act. The amended copyright act allows for legitimate and commonplace actions by Canadian consumers to be protected under copyright law.

Canadians no longer have to be concerned about the legalities of time shifting television programs on their personal video recorders, transferring music from their CD collection to their MP3 player, or remixing music or videos for non-commercial purposes and sharing it on social media. By enacting the Copyright Modernization Act, the government listened to the concerns of Canadian consumers and provided them with legitimate protection for their actions. Canada now has a modern copyright regime that will play a critical role in protecting and creating jobs in Canada's digital economy.

It is the resolve of our government to continue to bring forward legislation that empowers Canadian consumers and instills confidence in the marketplace. It is in this spirit that I will speak to Bill C-8 , which addresses the real need for protection against allowing counterfeit goods to enter Canada. By reducing the trade in counterfeit goods, the bill would help protect our economy, support innovation, and benefit both businesses and consumers.

For years, Canadian stakeholders in the business community have been seeking improvements to our intellectual property laws in order to better tackle the problem of counterfeiting and piracy. They have told us repeatedly that Canadian brands and works are being copied and taken advantage of, causing hardship not only to legitimate businesses but also to Canadian consumers. Let me reiterate: counterfeit trademark goods are not only harmful to the economy, but they are often made without regard to Canadian health and safety standards which could harm consumers and their families. How so?

Consumers could inadvertently buy counterfeit products that look like the real thing but could cause significant harm. For example, witness testimony at the industry committee mentioned several dangerous products. The CSA group talked about counterfeit circuit breakers found in a hospital in Quebec that were supplying power to life support equipment. Committee members were shown a video of a counterfeit circuit actually exploding under conditions that simulated normal electrical use. The International Trademark Association mentioned counterfeit food, medicines, and automotive parts.

Canada Goose explained that the stuffing in counterfeit versions of their jackets are, at best, of very low quality, and at worst, not sanitary. It is easy to see how these types of goods could present serious health and safety issues for anyone who would encounter them. Canadians who spend their hard-earned dollars to buy what they believe are high-quality products backed by a brand name are furious when they learn that they have been deceived. Bill C-8 is our government's response to this problem.

It amends the Trade-marks Act and the Copyright Act to provide new tools for rights holders, border officers, and law enforcement to better fight this issue. Most importantly, it puts in place strong measures to protect Canadian consumers and their families from the threat of counterfeiting. Allow me to explain how the bill would provide for a stronger border regime, new civil causes of action, and new criminal offences. First, the bill gives copyright and trademark owners additional tools to protect their intellectual property rights at the border.

Importantly, Bill C-8 provides border agents with the authority to temporarily detain suspected shipments and the ability to verify their suspicion with rights holders. Under the new system, rights holders would be able to file a request for assistance with the Canada Border Services Agency, asking for border officers' help in detaining suspected counterfeit or pirated goods. Allowing trademark and copyright owners to exercise their rights at the border means fewer shipments of counterfeit and pirated goods into the Canadian market, to the benefit of businesses, consumers, and their families.

Second, with regard to civil infringements, Bill C-8 adds a series of activities to the existing civil causes of action in the Trade-marks Act. Currently, trademark owners can only pursue a civil action against a counterfeiter when a good is being sold. Bill C-8 fills important gaps by making it a civil infringement to manufacture, possess, import, export, or attempt to export counterfeit goods for commercial purposes.

By targeting activities that occur earlier in the supply chain, the bill helps rights holders keep counterfeit goods out of the Canadian market and out of the hands of unsuspecting Canadian consumers. Not only does this bill add new civil causes for activities prior to sale, it also targets the practice of shipping labels separately from goods in order to avoid detection. Bill C-8 adds specific provisions against manufacturing, possessing, importing, exporting, and attempting to export labels or packaging that are destined to be associated with counterfeit goods.

This measure protects consumers from counterfeiters who may apply counterfeit labels to goods here in Canada in an attempt to avoid getting caught. To summarize the civil measures, Bill C-8 equips rights holders with improved tools to assert their trademark and copyright in a civil context. In recognition of the fact that counterfeiting is an unlawful act, the bill adds new offences to the Trade-marks Act for selling, manufacturing, causing to be manufactured, possessing, importing, exporting, or attempting to export counterfeit goods on a commercial scale.

The new criminal offences also cover services, labelling, and packaging. This is important because law enforcement knows that criminal groups are involved in the production and distribution of counterfeit goods. These groups forego safety regulations, certifications, and quality controls in order to maximize profits. They simply do not care about the health and safety of consumers. For these groups, counterfeiting is just another profitable line of business. The new criminal offences will give law enforcement agencies additional important tools to fight against serious and organized crime.

They will help us keep those goods off the market and help protect Canadian families. All of the measures I have just outlined pertain to sale for commercial purposes. That is the focus of Bill C-8 and of law enforcement authorities. In this way, Bill C-8 will protect consumers and their families from the threat of counterfeit goods by reducing the presence of these goods in the Canadian market. In addition, Bill C-8 provides a specific exception at the border for individuals importing or exporting counterfeit or pirated goods intended for personal use when these goods are in their possession or personal luggage.

Simply put, Canadians may cross the border with counterfeit goods or pirated copies for personal use. However, let me be clear. Every person who supports counterfeiting at any level hurts the Canadian economy and risks his or her health and safety. As I mentioned earlier, there is also a possibility that counterfeit goods and pirated copies are connected with organized crime, which often profits from the sale of counterfeit goods. The measures in this bill are designed to help federal agencies and rights holders target their efforts to confronting criminals who gain commercially from the sale of these goods.

This is the balance that the government has achieved with this bill. If we want to target those who profit from counterfeiting and piracy, we have to put our efforts into stopping commercial activities relating to counterfeiting and piracy, not in stopping individual Canadians who may inadvertently carry a counterfeit good in their luggage. Another area where this bill achieves the right balance is with regard to the respective roles of the state and rights holders in the fight against counterfeiting and piracy. Trademarks and copyrights are private rights.

We believe that the trademark and copyright owners have an important role to play in defending these private rights. That said, the government also plays a key role in keeping unsafe products out of the Canadian market and in stopping serious and organized crime. With Bill C-8 , the government puts in place a framework that allows trademark and copyright owners to protect their rights more efficiently at the border and within the country. For example, rights holders will have the ability to file a request for assistance with the Canada Border Services Agency.

This will allow rights holders to receive information from border officers about shipments suspected of containing counterfeit or pirated goods, allowing them to pursue remedies under the Trade-marks Act or the Copyright Act. Rights holders who choose to file a request for assistance will be asked to assume the costs of storage and destruction of counterfeit and pirated goods. For its part, the government will continue to play a leading role in stopping goods that present health and safety issues or that are linked to criminal activities.

Border officers will continue to refer these goods to the RCMP and Health Canada as appropriate. In my introduction I mentioned the work of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, as we reviewed Bill C-8 for several weeks. In particular, I would like to highlight a number of substantive amendments that were adopted by the committee that will clarify and improve the application of Bill C-8 , while keeping with the balance I alluded to earlier to help better achieve outcomes for Canadians.

(1010) First, the bill was amended to clarify that rights holders can use information obtained from border officers about suspected shipments to seek out-of-court settlements. Such settlements are part of the process of pursuing remedies under the act. They would enable rights holders to assert their rights in a cost-effective manner. Second, the knowledge requirements of the new criminal offences introduced in the Trade-marks Act were found to be unnecessarily high, which in turn meant a low probability of successful prosecution.

If we want the bill to provide an effective deterrent for counterfeiters, we have to make sure that criminal offences can be prosecuted. The amendments introduced at the committee achieve this goal by requiring the crown to prove that the accused knew that he was copying a trademark and that he did not have the consent of the trademark owner to do so. The criminal offences will continue to apply only to activities on a commercial scale and only to registered trademarks. The third amendment introduced at the committee stage concerns the definition of “distinctive” in the Trade-marks Act.

Some witnesses expressed concerns about changes in the wording of the definition. These changes were meant only to modernize the language, and there was no intention of changing the meaning of “distinctive”. The committee moved to replace the expression “inherently capable of distinguishing” with the expression “adapted so to distinguish”, which is currently found in the Trade-marks Act. This amendment alleviates the concerns of stakeholders and removes any risk of costly and unnecessary litigation associated with the reinterpretation of the new definition.

The final amendment I would like to mention concerns the new civil causes of action in the Trade-marks Act. Originally, the bill's new civil causes of action for manufacturing, possessing, importing, exporting, and attempting to export only applied to the goods and services for which the trademark was registered. In contrast, the existing causes of action for selling or distributing apply to all goods and services that could be confused with a registered trademark, whether or not the goods and services are on the trademark register.

The committee's amendment ensures that both the existing and the new civil causes of action have the same scope of application. Bill C-8 , as amended by the industry committee, is further proof that our government is focused on protecting consumers and their families. By keeping unsafe products out of the hands of unsuspecting consumers, it would enhance consumer confidence in the marketplace and would help legitimate businesses in the fight against counterfeiting and piracy.

I would urge all members of the House to support the bill and refer it to the Senate as soon as possible to ensure that Canadian rights holders, customs officers, and law enforcement have the tools they need to fight counterfeiting and piracy domestically and at our borders. (1015) [ Translation ] Mr. Philip Toone (Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for such an interesting speech. The discussions in committee really helped improve this bill.

The governing party even put forward amendments to its own bill, which goes to show that there were improvements to be made. Since over 1,000 Canada border services employees have been fired, it will be difficult to implement these changes. There are fewer and fewer border guards, who are Canada's first line of defence. How can this bill be implemented if there are not enough people to do it? [ English ] Hon. Mike Lake : Mr. Speaker, the hon. member referred to the work of the industry committee. Of course, members from all parties on that committee work very well together.

Actually, it is one of the better committees I have had the chance to be on in my time. As we go through the committee process, the questions that are asked to get information from the witnesses lead us, as a government, sometimes to look at some of the things in the legislation, and important changes are made. That is an important part of the process. In relation to his question, I do not agree with the assertion he made about the numbers. Second, any piece of legislation like this is made in close consultation with the experts. Of course, the experts at CBSA are consulted on a piece of legislation like this.

The bill would give new tools to the officers to do their job and to attack an important problem, something they recognize as an important challenge. We have done that with this piece of legislation. It will be up to the experts, the CBSA, to determine how best to use this new tool we have given them to do the important job they do to protect Canadians. As we look at the budget that is coming up, for example, I hope that the hon. member will support the government's efforts to be one of the only countries in the developed world to have a balanced budget by 2015.

Having that budget balanced by 2015 will enable us to continue to support the important work of both the CBSA and all the other excellent public servants who work so hard for this country.

(1020) Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I will save my comments regarding the balanced budget and how the government took a multibillion dollar Liberal surplus, converted into a deficit, and is now hoping to get it balanced, for the budget debate. Having said that, the issue of fraudulent and counterfeit goods has had a fairly significant impact on the Canadian economy. The member makes reference to safety issues. It is very important for us to recognize the impact they have.

The question I have for the member is not necessarily related to enforcement as much as it is about ensuring that the issue is being best addressed. For example, does he see a role for the consumer, and if so, to what degree? The member made reference to our borders. Our border control officers do a phenomenal job given the resources they have. How does the government see us addressing this issue going forward in terms of the involvement of consumers and others? Is this something that was talked about at committee? I for one was not at the committee, so maybe he could provide some comment on that. Hon.

Mike Lake : Mr. Speaker, of course, there was wide consultation on this issue. Obviously, consumers have a role to play, as do Canadian businesses, importers, exporters, and border services officials. Certainly all were consulted. With regard to the consumer, it is an interesting question, because obviously, the primary focus of this legislation is to protect Canadian consumers. At the end of the day, though, consumers also have a role to play. As I mentioned in the middle of my speech, we are not targeting an individual who buys a counterfeit purse or something similar in another country and brings it back home.

That is still wrong. It is still wrong to support counterfeit products, and there is a danger in doing that. It obviously hurts business. However, the bigger concern is that with some of these products, not so much purses but some other counterfeit products, there may actually be a personal danger. Of course, we want Canadian consumers to be aware of that, and people need to take responsibility when they consider what it is they are purchasing. Mr. Scott Armstrong (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, I was wondering if the parliamentary secretary could elaborate on some of the health concerns we face in Canada due to counterfeit products. He mentioned in his speech that we have issues with the feathers that fill coats that come in from other countries in an illegal way. He talked about some electrical devices that exploded because they were counterfeit. I had not thought a lot about the actual health concerns before today. I wonder if he could elaborate on some of the health concerns this bill would address. Hon. Mike Lake : Mr. Speaker, this is a really important point.

Again, we heard this over and over again at committee. It was a real eye-opener for the committee members on all sides to see the example of the circuit breaker, for instance. We do not really think about these things. When we think about counterfeit products, we think more about clothing, accessories, and those things we more typically see. In a case like the Canada Goose example, we saw a strong example of a product we would think would be harmless in the counterfeit version, but I cannot even get into the wide range of things they found in these jackets that were completely unsanitary.

Look at the possibility of counterfeiting medicines and creating medicines that people are taking because they think they will make them better, but those medicines have not gone through the same standards and safety controls a medicine would go through here. They may not contain anything that will actually help a person. These are real and serious problems in relation to this issue. People think about counterfeiting oftentimes more from a business standpoint, but in the interest of protecting Canadian consumers, safety, as we heard at the committee, is a major issue.

(1025) Mr. Dan Harris (Scarborough Southwest, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his speech. We sat on the committee together when we were doing a lot of the studies prior to the bill. The things that were being found in those jackets were reprehensible. They were absolutely disgusting. Many of us did not want to even touch the counterfeit jackets, and of course, there were the electrical products. During that study, we talked a lot about the 2007 committee report that recommended ex officio powers. I am pleased to see that in the bill now. It also recommended a reporting system for counterfeit goods.

Most of the data the government has is anecdotal. We do not actually have a system in place to determine how large the problem is. Of course, the OECD has made it clear that there is a need for better data when it comes to counterfeiting. I would like to ask the member what is in the bill that would seek to address that concern so that we can actually measure the size and scope of the problem so we know how big it is and what kinds of resources to put in to tackle it. I would say that cutting $143 million from CBSA will make it more challenging.

Adding ex officio powers would mean more training requirements and more work on that side. How would that be measured and balanced to make sure that the resources are there so that we can properly tackle the counterfeit goods coming in? Hon. Mike Lake : Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member. When he was on the committee, I always enjoyed his lively style of intervention. Both NDP questions today centred on spending more money, as they generally do in this place. It does not matter what we are debating, the NDP's questions are centre on spending more money.

In this government, we are looking at the amount of money that is spent on behalf of taxpayers of this country. We are saying that we can do better with that money. We can get that budget balanced and still take important steps like this to give tools to our border officers.

As we have the debate we are about to have on the budget coming up, I would ask the NDP members to first read the budget before they actually engage in the debate, which is always a good idea, and to second consider actually supporting our measures to get the budget in balance so we can continue to move forward with these important initiatives to the benefit of Canadians. [ Translation ] Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach (Beauharnois—Salaberry, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I seek the unanimous consent of the House to share my time. [ English ] The Acting Speaker (Mr.

Barry Devolin) : Does the hon. member have unanimous consent to share her time? Some hon. members: Agreed. [ Translation ] Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach : Mr. Speaker, I would like to specify that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Terrebonne—Blainville . Before I begin my speech, I would like to wish everyone a Happy Vietnamese New Year. Tet is the start of a new year and, according to the lunar calendar, this is the year of the horse. In Vietnamese, we say, “ chúc mung nam moi ”. Now back to Bill C-8 . Counterfeiting is a crime that harms legitimate trade.

It puts the health and safety of Canadians at risk, as we have just heard. Counterfeiting is when a recognized trademark is put on a fake product in the hopes of fooling clients and businesses. In recent years, counterfeit products have caused serious injuries. There were batteries that exploded and caused burns, drugs that had very dangerous side effects, and toys that injured children. In addition, there are clothes that are made with materials that are dangerous to our health and substandard coat linings that cause skin disease, for example.

The proportion of counterfeit products that are dangerous to our health is on the rise. In 2005, the proportion was 11%; however, it is now 26%. Canadians should not have to take risks when buying imported products. Counterfeiting also has a devastating effect on businesses, especially small and medium-sized businesses. Our small and medium-sized businesses invest their creativity and their resources in the development of unique, reliable and competitive products.

When counterfeit goods enter the Canadian market, they cause serious damage to businesses, and small and medium-sized businesses do not always have the means to take the counterfeiters to court. The value of counterfeit goods seized by the RCMP has risen from $7 million to $38 million over the past seven years. The OECD estimates that the value of counterfeiting worldwide is approximately $250 billion a year. China is the main source of counterfeit goods. In 2011, 80% of counterfeit goods came from China, and that trend is on the rise. The United States is the second-largest source.

We hope that Bill C-8 will help reduce the amount of counterfeit goods in Canada. The bill basically aims to strengthen the fight against counterfeiting by amending the Copyright Act and the Trade-marks Act. In fact, the bill will add two new criminal offences under the Copyright Act for possession and exportation of counterfeit goods. Furthermore, it also creates offences for selling or offering counterfeit goods on a commercial scale.

It also prohibits the importing of counterfeit goods, while creating two exceptions: the first exception is products imported for personal use, given that people do not always know when something they buy outside Canada is counterfeit, and the second has to do with items in transit control, that is, goods that are passing through Canada on their way to their final destination. Bill C-8 also gives border officials new powers to intercept infringing copies. Thus, they will no longer have to wait for a court order, which makes a lot more sense.

The Canada Border Services Agency and the Minister of Public Safety will also be able to share information on detained goods with copyright holders. These tools will help fight counterfeiting. However, it is of the utmost importance that we have the resources to enforce the law. The Conservative government has made major cuts to border services. Contrary to what the parliamentary secretary said earlier, approximately $143 million in cuts will be made, resulting in the loss of 549 full-time jobs between now and 2015.

That is quite significant given that the border between Canada and the United States is almost 9,000 km long. The Franklin border crossing in my riding was closed in 2011. Border guards and RCMP officers came to see me immediately to tell me how concerned they were because the smuggling of tobacco, drugs and weapons across the border is a major problem. Now that the RCMP and border services have fewer resources, it is becoming increasingly difficult for them to keep Canadians safe.

Border guards and RCMP officers are being given more responsibilities and fewer resources, making it even harder for them to protect Canadians from counterfeiting and maintain border security. Let us not forget that Bill C-8 will require customs officers to analyze the products entering and leaving the country to determine whether they are counterfeit copies and whether they fall under one of the exemptions. In the case of counterfeit goods, customs officers will have to detain the goods, store them and contact the rights owners. They will have to take care of all that in addition to doing their regular duties.

(1030) One has to wonder whether the Canada Border Services Agency will have the means to implement the law without compromising its other responsibilities, which are to protect Canada's borders and keep our country safe.

The president of the Customs and Immigration Union, Jean-Pierre Fortin, had this to say about the cuts to the Canada Border Services Agency: These proposed budget cuts would have a direct and real impact on Canadians and our communities across the country: more child pornography entering the country, more weapons and illegal drugs will pass through our borders, not to mention terrorists, sexual predators and hardened criminals. Experienced people are concerned. How can the government ensure that all of the measures proposed in Bill C-8 are funded without affecting other surveillance services?

The government refuses to comment on this, despite all of the questions we asked about it in committee. The other major issue is the lack of data on counterfeiting in Canada. We do not know the magnitude of the problem. All we have are statistics on actual seizures. We do not have any information about what type of goods are being counterfeited and where they come from. We do not have any information on all of the counterfeit goods that are on the market. The Canadian Intellectual Property Council believes that the Canadian system does not have the tools to track cases detected and report them to the authorities.

European border authorities must publish statistics but, in Canada, the Border Services Agency is not mandated to report infringements of intellectual property rights. In committee, when we asked the RCMP whether they had an idea of the number of Canadian manufacturers charged with importing or exporting counterfeit goods, the federal policing superintendent replied that he did not have any statistics in that regard. In fact, the RCMP's police information retrieval system does not track enough information to provide a clear picture of the number of counterfeit goods imported or exported.

In 2007, a report by the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology recommended that the government establish a reporting system that would track investigations. It is difficult to tackle this problem without the facts and the exact figures. How can we measure progress after we implement this law without a baseline? Let us be realistic. Without funding for tracking counterfeiting and without a team of experts to manage border measures, the legislation will have very mixed results. The NDP attached a dissenting opinion to the committee's report on its study of the bill.

We are calling on the government to consult with consumer associations and industry. We would also like customs officers to have the powers they need to do their jobs while ensuring compliance with civil liberties and usual procedures. We are also asking that the agency be provided with sufficient funding, it goes without saying, to fight counterfeiting and continue doing the work it does every day. In conclusion, the NDP supports the fight against counterfeiting. Our approach respects both copyright holders and citizens. We are also pragmatic.

We know that if we pass a law but do not allocate the necessary resources to enforce it, the outcome will be poor. Fighting counterfeiting effectively without taking away from other border control activities means providing the appropriate resources to the relevant authorities. The government must also stop cutting front-line officer positions. The number of full-time jobs has been reduced by 549. We have also taken a very close look at Bill C-8 in committee, and we believe that it does not compromise Canadians' basic rights.

The bill does not include censorship, does not criminalize travellers, and does not cover goods in transit. However, there must be conclusive evidence and follow-up on analyses. Most importantly, the government must provide adequate human and financial resources to our border services and RCMP officers. (1035) [ English ] Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on the safety issue. We know and understand that there is a great deal of importation in different forms, things such as electrical components and medical products. Medical issues are something I am most concerned about.

When different types of medicines are brought in proclaiming to replace other types of medicines that have gone through a process of certification, it is very dangerous. There are electrical components brought in with substantial price differences from the real thing and, again, they pose a safety issue for Canadians. My question to the member is this. Just focusing on the issue of safety, does the member see other opportunities that we can, as legislators, move toward to enhance consumer awareness on these issues?

For example, the Government of Canada will spend hundreds of millions of dollars on wasteful ads when, in fact, we could be spending more on consumer advisory-type information ads. I ask her to comment. [ Translation ] Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach : Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Winnipeg North for his question. The Conservative government is spending its money in a pretty ideological way and paying for ads about programs that are not all that useful to people in terms of raising awareness of fraud and counterfeit goods that could pose a risk to health, the economy and the ability of our businesses to compete.

Counterfeit medicines are certainly extremely dangerous to people's health since Health Canada has not evaluated them. They can have really serious side effects that could be terrible for people's health. The government should spend money raising people's awareness about the quality of goods and where they come from. There should also be resources for producing reports, which is what the NDP asked for in committee. We asked for an annual report to be produced to follow up on analysis of these goods. Unfortunately, the Conservatives rejected our amendment in committee.

(1040) Mr. Pierre Nantel (Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech, which was very well researched. The member's riding is home to a large cluster of the border crossings in the Montérégie area, between Dundee and Hemmingford, I believe. In my past life, before I was elected in 2011, I had the opportunity to be around many border officers. They told me how much their everyday tasks had changed. When my colleague was studying this bill, did she get the impression that the realities faced by border officers had been heard or understood? Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach : Mr.

Speaker, I thank my colleague from Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher for his very practical question. We had border officers come to testify in committee. People also wrote to us to say that resources were very limited on the ground. As a result of the Conservatives' $143 million in cuts in the 2012 budget, resources will be even more limited, even though the officers' responsibilities continue to increase. Along the border between Dundee and Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, in my riding, there is a huge amount of arms, cigarette and drug trafficking.

Since there are fewer and fewer border crossings, people can cross the border without being stopped. They are obviously crossing the border illegally. How can we effectively monitor counterfeit goods? It is completely unrealistic and it is very difficult for them to do everything properly. Ms. Charmaine Borg (Terrebonne—Blainville, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the members of the House for giving their unanimous consent to allow me to speak this morning. It is greatly appreciated. I would also like to commend my colleague on her very intelligent and well-presented comments.

I want to speak to Bill C-8 today because it is an important measure for combating counterfeit products in Canada. I will begin by saying that we intend to support the bill at this stage because we believe it will greatly benefit Canada in terms of combating counterfeiting and piracy. As my colleague mentioned, according to the OECD, the estimated cost of counterfeiting is $250 billion. That is a lot of money. It is quite troubling to know that all that money is going into the hands of people with questionable practices.

When we talk about counterfeit products we immediately think of fake Louis Vuitton bags because they are everywhere. I see them every day. However, counterfeiting is much more than that. Prescription drugs can be counterfeit and pose a serious risk to the health of Canadians. Electronic devices can also cause problems, especially small devices used on airplanes, for example. If a counterfeit device is used on a plane, it can cause serious problems and put the lives of Canadians in jeopardy. This is quite troubling.

I want to say a few words about a company in my riding that tests electronic components to see if they are counterfeit. I had the opportunity to visit that company roughly a year ago and I learned a lot of things, including that there are a lot counterfeit components. Honestly, I was surprised to see to what extent the components we buy from other countries are not always authentic. The people at this company explained to me the procedure they follow to test these components. It is quite an involved process and not something that everyone could do. I commend them for their work, which is essential.

Thanks to them, a number of companies in Canada and in the United States can be 100% certain that the component they purchased is authentic and will work properly, especially when we are talking about aircraft equipment. Their work is quite impressive. I just wanted to take a bit of time to talk about a personal experience. Back to Bill C-8 , which proposes a number of different things that I would like to discuss in detail.

The bill adds two new criminal offences under the Copyright Act for possessing or exporting counterfeit copies and creates offences for selling counterfeit goods or offering them for sale on a commercial scale. It prohibits the import or export of counterfeit copies and counterfeit goods and ensures a balanced approach to this prohibition by creating two exceptions: personal use and copies in customs transit control. The bill also gives customs officers new powers to detain counterfeit goods and copies.

It gives the Minister of Public Safety and border authorities new powers enabling them to share information relating to the detained goods with rights owners. Lastly, it expands the scope of what can be registered as a trade-mark, as described within the broader definition of a certain term. Basically, these are good measures, and the NDP supports them. However, there is one big problem, and I believe my colleagues talked about it. CBSA's funding has been reduced by $143 million. Officers are being asked to get more training and spend more of their time fighting counterfeiting.

In principle, that is a good thing, but given the budget cuts, it is hard to imagine that they will be able to perform those additional duties.

(1045) We are seriously questioning the idea of giving our border agents more responsibility when we do not necessarily have the financial means to do so. In that regard, I would like to quote Jean-Pierre Fortin, national president of the Customs and Immigration Union, who commented on the budget cuts as follows: These proposed budget cuts would have a direct and real impact on Canadians and our communities across the country: more child pornography entering the country, more weapons and illegal drugs will pass through our borders, not to mention terrorists, sexual predators and hardened criminals.

Clearly, these budget cuts could have serious repercussions. The government should seriously consider that when asking border agents to take on more responsibilities as part of their job. I would like to make another point. I asked this question during question period when the bill was introduced in the House. Does Bill C-8 signify that the government is planning on ratifying ACTA in its entirety? That is a very important question. ACTA has attracted widespread criticism on the international stage.

The European Union rejected many clauses in the agreement, and I would like to take a few moments to highlight the most problematic ones. For example, there are clauses that would criminalize certain individuals. There were concerns about the use of shell corporations, the role of Internet service providers, and potential interruptions in the generic drug supply. Those clauses were rejected by the international community.

I would like to reassure those who are fighting for an open Internet environment and who are speaking out against the idea of the government being able to block websites, that this bill does not seem to include those troubling clauses. I want to congratulate the government on that, because introducing those clauses here in Canada could cause problems regarding Canadians' access to an open Internet environment. Obviously, we will have more to say, but this seems to be relatively balanced in terms of our intention to ratify ACTA.

I would encourage the government to think twice—or even three or four times—before it proposes such measures, if it intends to do so in the future, because this comes with a great deal of risk. I want to support another aspect of this bill, and that is the exception for personal use. Naturally, when we see a bill on counterfeiting, certain questions come to mind. Will someone crossing the border who bought a knock-off of a Louis Vuitton bag be arrested? Will her bag be seized? That would be going a little too far, so I am glad an exception has been included for personal use, to avoid those kinds of situations.

We can also consider people who go through customs with a laptop and would be forced to turn it on to determine whether there are any pirated programs or illegally downloaded songs on it. Having to go through all of someone's software could cause a problem. I am therefore happy to see the exception for personal use, but that provision needs to be examined further to make sure that it will not cause any such problems. Since my time is almost up, I would just like to reiterate our support for this bill. Fighting counterfeiting is an issue that is very important to the NDP.

We are prepared to work with the government in order to find ways to strike a balance between the law, copyright holders and consumers. That is what really matters. (1050) [ English ] Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the member was talking about the personal items that individuals might have in their possession, whether crossing a border, or another means for which they would acquire something for personal use. There is a significant difference that needs to be highlighted.

Those who would reproduce an item with the idea of selling it for profit, with a huge criminal element to that component, and those who will consume products, knowing full well they are knock-off products, in particular if they are bringing those items into Canada from outside. I believe the member was commenting on that aspect of it, and I am interested in hearing more from her about her party's position. She used the example of someone being abroad and purchasing a knock-off purse or another item, and I am interested in hearing more comments on that particular issue. [ Translation ] Ms. Charmaine Borg : Mr.

Speaker, I thank my hon. Liberal colleague for giving me the opportunity to speak to this issue a little more, since I had so little time left. Yes, I talked about the exception for personal use. As with all things, a balance must be found. Does someone crossing the border with a counterfeit purse really pose a risk? Most people would say no, that it was that individual who has been duped. However, if someone has purchased a medication that could be harmful to their health, they need to know that. There has to be balance.

When someone crosses the border with dozens of counterfeit purses, it is more likely that that person plans to sell them for a profit. That poses a risk. It is important to keep the exception for personal use, in order to prevent abuses.

(1055) Hon. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's comments. Last year, I was a member of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology and I listened to a number of corporate representatives talk about the problems created by counterfeit goods. I was not on the committee for very long or when it studied the bill, but I was told that many amendments were suggested by members of both opposition parties and all of them were rejected by the Conservatives.

Apparently, they were not the least bit interested in listening to the arguments for some of the amendments that, in my opinion, were necessary. I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about how the Conservatives listen only to the Prime Minister 's Office and never to sound reasoning. Ms. Charmaine Borg : Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. In fact, that happens often. All MPs agree that we have to fight counterfeiting in Canada.

However, when committee members work together on such an important report or issue—I did not work on this bill—it is very disappointing to have the Conservatives reject all the arguments put forward by the other parties. When we co-operate, we can bring together all the best ideas and find a solution that will be in Canadians' best interests. [ English ] The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Resuming debate, with three minutes before statements by members, the hon. member for Halifax West. Hon. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.) : Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to rise today, even if it is for the three minutes remaining before we begin statements by members and question period. However, I obviously will have an opportunity to finish my remarks after question period, and I look forward to that. I am pleased to rise to speak to Bill C-8 , which is an important piece of legislation. I think it could have been improved at committee, and it is unfortunate that the Conservative government did not accept any amendments that were brought forward. This seems to be a pattern that we have seen over and over in committee.

Rather than consider, discuss, and have a collaborative process when it comes to possible amendments that could improve a bill, the Conservative MPs on committees unfortunately seem determined not to consider them, or perhaps they are cowed and afraid of the PMO or the minister's office and do whatever the minister's office tells them and simply vote to defeat all amendments. That is unfortunate, because this is an important bill. It is a bill that could be better. It could have improvements to make it a stronger piece of legislation to serve our country better.

It could better serve our businesses that are so concerned about this issue of counterfeit goods. I sat on the industry committee last year before that. As my hon. colleague the parliamentary secretary was saying earlier, we heard from various companies that expressed grave concern about the impact of the increasing amount of counterfeit goods coming into the country. When we consider the kinds of goods we are talking about here, it should be of concern to all Canadians. We are not talking just about things like hockey jerseys, for example, that really take away revenues from the teams that own those brands.

That has an impact on those teams. Normally, people think NHL teams are wealthy and the players are wealthy, so they are not worried about them. However, if we think about it, with the dollar below 90¢ these days, we are going to hear more about the challenges that presents to NHL teams operating in Canada, because they pay their players in U.S. dollars, so that is a concern for them. We also hear about things like pharmaceuticals or electrical components. We can imagine a counterfeit electrical component in a house. That counterfeit electrical component might lead to a fire.

We need to be concerned about all these things. I know my time before question period is coming to an end, Mr. Speaker, so I will pause and let you take over. I look forward to resuming my comments later.

(1100) The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Yes, I regret to interrupt the member for Halifax West. He will have 17 minutes remaining when this matter returns before the House.

STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Statements by Members [ English ] Margaret Fulton Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP) : Mr. Speaker, this is one of those occasions when I wish an S. O. 31 was more than 60 seconds as I try to sum up of the life an extraordinary woman who had an extraordinary life. I was proud to know her as a friend and a colleague. Margaret Fulton passed away at the age of 91 on January 22, earlier this month, peacefully at home on Salt Spring Island. However, the impact of her life started when she was a young woman on a farm in Manitoba, where she was born in 1922.

She went on to be, at first, a schoolteacher in a one-room schoolhouse. Through her life and career, she became a champion for women's studies, for feminism, for confronting sexism and patriarchy and male power wherever she found it, for centralization of systems. She was an iconoclast. She was a pioneer. She achieved 15 honorary doctorates, was an Officer of the Order of Canada, and achieved numerous goals in education, including being president of Mount Saint Vincent for two terms, that being the first university to bring in a program for women's studies.

We will all miss her, especially her 17 nephews, her seven nieces, and her sister, Eva Robinson. I will miss you, Margaret.

Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar Mrs. Kelly Block (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our time in our ridings over the past seven weeks was a great opportunity to reconnect with family, friends, and constituents. Prior to the Christmas holiday, I had the pleasure of hosting Christmas open houses in Saskatoon, Rosetown, and Biggar. After a great Christmas and New Year's celebration with family, I started my annual New Year tour of the riding.

I met with folks in Rosetown, Fiske, Ruthilda, Biggar, Sonningdale, Harris, Delisle, and Saskatoon, and, after weather delays, met with folks in Grandora, Asquith, Vanscoy, Sovereign, Stranraer, and Herschel. It was good to see so many constituents and to catch up on what is happening in these great communities. I also had the pleasure of making two announcements on behalf our hard-working Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food providing important funding for research that will benefit Canada's livestock and crop sectors. It is truly an honour to represent the constituents of Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar .

[ Translation ] Employment Mr. Mathieu Ravignat (Pontiac, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, my riding of Pontiac has been abandoned by the Conservative government. Just think of the forestry industry, which has received no assistance; employment insurance reform, which has impoverished seasonal workers; the appeals to the municipal infrastructure fund, which have been turned down; the cuts to the public service, which are making families insecure; the protection of lakes and rivers, which has been sabotaged; the recent cuts to Canada Post; and the list goes on, Mr. Speaker.

My constituents are proud people and are not asking for charity. They just want to work. What is the federal government doing to stimulate my region's economy? Nothing. It would rather spend $14 million on bogus advertising to justify its lack of action. The NDP has a real jobs plan. We will provide tax breaks to businesses and create jobs by modernizing infrastructure. In Pontiac, jobs are disappearing and wages are declining. We need solid leadership, and that is what the NDP's job creation plan offers to all Canadians.

[ English ] Winter Olympic Games Mr. Ray Boughen (Palliser, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, seven days from now, Canadians will be filled with patriotism as they tune in to watch the 2014 Olympic Winter Games. Four-time Olympic medallist Hayley Wickenheiser has the honour of leading the team into the stadium as Canada's flag-bearer. I am proud to add that she is from my home province of Saskatchewan and is an excellent role model for young athletes. Our athletes may be across the world in Sochi, but they can be confident that all Canadians are with them as they strive to own the podium.

I know they will do us proud, with the whole country behind them. I call upon all members of the house to join with me with a “Go, Canada, go”. Are we ready? Go Canada, go!

Canal Classic Hon. John McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday, we witnessed several miracles on ice at the Canal Classic. Some miracles were expected; some were not. As expected, the members for Barrie and Wetaskiwin demonstrated their dazzling speed. As expected, the member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel missed an open breakaway that any four-year-old could have scored on. One media member who claims to be both tough and fair was neither tough nor fair nor present, spending the entire game on the fringes, presumably worried about his makeup.

An unexpected miracle occurred when former Liberal senator Jim Munson tied the game in the last few seconds. He appears to relish his new-found freedom to be out of a position at the perfect time. With the game tied and at the end of regulation play, the member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel redeemed himself and miraculously won the game in a shootout. Equally miraculously, the NDP, the Conservatives, and the Liberals co-operated to beat back the media hordes. Even the former minister of defence and his former critic of a similar name were civil to each other.

However, the most satisfying miracle was to raise funds for JumpStart. We thank Canadian Tire for making all of these miracles, both big and small, possible.

(1105) Winter Olympic Games Mr. Peter Braid (Kitchener—Waterloo, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, one week from today the world will be watching as Canada's best compete at the Olympic Winter Games in Sochi. Kitchener—Waterloo will be well represented with five of our own going for gold. Kitchener-Waterloo Skating Club members Kirsten Moore-Towers and Dylan Moscovitch will be competing in the pairs figure skating event, while Kaitlyn Weaver and Andrew Poje will represent Canada in ice dancing and Kitchener native Jenna Blasman will be competing in the first-ever Olympic slopestyle event as a member of Canada's snowboard team.

I encourage all members and all Canadians to join me in cheering on our Olympic athletes as they make us proud in Sochi. Go, Canada, go.

[ Translation ] Canada Post Ms. Laurin Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are continuing down their path of destruction, and this time they are attacking Canada Post. They are cutting home delivery service in urban areas, increasing rates and eliminating 6,000 to 8,000 jobs. Now I find out that effective March 4, the Saint-Eustache post office will become a postal service centre and that the number of client service employees will be cut. In short, people are being asked to pay more for less service. However, the postal service has been profitable for 16 of the past 17 years.

The only year the corporation posted a deficit was 2011, the year employees were locked out. It is time for real consultations on Canada Post. Seniors, people with reduced mobility, the municipalities and SMEs have to be heard.

[ English ] Shared Parenting Mr. Maurice Vellacott (Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I have had a difficult decision to make. I have four items on the order paper, and all of them are of great importance. One is a democratic reform initiative, two are explicitly pro-life measures, and the one bill I have on the order paper is for the sake of the children. They all deserve to proceed in this place, but regrettably I can only choose one at this time. I have selected Bill C-560 to move forward to second reading debate in this chamber.

It is my bill to amend the Divorce Act to make equal shared parenting a rebuttable presumption in cases of marital breakup involving children. Aside from proven abuse or neglect, over three-quarters of Canadians want equal shared parenting to be the presumption in our courts when marriages unfortunately break down. Research clearly demonstrates that equal shared parenting is in the best interests of children.

Also, based on conversations I have been a part of, I have good reason to believe that the other three items I have on the order paper will be picked up in due course by other good MPs who have spine and foresight. For that I am also truly grateful.

Status of Women Mrs. Susan Truppe (London North Centre, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, Canada's economic action plan 2013 contained measures to increase the participation of under-represented groups in certain sectors of the labour market, including women. Our economy needs skilled workers, and to meet that demand, we need women working in all occupations, especially in those where they are under-represented. I was pleased to host round tables across Canada about this issue. I was honoured to begin the round tables at Fanshawe College in London, Ontario.

I am pleased with the recent announcement by the Minister of Status of Women of $2.8 million supporting 14 Ontario-based projects to advance women's opportunities in non-traditional occupations, increase economic options for women, and improve prosperity for immigrant women. This demonstrates our government's focus on ensuring jobs, growth, and long-term prosperity for all Canadians. That vision starts in communities with women and men who are empowered to fulfill their potential and contribute to the Canadian economy.

(1110) [ Translation ] The Budget Ms. Françoise Boivin (Gatineau, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, in my riding of Gatineau, we have the same priorities in 2014 that we had in 2013. Everyone is telling me that they are having a hard time making ends meet. The priorities for the people of Gatineau are health care, retirement benefits, well-paying jobs, Canada Post, and respect for the public service, seniors and our veterans.

As we approach the tabling of the budget, these master economists, who have been running deficit budgets year after year since they came to power, will be adding to the national debt, which they have already increased by $123.5 billion. I would be very surprised to find a single Canadian, aside from a Conservative MP, who thinks that this government is working for Canadians. The Conservatives hope that if they table their budget in the middle of the Olympics, everyone will forget about their incompetence. In 2015, Gatineau will remember that our region has been abandoned by the Conservatives.

Gatineau will fight with me and my NDP colleagues to turf this government and finally put people first.

[ English ] Health Ms. Eve Adams (Mississauga—Brampton South, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government understands that each and every one of our citizens deserves the best health care available. We are leading the way by providing the highest health care transfer dollars ever to provinces and territories. These are set to reach $40 billion by the end of the decade. In a speech to the Economic Club of Canada yesterday, the Minister of Health made it clear that we are also focused on innovation to ensure that the system is sustainable.

We are supporting innovate partnerships with the private sector, provinces, and territories. Such initiatives include funding for the Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement, which will improve patient care and reduce costs. Our government is also the single largest investor in health care and science research. Through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, our government invests roughly a billion dollars each and every year into world-class research.

With the leadership of our great Minister of Health , our government will continue to leverage the expertise of all Canadians to improve the quality of care and make our health care system sustainable.

[ Translation ] Winter Olympics Games Mr. Pierre Nantel (Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, with the opening of the Sochi Winter Olympics right around the corner, now is a good time to remember that 30 years ago, a member of the greater Longueuil community, Gaétan Boucher, won three medals, one bronze and two gold, in his sport at the Sarajevo Olympics, thereby making an indelible mark in the history of those games. The citizens of Longueuil can look back with pride, knowing why a boulevard, school and athletic centre in Longueuil are all named after him. Thank you, Gaétan Boucher.

May your success bring good luck to our new speed skating hopeful, Charles Cournoyer, a young rising star from Boucherville at 22 years of age. On behalf of everyone in Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, good luck Charles. We are all behind you.

[ English ] Consumer Protection Mr. James Lunney (Nanaimo—Alberni, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, Canadian families work hard for their money and every dollar counts. On this side of the House, we have taken decisive action to put Canadian families first by cutting taxes an incredible 160 times. That amounts to over $3,200 more every year for the average Canadian family because of our Conservative government's initiatives. We have consistently put consumers and families at the core of our decisions.

We will continue to do so by reducing wireless costs, increasing choice for television packages, and increasing high-speed Internet access for rural Canadians. We know that Canadians want more choice and lower prices, whether for their cellphone plan or TV package at home. That is why we welcome the Competition Bureau's action this week to defend consumers against skyrocketing roaming fees that increase wireless prices and lead to less wireless choice. While the opposition continues to call for job-killing carbon taxes and legalizing marijuana, we will continue to put Canadian families first.

[ Translation ] L'Isle-Verte Mr. Emmanuel Dubourg (Bourassa, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, in the early hours of January 23, tragedy struck L'Isle-Verte. A terrible fire destroyed the Résidence du Havre, leaving 32 people dead or unaccounted for. In the face of such tragedy, there are no words to express our grief and our compassion. I would nevertheless like to offer my most sincere condolences to the families of the dead and missing.

I would also like to salute the dedicated efforts of the teams of first responders who, despite very difficult conditions, have been tirelessly sifting through the rubble so that bereaved families can grieve in peace. Tomorrow, the community will share its grief with the whole province and bid farewell to those who were lost during a ceremony at the L'Isle-Verte church. I invite my colleagues, the constituents of my riding, Bourassa, and the Haitian community to join me in expressing our support for this community that has suffered so much.

(1115) [ English ] Public Safety Ms. Roxanne James (Scarborough Centre, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our Conservative government is committed to keeping our streets and communities safe. We have passed numerous laws to keep dangerous and violent criminals behind bars where they belong, including new penalties for child exploitation as well as ending the ability of child molesters to get criminal record suspensions. We did all of this without a massive expansion of the prison population, contrary to the dire predictions of the NDP. How is this possible? When we lock up criminals, they are not out committing more crimes.

Contrast this with the Liberals whose leader has said that they would not rule out ending mandatory sentences for anyone. When it comes to keeping our streets and communities safe, Canadians know that they can count on our Conservative government.

The Senate Mr. Dan Harris (Scarborough Southwest, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Liberal leader's bold new policy has amounted to Liberal senators becoming “Senate Liberals”. Not one senator changed party affiliation or swore off partisan activity. The standings in the Senate remain the same: 57 unelected and unaccountable Conservatives, opposite 32 unelected, unaccountable Liberals. The member for Markham—Unionville bizarrely claimed that the fact the Liberal caucus will now meet in separate rooms made him as proud as when Canada stayed out of the war in Iraq.

Canadians are now realizing that the Liberal leader did not do his homework and is yet again crafting policy on the back of a napkin. Of course, he could have come to us. We have done the homework. Remember, just a couple of months ago the motion to take partisanship out of the Senate, the one that every single Liberal voted against. Canadians deserve better. They deserve an end to the unelected, unaccountable, and unnecessary Senate.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Mr. Paul Calandra (Oak Ridges—Markham, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, last night the CBC aired a misleading report on Canada's signals intelligence agency, the Communications Security Establishment Canada. The documents cited were stolen by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden and sold to the CBC by Glenn Greenwald. Canada's signals intelligence agency has been clear that the CBC story is incorrect, yet the CBC went ahead and published it anyway.

Here are the facts: before the story aired, CSEC made it clear that nothing in the stolen documents showed that Canadians' communications were targeted, collected, or used, nor that travellers' movements were tracked. In addition, CSEC's activities are regularly reviewed by an independent watchdog who has consistently found it has followed the law. Why is furthering porn-spy Glenn Greenwald's agenda and lining his Brazilian bank account more important than maintaining the public broadcaster's journalistic integrity?

ORAL QUESTIONS Oral Questions [ English ] Veterans Affairs Mr. Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, today the Conservative government is closing eight Veterans Affairs offices. These offices provide specialized services to thousands of our veterans. They are being replaced by computers and a 1-800 number. Inexperienced staff from other departments do not have the training or the experience to deal with these complex health issues. Veterans are rightly furious with the government.

Why are the Conservatives just steamrolling ahead with cuts that are reducing services to the brave men and women of this country? Mr. Parm Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government has created 600 new points of service across the country to assist Canada's veterans. A critically injured veteran does not have to drive to a district office. We will send a registered nurse or a case manager to them in the comfort of their own home to assist them where the service is required.

Veterans who are seriously injured can count on our government to shovel their driveways, cut their grass, and prepare their meals in their homes. Mr. Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, after all the broken Conservative promises to our veterans, that is another one they will not believe. Veterans are not fearmongering, they are worried. They will lose the long-term relationships they have built with staff at their regional offices. These brave men and women have complex mental and physical health issues. Meanwhile, the Conservative cabinet has doubled spending on its own regional offices.

Are veterans really in less need of help than some travelling Conservative minister?

(1120) Mr. Parm Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, since coming to office, our government has invested almost $5 billion in additional funding to help veterans and to provide services and benefits. Regarding the offices that are being merged with Service Canada, we will make sure that each of the eight offices has a fully trained Veterans Affairs Canada employee to provide the necessary assistance.

National Defence Mr. Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, under Canadian law, it is illegal for Communications Security Establishment Canada to target and spy on Canadians or anyone inside Canada's borders. This is an agency directly under the control of the Minister of National Defence . Can the government tell Canadians why this agency was tracking and spying on Canadians in our airports? Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, it is my understanding that CSEC made it clear to the CBC that nothing in the documents they had obtained showed that Canadian communications were targeted, collected or used, nor that travellers' movements were tracked. [ Translation ] Ms. Françoise Boivin (Gatineau, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, on November 28, the Minister of National Defence said in the House: ...the Communications Security Establishment Canada—CSEC—must abide by Canadian law. It is prohibited from targeting Canadians. My question is for the Minister of National Defence .

Can he tell us how monitoring Canadians' activities through Wi-Fi networks and airports is not the same as targeting Canadians? [ English ] Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, my previous answer addressed this particular question, but I can let the hon. member know, and she may be aware, that the activities of CSEC are reviewed by an independent commissioner, who has repeatedly indicated that CSEC respects the privacy and the laws of this country. [ Translation ] Ms. Françoise Boivin (Gatineau, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, now I know why Canadian airports provide free access to their Wi-Fi networks. The Minister of National Defence is responsible for Communications Security Establishment Canada. He must take responsibility for this serious violation of the law, and he must explain why the spying pilot project was extended and why the information taken from Canadian Wi-Fi networks is now being shared with foreign countries. Did the minister ask CSEC for an explanation, and how does he justify this violation of the law? [ English ] Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated, CSEC made it clear to the CBC that nothing in the documents it had obtained showed that Canadian communications were targeted, collected or used, nor that travellers' movements were tracked. I am sure that will reassure the hon. member.

[ Translation ] Veterans Affairs Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, as if closing service centres were not enough, now we find out that the government has just closed centres for treating veterans with PTSD. One of those centres was in Chicoutimi. Hundreds of people there with PTSD will now have to cross Saguenay park in the middle of winter to get services in Quebec. How can the government ignore the suffering of our veterans in such a cavalier way? [ English ] Mr. Parm Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, this is a provincial facility that has nothing to do with the district offices. The Province of Quebec is in the midst of contract negotiations with the service provider and that process should run its course. The fact remains, our government financially supports this and many other front-line facilities. In this case, we expect these services to continue well into the future. Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, they will continue, hundreds of kilometres away.

Today, the Conservatives are closing Veterans Affairs offices while opening and expanding palatial regional offices for themselves and their bloated staff. Even worse, the Conservative MP for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke is now blaming the veterans themselves, saying that the problem is just a stigma in their own heads. Why are the Conservatives showing such contempt for our brave veterans?

(1125) Mr. Parm Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, there will be 650 points of service for veterans to access service. These offices will be in areas where district offices did not exist. Now there will be Service Canada offices in areas as Durham, Sault Ste. Marie, and many others, so all veterans have access to the services they deserve. Hon. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.) : Mr.

Speaker, today in Sydney and seven other location across Canada it is black Friday, because the Conservatives are closing offices that provide vital services to our veterans. At the same time, they are spending millions to open posh new offices for, wait for it, their ministers. Do the Conservatives not think there might be a scintilla of a chance they got their priorities wrong? Mr. Parm Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the facts are as follows. As I mentioned, there are 650 new points of service for veterans where they can access these services.

Let me give some examples of how far the offices being merged with Service Canada are from district offices. For example, in Brandon, Manitoba, it is in the same building. In Saskatoon, it is the same building. In Kelowna, B.C., it is the same building. In Corner Brook, Newfoundland, it is the same building. In Charlottetown, P.E.I., it is across the street.

National Defence Mr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP) : Mr. Speaker,

section 273 of the National Defence Act states that the activities of the Communications Security Establishment shall “...not be directed at Canadians or any person in Canada”. Could the minister tell this House how tracking the activities of average, law-abiding Canadians could ever be considered lawful? Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, there are legislative measures in place to protect the privacy of Canadians and CSEC must adhere to those.

I can tell the hon. member what the independent CSEC Commissioner said: CSEC’s Chiefs…have spared no effort to instill within CSEC a culture of respect for the law and for the privacy of Canadians. I can say with pride and confidence that CSEC is truly being watched. I am sure that will satisfy the hon. member. Mr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, let me quote Ontario's Privacy Commissioner to the minister: It is really unbelievable that CSEC would engage in that kind of surveillance of Canadians. Of us.

Will the minister acknowledge that tracking the locations of Canadians by CSEC is against the law? Will he at least acknowledge it is wrong? Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the Privacy Commissioner is wrong; it is unbelievable. I have made that very clear. Again, CSEC is overseen by an independent commissioner, and I accept the report of the independent commissioner. [ Translation ] Ms. Charmaine Borg (Terrebonne—Blainville, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, Communications Security Establishment Canada collected metadata on the location of Canadians, the duration and location of their communications and how they use data. Is the government really claiming that gathering this information is not the same as illegally monitoring Canadians? [ English ] Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated in an earlier answer, CSEC has made it clear to the CBC that there was nothing in the documents that had been obtained that showed that Canadians' communications were targeted, collected, or used, nor that travellers' movements were tracked. [ Translation ] Ms. Charmaine Borg (Terrebonne—Blainville, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, was the former Minister of National Defence, the hon. member for Central Nova , aware that the agency was collecting information on hundreds of thousands of Canadians and sharing it with foreign countries? [ English ] Hon.

Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I should have pointed out that the independent commissioner who oversees the activities of CSEC has given a favourable report concerning CSEC's activities and its compliance with the law, but it is not just for this past year or so, it goes back to the years that my colleague was also the Minister of National Defence.

[ Translation ] Veterans Affairs Ms. Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, they are insulting veterans and spying on Canadians. What a great week for the Conservatives. Is it not pathetic to see the Minister of Veterans Affairs rise in the House to say that veterans' discontent is a vast union conspiracy? It is just as ridiculous as his claim that no cuts are being made to his department. Really? Why then do the financial documents from his department show the opposite?

If the Conservatives are not making any cuts, then why are they closing eight service centres before the end of the day today? (1130) [ English ] Mr. Parm Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government has a strong record when it comes to providing services and benefits to our veterans, our men and women in uniform, and we will continue to do. However, the opposition, especially the NDP, tries to pander to the unions and are more than willing to speak their talking points.

I would like to point out the fact that every single initiative that we have introduced to help our veterans, the NDP has voted against almost every single one of them. [ Translation ] Ms. Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, it is funny that the member does not seem willing to contradict the minister and refuses to say whether or not cuts are being made to this department. Let us look at the Department of Veterans Affairs' most recent report on plans and priorities.

On page 13 of the report, it states in black and white that the department is making cuts of $105 million in 2014-15 and $132 million in 2015-16. Did the minister read his own department's report on plans and priorities? Will he continue to claim that no cuts are being made in his department? [ English ] Mr. Parm Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, let me repeat for the member, maybe in slow motion. Since coming to office, our government, the Conservative government, has invested almost $5 billion in additional funding to help veterans.

We will continue to stand up for veterans on this side of the House. Only the NDP and the Liberals can call 650 points of service a cut. That is not a cut, it is providing more services, more-- The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : The hon. member for Beauharnois—Salaberry. [ Translation ] Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach (Beauharnois—Salaberry, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, a condescending attitude does not make the Conservatives more competent. The reality is that they will not be able to offer the same services with fewer service centres.

The other sad reality is that some veterans have said that they will be less comfortable accessing the less personalized services proposed by the Conservatives. What the Conservatives are actually doing is dissuading veterans from getting the help they need. Does the Minister of Veterans Affairs really think that veterans will be just as comfortable confiding in a computer as in a professional they have known and trusted for a long time? [ English ] Mr. Parm Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, it seems like it is only the NDP that would like to see Canada's veterans drive downtown and drive to the district office to obtain services.

Whereas this government is committed to provide them service in the comfort of their own home. We will continue to cut their lawn. We will continue to shovel their snow. We will continue to prepare meals in the comfort of their home or deliver those meals to them. [ Translation ] Ms. Francine Raynault (Joliette, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I do not expect to get a different answer than the one that has already been given, but I will ask my question anyway.

The Conservatives are closing veterans' service centres that provide mental health support, crisis intervention and the assistance elderly veterans need to live independently. Is the minister saying that these are not essential services? How does he think he is going to be able to offer the same services once he closes these offices? [ English ] Mr. Parm Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, there will be 650 points of service, 600 additional. Maybe the NDP do not get the math and do not understand how it works.

When 600 points of access are added for our veterans, they go toward helping veterans. There are many, many cities and towns in this country that currently do not have a district office, that do not get the service, and will now get that service.

(1135) Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, members will know that Brandon, Manitoba, is a huge military town with thousands of veterans, yet they are going to lose their Veterans Affairs office. Veterans in Thunder Bay will have to drive to North Bay, a 13-hour drive, to get basic service. The Conservatives love to trot out veterans for self-serving photo ops, but they turn their backs on them when it comes to meeting their basic needs. It might be the 11th hour, but it is never too late to do the right thing.

For the sake of those who have served, will the Conservative government reconsider this appalling, disgraceful decision to close these Veterans Affairs offices? Mr. Parm Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, honestly, it is beyond my understanding as to why NDP members would like to see our veterans drive to these district offices. The member opposite mentioned Brandon, Manitoba. The Service Canada office where the services are being merged is in the same building. What does the member not get? I have a difficult time understanding.

We are providing more services, more points of service, across the country so that veterans do not have to drive. We will send a registered nurse. We will send a case manager— The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Order. The hon. member for Bourassa.

[ Translation ] National Defence Mr. Emmanuel Dubourg (Bourassa, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, Communications Security Establishment Canada allegedly spied on Canadians through the free Internet service at one of our major airports. The purpose of this operation was not to protect Canadians. It was a test that was requested by the U.S. National Security Agency. This is illegal, according to experts. Does the government think it is acceptable for a Canadian agency to illegally spy on Canadians at the request of the U.S.? [ English ] Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, I notice the hon. member used the term allegedly. As I already indicated, CSEC made it clear to CBC that nothing in the documents it had obtained show that Canadian communications were targeted, collected, or used, nor that travellers' movements were being tracked. That being said, there is an independent oversight of CSEC through an independent commissioner, and that commissioner has consistently said that CSEC respects the law and respects the privacy of Canadians. Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.) : Mr.

Speaker, the chief of CSEC is on the record, telling us that “...we do not target Canadians at home or abroad in our foreign intelligence activities, nor do we target anyone in Canada. In fact, it's prohibited by law.” But now there are reports that CSEC was secretly tracking airline passengers in Canada who use Wi-Fi in airports. Canadians deserve to know. Is the government breaking the law by spying on, or allowing spying on, law-abiding citizens? Has the minister initiated an investigation to reassure Canadians? Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated, CSEC has already indicated to CBC that that is completely incorrect, that there is complete compliance with Canadian law. As I have pointed out, for years now there has been an independent commissioner who looks at all the issues surrounding CSEC. He has concluded that CSEC complies with the law and respects the privacy of Canadians. Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, members of Parliament spend a lot of time in Canadian airports, travelling throughout the country, and while travelling they use Wi-Fi to stay connected and to continue working.

Potential spying on MPs at airports could involve emails with personal information on constituents. Will the government notify any members of Parliament or Canadians who have been caught up in this data sweep? Will the minister initiate his own investigation into CSEC's activities, to reassure Canadians that their privacy has not been violated? Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, the independent commissioner, a former justice, has a look at the activities in CSEC and has, on a regular basis, through his reports, indicated that CSEC complies with Canadian law, that there is a culture of respect within CSEC, and that CSEC respects the privacy of Canadians.

(1140) [ Translation ] Science and Technology Ms. Laurin Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' attacks on science and knowledge are now targeting libraries. Since 2012, dozens of departmental libraries have been closed down. Scientists, public servants and Canadians are losing access to very important documents. Canada has become a laughingstock around the world as a result of this unacceptable destruction of information. Will the Conservatives stop preventing Canadians and scientists from accessing books and knowledge? [ English ] Hon.

Mike Lake (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, this is a puzzling question. Last I checked, this is 2014. The hon. member who just asked the question, I am guessing, is of the generation that uses computers and the Internet from time to time and would understand that it is an age in which we are digitizing information. The information for which we used to go to libraries and search books—libraries the size of this chamber—we can now carry around with us. We can access it from anywhere. This is a good thing and, of course, the government will continue to move in that direction.

Ms. Laurin Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the member might skate around the question, but the fact remains that the Conservative government's disdain for knowledge has reached new lows. It turns out that not only did it shut down seven world-class libraries at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans but also it made taxpayers foot the bill for tens of thousands of dollars in costs to destroy valuable material. Why are the Conservatives in such a rush to destroy Canada's scientific heritage? Mr. Randy Kamp (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, as my colleague has said, we are committed to updating government with 21st century technology in order to be more responsible to the taxpayer. This is exactly what was happening with the Fisheries and Oceans library. Users were asking for digital information. In fact, most of our libraries average about five to twelve visits per year. We are doing the right thing here and being responsible for what Canadians want.

[ Translation ] Library and Archives Canada Mr. Pierre Nantel (Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I want to stick with the topic of libraries, knowledge and vitality. The Conservatives continue to treat Library and Archives Canada as a second-class organization. LAC has been without a head librarian and archivist for eight months now. The legislation is clear: the position cannot remain vacant for a period of more than six months. If that deadline passes, the Conservatives are abusing the spirit of the act. Meanwhile, the files are piling up.

When will they start to treat our archival heritage with respect and appoint someone competent to run LAC? [ English ] Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, there is a process under way, and I am sure a decision will be made in the fullness of time.

National Defence Mr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the defence minister today has taken great pains to refer to the report in question and say that it does not show that Canadians have been electronically tracked. My question is: Will the minister, then, therefore, stand up and categorically state that under no conditions have innocent, law-abiding Canadians been electronically tracked by CSEC, yes or no? Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, we rely on the independent commissioner for that assessment, who has indicated that CSEC has spared no efforts to instill within CSEC a culture of respect for the law and for the privacy of Canadians. I can say with pride and confidence that CSEC is truly being watched. That is the independent commissioner.

Natural Resources Mr. Richard Harris (Cariboo—Prince George, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government knows that the Keystone XL pipeline will create jobs and economic growth in Canada and the United States. Furthermore, the pipeline will enhance North American energy security by displacing foreign oil. While the NDP puts ideology before the facts again and again, our Conservative government is focused on ensuring working families have good-paying, long-lasting jobs. Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources tell the House how the Keystone XL pipeline will support Canadian workers? Mrs.

Kelly Block (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, this pipeline will create tens of thousands of jobs in Canada and the United States. The New Democrats have turned their backs on workers. Just listen to the International Union of Operating Engineers, who said, “We are disappointed that the NDP has chosen to completely ignore the benefit of pipeline construction to working Canadians...”. It is time for the NDP to stand up for Canadian workers.

(1145) [ Translation ] The Environment Ms. Ruth Ellen Brosseau (Berthier—Maskinongé, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, last September, Health Canada published a document entitled “Action to Protect Bees from Exposure to Neonicotinoid Pesticides”. This document clearly shows that these pesticides negatively affect bees. An increasing number of studies, such as the one by Health Canada, show that there are clear links between neonicotinoids and the declining bee population. Why are the Conservatives not taking real action to stop the decline in Canada's bee population? [ English ] Ms.

Eve Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, when concerns were identified with this pesticide, our department took immediate steps to re-evaluate the information and to work with our international partners. Based on the best science that is currently available, we have brought in new rules and regulations for the 2014 growing season. We are taking this issue very seriously. Ms. Ruth Ellen Brosseau (Berthier—Maskinongé, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, people are concerned that the current government is not doing enough to protect our pollinators and that we need a rigorous series of risk-based assessments and scientific study, not just gambling with the livelihoods of farmers. Other jurisdictions are taking clear and decisive action to protect bee populations. Why are the Conservatives risking the livelihoods of farmers, and why are they not taking this issue seriously? Ms. Eve Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, as I just indicated, we are working with our international partners and we have brought in new rules and regulations for the 2014 growing season. Just to reassure the members opposite, though, over 200 types of scientific studies must be submitted before a pesticide is approved in our nation.

[ Translation ] Rail Transportation Mr. Mathieu Ravignat (Pontiac, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the railway is vital for the economic development of the Pontiac RCM. Nonetheless, CN has started lifting the tracks. It took an injunction to force CN to keep the line intact. The community's concerns are clear. Will the Minister of Transport finally intervene in order to find a solution, listen to the community and guarantee the future of this

section of rail line, and especially the economic future of the region? [ English ] Mr. Jeff Watson (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the member will know that there is a regulatory process for the discontinuance of railways, and that process is being followed. [ Translation ] Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives said that they do not intend to invest in the rail line linking Bathurst to Miramichi, which allows VIA Rail to transport passengers in Acadia.

The Conservatives are killing VIA Rail service in eastern New Brunswick and eastern Canada, and the Conservative members for Miramichi and Madawaska—Restigouche have not said a word. Will New Brunswick's Conservative MPs show some backbone and oppose their government's decision? New Brunswick has eight Conservative MPs, and they are not working on behalf of the province of New Brunswick. [ English ] Mr. Jeff Watson (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the member will know, with respect to the Newcastle subdivision, that this was a business decision made by a private company.

There is a regulatory process in place, which the company is following. While the discontinuance process is under way, CN is responsible for maintaining its track infrastructure. As previously indicated, the federal government has no interest in acquiring this rail line through the discontinuance process.

Aboriginal Affairs Hon. Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul's, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, improving the relationships and partnerships with the aboriginal people of Canada is an actual pre-condition to unlocking the natural resource and energy wealth in Canada. Instead, the government is actually gutting the capacity of indigenous people to engage in a meaningful way. This week, the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations was forced to lay off almost its entire workforce, 66 people, to cope with the $2 million cuts imposed by the current government.

How can the government build the needed trust and partnerships with aboriginal peoples while systematically robbing them of their voice? Mr. Mark Strahl (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we are focusing our funding on projects that generate tangible results while respecting taxpayer dollars. The objective is to ensure that funding is directed at priorities, such as initiatives that contribute to economic development and education, and to also eliminate the duplication of projects.

Resources will be focused on projects that result in concrete and positive impacts on the aboriginal people, as they are intended. For example, in our last budget we indicated a four-year investment of $241 million to help first nations youth ensure they got the skills they need to get a job.

(1150) International Trade Hon. John McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the Government of South Korea employs a number of non-tariff techniques in order to circumvent free trade deals. In its rush to sign deals, the Conservative government appears to be prepared to throw Ontario's auto industry under the bus. Will the minister specifically contact the Ontario government and address the concerns raised by the Ontario government that it get the same deal that the U.S. demanded and received for Michigan? Mr. Erin O'Toole (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, as the member knows, negotiations are under way, and the government will only sign a trade agreement that is in the best interests of Canada. It is also critical to know—and the Ontario government knows well—that the European Union, Australia, and the United States have signed deals with South Korea. Since the U.S. signed in 2012, we have lost $1.5 billion in exports to that country. We are here to ensure that a free trade agreement with South Korea will level the playing field and ensure Canadian exporters have opportunities and more jobs for Canadians.

[ Translation ] Aboriginal Affairs Ms. Mylène Freeman (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the work of the Special Committee on Violence Against Indigenous Women is coming to an end, and the conclusion is obvious: we need to take action to avoid having to start over and produce another report that will simply gather dust. The NDP has taken action by moving a motion calling for a concrete action plan to put an end to violence against women. Will the government support our plan? [ English ] Hon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, we can all agree that this is an appalling situation. Violence against aboriginal women and violence against children, in particular, remains an enormous problem in this country, which is why, as a government, we have taken decisive action. We have, in fact, made a number of changes within the Criminal Code that put more emphasis on holding offenders accountable. We have established and invested more than $25 million specifically on an initiative aimed at attacking this issue.

We have established a National Centre for Missing Persons, enhanced the Canadian Police Information Centre database, and given police more resources. We hope this member and her party will support this. Ms. Mylène Freeman (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, it is not enough, and it is time for more than just words. Many groups have spoken out at the committee about the flaws. We have seen no change from the Conservatives. It is clear that aboriginal women deserve more than just another report that is going to gather dust. They deserve answers.

When will the government agree to an inquiry and to concrete steps to end violence against aboriginal women? Hon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, let me continue with the numerous concrete, substantive financial investments and measures taken by the government, and very often opposed by the member and her party. We have in fact supported development of school and community pilot projects aimed specifically at reducing violence among young aboriginal women.

We have supported the development and adaptation of victim services so that people are culturally aware, culturally tuned in to what aboriginal first nations need, and developed a comprehensive list of best practices to help communities and law enforcement and justice partners in future work. We have worked with the aboriginal communities to develop their own safety on-reserve plans. We have, of course, changed to give matrimonial property act provisions— The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : The hon. member for Elgin—Middlesex—London.

Small Business Mr. Joe Preston (Elgin—Middlesex—London, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, small business owners in my riding have been telling me how happy they are that our government is standing up for them by legislating on the one-for-one rule. I understand that the rule has been in place less formally for the past year. I hope that the parliamentary secretary can give us some examples of how the rule has worked for us in this past year. Mr. Dan Albas (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it is a great question and I am happy to answer for the hon. member.

On this side of the House, we are proud to have heard and listened to the calls of Canadian business owners. Here is a concrete example of how we have helped. The one-for-one rule has resulted in allowing pharmacy technicians to transfer drugs to other pharmacies, a practice previously restricted only to pharmacists. This has enabled pharmacists to spend more time providing service and advice to customers while saving them $15 million. Contrast that to the Liberal leader. It seems that the only drug transfers that he would make more effective are the ones sold by dangerous—

(1155) The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Order, please. The hon. member for Lac-Saint-Louis.

Health Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, drug compounding companies are not federally regulated like drug manufacturers, nor provincially regulated like pharmacies. In the Marchese case, an error by a compounder resulted in cancer patients receiving diluted doses of a chemotherapy drug. The Obama administration has brought compounders under federal law, treating these companies more like drug manufacturers. Will the government apply federal standards for drug manufacturers to compounding companies to avoid a balkanized regulatory regime that varies from province to province? Ms.

Eve Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government understands that Canadian families need access to high quality and safe medications. Health Canada scientists review all drugs approved for sale in Canada based on a rigorous review, to ensure health, safety, and efficacy.

[ Translation ] Canada Post Mr. Marc-André Morin (Laurentides—Labelle, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, in my riding of Laurentides—Labelle , the communities of Lac-du-Cerf, Sainte-Anne-du-Lac, Saint-Faustin-Lac-Carré, Rivière-Rouge, Amherst and Chute-Saint-Philippe are concerned about the closure of Canada Post offices. Six municipalities have already passed resolutions demanding that postal services continue. Will the government listen to the people and elected officials in Laurentides—Labelle and work to find solutions instead of taking an axe to public services? [ English ] Mr.

Jeff Watson (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, as the member will know, Canada Post delivered one billion fewer individually addressed letters in 2012 than it did in 2006. The Conference Board of Canada, in its report, projected that Canada Post could lose roughly $1 billion a year by 2020. The member will also know, though, that Canada Post, as an arm's-length crown corporation, is responsible for its operations, including business and financial decisions. It is their five-point plan.

Agriculture and Agri-Food Mr. Gary Schellenberger (Perth—Wellington, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, last week, porcine epidemic diarrhea was detected in southern Ontario. Although this disease poses no risk to human health, it could have serious repercussions for Canada's pork sector. In addition to the already stringent inspections at the border, could the Minister of State for Agriculture please update the House on what else our government is doing to help industry combat this disease? Hon. Maxime Bernier (Minister of State (Small Business and Tourism, and Agriculture), CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for the question but most importantly for his hard work on this file. [ Translation ] Yesterday the Minister of Agriculture announced emergency access to a vaccine to respond to the threat posed by porcine epidemic diarrhea. It will be available to pork producers in Canada for use under veterinary supervision as a precautionary measure against the virus. I would like to assure my colleagues that our government is continuing to work with the pork industry as a whole.

Government Services Mr. Claude Patry (Jonquière—Alma, BQ) : Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Infrastructure, Communities and Intergovernmental Affairs has a poor attitude when it comes to Quebec's economy, and his own government is cutting services and relocating them far away from people. Eliminating home mail delivery in urban areas, closing the passport office in Jonquière and closing the Service Canada office in Kénogami will hurt the economic development of these Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean communities.

When will the minister intervene and prevent the government from taking away the services that the people of Jonquière and Kénogami appreciate having nearby? Mr. Jacques Gourde (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, for Official Languages and for the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the Economic Development Agency of Canada is working in all regions of Quebec to develop the Quebec economy. This is one of our government's priorities, and it should be a priority for all MPs from Quebec.

[ English ] Ethics Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP) : Mr. Speaker, Canadians will remember the sorry tale, the scandal of Dr. Arthur Porter who once held the sensitive position of chair of the Canadian Security Intelligence Review Committee. As we all know, he is now in jail in Panama and fighting extradition to Canada. Appallingly, he is still a member of the Privy Council. He is a Privy Council officer. To be removed from that position, all the Prime Minister has to do is ask the Governor General to remove him. Why has this step not been taken?

(1200) Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I will take the member's comments under advisement and get back to her. Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP) : Mr. Speaker, I certainly thank the hon. parliamentary secretary; that is a very encouraging response. Perhaps we can have a government and an administration that styles itself as tough on crime but appears to be soft on its friends.

I am wondering if the parliamentary secretary could also take a message to the Prime Minister from one of my constituents, who would appreciate if the Prime Minister would urge his friend the mayor of Toronto to resign because it is an embarrassment to Canada to have someone with these charges against him— The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Order. The question clearly goes beyond the administrative responsibilities of the Government of Canada and concludes question period for today. The hon. member for Medicine Hat is rising on a point of order.

Point of Order Oral Questions Point of Order Mr. LaVar Payne (Medicine Hat, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order. The member for Winnipeg Centre used very unparliamentary language towards me and our colleagues in the House. He also gave me the not-so-famous Pierre Elliott Trudeau salute. I expect a full apology, to me as well as to my colleagues here in the House. That is not acceptable in this place. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : The Chair will take this on advisement, and I am sure this matter will come back before the House.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Routine Proceedings [ English ] Foreign Affairs Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the following documents. The first of two reports is entitled “Report on Exports of Military Goods from Canada, 2010-11”; and, second, the 2011-12 progress report, “Canada's Action Plan for the Implementation of the United Nations Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security”.

Furthermore, I have two treaties that I wish to table, entitled, one, “Acts of the 25th Congress of the Universal Postal Union” done at Doha on October 11, 2012; and finally, the exchange of notes between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America constituting an agreement amending

chapter 4 of annex 4 of the treaty between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America concerning Pacific salmon, which was done in Washington on December 13 and 23, 2013. An explanatory memorandum is included with each treaty. [ Translation ] Hon. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.) : Mr.

Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian delegation of the Canada-Africa Parliamentary Association respecting its bilateral mission to Cameroon concerning the creation of a senate in Cameroon, held from November 13 to 17, 2012. The report was delayed because we were waiting to see the results of our delegation. Those results are described in our report.

[ English ] Petitions The Environment Mr. Alex Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions. The first one is from residents of Nelson, Castlegar, Trail, Rossland, Crescent Valley, Winlaw, Salmo, New Denver and Cranbrook, who are upset over the cuts to Environment Canada. They call upon Parliament to undertake a thorough assessment of the needs and priorities of Environment Canada's mandate, taking into account regional differences and specifics, and also to have Environment Canada conduct an assessment of the risks and impacts on environment and human health that may arise from these decisions.

(1205) Canada Post Mr. Alex Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, on the second petition most of the 250 names are from my community of Castlegar. The petitioners would like the Government of Canada to instruct Canada Post to keep and expand public post offices instead of opening privately run offices or franchises, which seems to be the trend.

Genetically Modified Alfalfa Hon. Michael Chong (Wellington—Halton Hills, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I present a petition from 70 or so constituents in my riding of Wellington—Halton Hills, mostly from the Rockwood area, who petition the government to put a moratorium on genetically modified alfalfa.

The environment Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP) : Mr. Speaker, I rise to present two petitions today. The first is from residents of Salt Spring Island within my riding, as well as many from Vancouver. They call on the government to live up to the commitments that were made in a bill passed by the House of Commons but disgracefully defeated in the Senate without having a single day of hearings. It calls for meaningful reductions of greenhouse gases to 25% below 1990 levels by 2020.

The Environment Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP) : Mr. Speaker, the second petition is from residents from Pender Island within my riding, calling on the government to ensure that the risky pipeline and tanker scheme proposed by Enbridge is not approved and that the islands and the coastline of British Columbia can be protected from tankers loaded with raw bitumen. [ Translation ] Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach (Beauharnois—Salaberry, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have a petition to present regarding the protection of navigable waters.

As part of one of its omnibus bills, the government managed to ensure that nearly all the waterways in Canada are no longer protected, apart from 62 rivers, 97 lakes and three oceans, which together represent less than 2% all of waterways. The petitioners are calling on the government to guarantee permanent navigation rights on all lakes and, above all, to restore the former environmental assessment process. Now, citizens are the ones having to ensure that our waters are protected, and at their own expense. Approximately 50 people have signed this petition.

[ English ] Mining Industry Hon. Irwin Cotler (Mount Royal, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition from Canadians concerned about harsh and degrading working conditions in the resource and extraction industry around the world, particularly with respect to what have been described as conflict minerals used in electronic equipment such as cellphones. The petitioners call on the government to impose standards for identifying the source of these component materials so that Canadians can be confident that when they buy electronics, they are supporting safe and humane business practices. Mr.

Joe Preston (Elgin—Middlesex—London, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from some 40 members from St. Thomas and the area around it regarding the actions of Canadian mining companies.

[ Translation ] Grenville Canal Ms. Mylène Freeman (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, these petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to cover the cost of repairing and restoring the shoreline and retaining walls of the Grenville Canal in my riding. Even though it is considered a national historic site, the canal was forced to close in 2008 because of its decrepit state. For the past four years, elected officials and members of the local community have been joining forces to call on the federal government to preserve this historic canal, which is so important to the region.

I want my constituents to know that I fully support them in their efforts. It is time to demand symbolic recognition for this important canal.

[ English ] Questions on the Order Paper Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

Government Orders Government Orders [ English ] Combating Counterfeit Products Act Bill C-8. Third reading The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-8,

An Act to amend the Copyright Act and the Trade-marks Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts , be read the third time and passed. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Barry Devolin) : When this matter was last before the House, the hon. member for Halifax West had the floor, and he has 17 minutes remaining in his speech. The hon. member for Halifax West . Hon. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise again to resume my comments on Bill C-8 .

I would like to speak a bit about what is in the bill. (1210) [ Translation ] Bill C-8 amends the Copyright Act and the Trade-marks Act to add new civil and criminal remedies and new border measures in both acts, in order to strengthen the enforcement of copyright and trademark rights and to curtail commercial activity involving infringing copies and counterfeit trademarked goods. More specifically, the bill creates new civil causes of action with respect to activities that sustain commercial activity in infringing copies and counterfeit trademarked goods.

It creates new criminal offences for trademark counterfeiting that are analogous to existing offences in the Copyright Act. It also creates new criminal offences prohibiting the possession or export of infringing copies or counterfeit trademarked goods, packaging or labels. The bill enacts new border enforcement measures enabling customs officers to detain goods that they suspect infringe copyright or trademark rights. I think my colleagues in the House obviously agree that it is important to protect copyrights and trademarks. It is important to protect Canadians' jobs. This is how they earn their living.

The bill also allows customs officers to share information relating to the detained goods with rights owners who have filed a request for assistance, in order to give the rights owners a reasonable opportunity to pursue a remedy in court. The bill exempts the importation and exportation of copies and goods by an individual for their personal use from the application of the border measures. This is important to consider.

The bill also adds the offences set out in the Copyright Act and the Trade-marks Act to the list of offences set out in the Criminal Code for the investigation of which police may seek judicial authorization to use a wiretap. Obviously, in this situation, it would be illegal to use a wiretap. We are already hearing about illegal wiretaps that the government has done. Bill C-8 also amends the Trade-marks Act to, among other things, expand the scope of what can be registered as a trade-mark and allow the Registrar of Trade-marks to correct errors that appear in the trade-mark register. That is important.

Personally, I hope that, in the future, the government will introduce a bill ensuring that these provisions apply not only to trade-marks but also to official marks. I think that significant changes must be made to official marks legislation and to how we correct past mistakes. Finally, the bill streamlines and modernizes the trade-mark application and opposition process. [ English ] Now that I have given a bit of a review of what is in the bill, let us talk about what happened after the bill passed second reading and went to committee, where a variety of proposals for amendments were brought forward.

The fact is that this is unfortunately a case, another case, of the Conservative government using its majority to ram through a flawed piece of legislation that could have done a much better job of protecting Canadian business interests and Canadian consumers. We are supporting the bill, because it is important to have some measures to protect these interests and to try to stop this enormous flow we are seeing of counterfeit goods into Canada. Nevertheless, it does not mean the bill could not be better. We certainly would have liked to have seen it made better.

Every single amendment we brought forward and that the NDP brought forward at committee was torpedoed by the Conservatives there. The Conservatives followed orders. When the minister appeared, he stated that he wanted the bill passed by committee quickly and that he would allow no more than four days of hearings. To no one's surprise, that is exactly what happened. When we talk about having less partisanship around here, about having more collaboration around here, this is what we are talking about. I hope that the changes we are proposing to the Senate make it a less partisan place and a more collaborat