OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)

House of Commons Debates Volume 151 No. 249 1st SESSION 44th PARLIAMENT Wednesday, November 8, 2023 Speaker: The Honourable Greg Fergus HOUSE OF COMMONS CANADA (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) COMMONS DEBATES November 8, 2023 DEBATES No. 249 No. 249 N o 249 Volume 151 249 08 11 2023 2023/11/08 14:05:00 Débats de la Chambre des communes House of Commons Debates House Of Commons 1 44

The House met at 2 p.m. Prayer

Statements by Members

(1405) [ Translation ]

The Speaker :

It being Wednesday, we will now have the singing of the national anthem led by the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay . [ Members sang the national anthem ]

Statements by Members Statements by Members

[ Translation ] Rouge et Or Rugby Team

Mr. Alain Rayes (Richmond—Arthabaska, Ind.) :

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to congratulate a group of exceptional young women and their coaches on their spectacular victory at the U Sports women's rugby national championship. This victory, which is the result of hard work, immense determination and outstanding teamwork, is definitely something to celebrate. It is a second consecutive banner and a third title in four championships for the Rouge et Or.

It is also worth noting that Laval University is the only francophone university to bring home this national title and win the record for the largest crowd at a women's university sports event in in Quebec. I want to wrap up my statement with the words of Corinne Fréchette, the rugby tournament MVP, who said, “This is about more than just a match. It is bigger than just a medal. We represent all of the alumni who have worn the jersey and who did everything they could to help grow the sport. We are making history in our own way, and we are making our mark on women’s sports.

There are younger girls who will want to wear our colours.” I want to congratulate these young women who are such inspiring role models.

[ English ] Foreign Affairs

Mr. Shafqat Ali (Brampton Centre, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, according to a UN report, since the conflict began, over 1,400 innocent Israelis and more than 10,000 innocent Palestinians, including 4,000 children and more than 2,500 women, have lost their lives. The killing of innocent civilians is heartbreaking and painful. The whole population in Gaza is under siege. Access to food, water, electricity and medicine is being severely restricted. There are 1.5 million Palestinians internally displaced, and 14 of 35 hospitals have stopped functioning. On Friday, the Prime Minister said, “We've all seen too much horror these last weeks.

Kids being killed...We all want it to stop.” Many Canadians are calling for us to call for an immediate ceasefire to end the hostilities, the freeing of hostages and the full respect of international humanitarian law. I have heard them, and I will keep listening.

Remembrance Day

Mrs. Stephanie Kusie (Calgary Midnapore, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, as Remembrance Day approaches, I think of family members who sacrificed so that we may live in peace. I think of my father's uncle, John Schramm, who served in the navy. Great-uncles Gordon Schramm and Eddy Hanowski served in the army. Eddy was severely injured in Holland. On my mother's side, I remember my great-uncle Ronald L'Italien, who paid the ultimate price for his service to Canada. These sacrifices are remembered by generations, from my parents to me and to my son, who wrote this poem:

Today as I awake The war takes place

No breaks are there Where the war takes place

They fought together Where the war takes place

The poppies grew as fast as the Flash Where the war took place

They had to choose between their country or their family Where the war takes place

The soldier is a lion when he is on the battlefield Where the war takes place

They all go home After the war takes place

May we never forget.

[ Translation ] Brian Merrett

Ms. Anna Gainey (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an exceptional Montreal photographer, Brian Merrett, who passed away on September 21. [ English ] Born in 1945, Mr. Merrett became an activist and leader in the preservation of architectural heritage of Montreal. Through his works and the publication of several books, he recorded and fought to protect the fabric of Montreal at a time of tremendous change and urban development. He challenged infrastructure projects that threatened historic buildings, saving, among others, Windsor Station.

His work played a crucial role in the restoration of Shaughnessy House, now integrated into the Canadian Centre for Architecture. [ Translation ] Mr. Merrett’s work is also featured in the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts. His photographs are in the museum's collection as well as in other private and public collections, including those of the McCord Stewart Museum, Musée national des beaux-arts du Québec and National Gallery of Canada, just a few steps from here. Let us take a moment to honour his legacy and the significant mark he left on our magnificent city of Montreal.

Greater Sainte‑Agathe Chamber of Commerce

Ms. Marie-Hélène Gaudreau (Laurentides—Labelle, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, it all began on March 9, 1933 in a room in Sainte-Agathe-des-Monts City Hall. The Sainte-Agathe chamber of commerce was born out of the desire to officially speak for commercial interests. The new chamber of commerce’s first success was establishing a liquor commission store. We can mention early initiatives such as the Carnival and the completion of the old Route 11 as well as the success stories of companies such as J.L. Brissette and Fenêtres MQ and of start-ups such as Origine Nature, La Manufacture, and La Veillée.

The chamber of commerce, now known as the Chambre de commerce du Grand Sainte-Agathe, actively works to develop a region with huge potential. Today, Sainte-Agathe-des-Monts is a services and activity organization hub as well as a development centre for SMEs. Congratulations to the Chambre de commerce du Grand Sainte-Agathe on its 90th anniversary.

(1410) Orléans

Mrs. Marie-France Lalonde (Orléans, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, November marks Hindu Heritage Month in Canada. I would like to thank the Hindu community in Orléans and across the country for their contribution to our society.

I was very pleased to attend the Diwali events this week on Parliament Hill. [ English ] I am also very excited to welcome in this House 90 students from four civic classes of Cairine Wilson Secondary School in Orleans. [ Translation ] I thank their teachers, Malia Robin, Felicia Persaud, Paul Emerson and Marlene MacRae for having organized this visit. [ English ] Finally, this week is Veterans' Week, which will conclude with Remembrance Day on November 11. Several celebrations across our country will take place honouring those who fought and lost their lives for our freedom and our liberty.

I thank all the veterans and acting members of the force, in Orleans, Canada and abroad, for their service. Lest we forget.

Indigenous Veterans Day

Mr. Jamie Schmale (Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, throughout the history of Canada, indigenous peoples have served with honour and distinction in the Armed Forces. They have defended our nation, protected our shared values and demonstrated unwavering courage and resilience in the face of danger. In World War I, their bravery and contributions in battles such as Vimy Ridge and Passchendaele were instrumental in the allied victory. In World War II, indigenous peoples once again stepped up to defend freedom and democracy.

During the Korean War and subsequent international conflicts, indigenous peoples continued to serve, making heroic contributions to Canada's peacekeeping efforts around the world. As we remember those who fought and those who made the ultimate sacrifice, we must also remember the often overlooked stories of indigenous veterans, who returned home to face continued challenges and discrimination. On November 8, let us recommit ourselves to the principles of justice, equality, and reconciliation.

Let us strive to ensure that indigenous veterans, who have served and who continue to serve, receive the recognition, respect and support they deserve. Lest we forget.

Royal Canadian Army Cadets

Hon. David McGuinty (Ottawa South, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, the 2332 Major EJG Holland VC Royal Canadian Army Cadet Corps was founded on November 25, 1948. It will celebrate its 75th anniversary this month with a ceremonial parade. Eighty cadets strong, and with a dedicated team of officers and civilian volunteers, this unit has volunteered with the Royal Canadian Legion Poppy Campaign, the Army Run, Christmas toy drives, the Boots on the Ground Walk and many other community events. Cadets build life skills such as leadership, teamwork, resilience and discipline. This valuable experience has positively impacted countless youth throughout our community.

I send my congratulations to the 2332 Royal Canadian Army Cadets on their 75th anniversary.

Hindu Heritage Month

Ms. Ruby Sahota (Brampton North, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the second annual Hindu Heritage Month and in celebration of Diwali. During this month, I would like to recognize and honour the countless contributions of the Hindu community to our nation. Over the past 120 years, it has been an integral part of Canadian society. Hindu communities have flourished and grown immensely, leaving their mark on several aspects of Canadian society, from medicine and cutting-edge technology to the arts and thriving businesses. This weekend, I will also be celebrating Diwali with the Hindu community in Brampton.

The festival of lights marks the victory of light over darkness, knowledge over ignorance, and good over evil. It is a time for families and friends to come together, share joy and express their gratitude for the blessings in their lives. During this special month, I encourage all Canadians to take the time to learn more about the Hindu culture and the significance of Diwali, to engage with our Hindu friends and neighbours, and to join in the festivities. Let us embrace the opportunity to foster understanding, respect and appreciation for the rich traditions that define our nation.

(1415) Veterans

Mr. Blake Richards (Banff—Airdrie, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, as we approach Remembrance Day, it is important to remember and recognize the sacrifice that so many Canadians made for our freedoms. The toll of war weighs heavily upon our veterans, so it is our duty to honour their sacred contribution and ensure that they are cared for, yet this Prime Minister has told them that they are asking for more than he can give, and after eight years, we are seeing veterans suffering in record numbers. We need to recognize that veterans, particularly those with injuries, are vulnerable to the cost of living crisis brought on by this government.

The Veterans Food Bank of Calgary reports that demand for its services has doubled and expects the shelves to be empty by the end of the week. Veterans are suffering right now, with more and more using food banks and homeless shelters. Now, the cost of living crisis has gotten so bad that there are serving members of the Canadian Armed Forces who are living in their cars because they cannot afford a place to live. The Prime Minister is just not worth the cost. It is time to bring home a government that will honour the service and sacrifice of our veterans, not just on Remembrance Day, but every single day.

Indigenous Veterans Day

Mr. Vance Badawey (Niagara Centre, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise today on Indigenous Veterans Day to express my gratitude and to celebrate the indigenous veterans who have served in the Canadian Armed Forces in Canada and across the world. The service of first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples to our country in times of conflict, war and peace goes back generations. It is up to all of us to ensure that their sacrifices are never forgotten and that their contributions are fully appreciated. It is essential to acknowledge that many indigenous veterans faced unique challenges and discrimination during and after their service.

Despite those challenges, they persevered, showcasing their remarkable resilience and determination. On this Indigenous Veterans Day, let us all remember and pay our heartfelt tribute to those individuals who stood at the forefront of our nation's defence and exemplify the true meaning of service and sacrifice. Lest we forget.

[ Translation ] Carbon Tax

Mr. Bernard Généreux (Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, after eight years of this Prime Minister , he is trying to save his career any way he can. As luck would have it, he has found a new partner in the centralist Bloc Québécois. Monday, we voted on a common-sense motion that would have given everyone a break on the carbon tax on home heating. That was not just for 3% of the population, but for all Canadians, contrary to what the Minister of Rural Economic Development would have us believe. However, the Liberals voted against the motion, as did the separatist Bloc Québécois.

Voting for the Bloc Québécois is costly, and it is going to remain costly for a long time, because they want to radically increase the carbon tax. The costly new Bloc-Liberal coalition hurts everyone, including Quebeckers. It is not me who is saying this, but the Parliamentary Budget Officer, since the second carbon tax will add 20¢ to every litre of gasoline. Our proposition is clear: no gimmicks, no temporary measures. We have to eliminate inflationary taxes to bring common sense back to Quebec. That is common sense.

[ English ] Carbon Tax

Mr. Glen Motz (Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, after eight years under the Prime Minister , he is just not worth the cost. Canada is broken. Households and businesses across this country are struggling to hold on, losing hope that things will ever get better. The Prime Minister decided to pause the carbon tax on home heating oil for only 3% of Canadians. His divisive policies have left western Canadians out in the cold, having to decide between eating and heating. The economic development minister thinks that westerners should just elect more Liberals if they want to afford home heating.

Surprisingly, Albertans in Edmonton Centre and Calgary Skyview did vote Liberal; however, their MPs did not even try to get Albertans the same breaks as other Canadians have. In fact, on Monday, the same two MPs voted against our Conservative motion to axe the carbon tax on all home heating. It is clear, now more than ever, that Canada needs a common-sense Conservative government to start fixing the problems created by the NDP-Liberal carbon tax coalition.

(1420) Foreign Affairs

Hon. Bardish Chagger (Waterloo, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, for the last 32 days, I, along with colleagues for Kitchener—Conestoga , Kitchener South—Hespeler and Cambridge , have been listening to and consoling residents in the Waterloo region for the deaths of thousands of innocent Israelis and Palestinians. We feel their pain and grief, and we bring their calls to action to this chamber. There are parents having to explain to their kids why they are seeing death and horror in their social media feeds.

We have children who are afraid to wear religious symbols, neighbours grieving the loss of loved ones, faith leaders fearing for the safety of congregations and people feeling silenced and kept from publicizing their views. We hear the range of calls from Canadians for a humanitarian ceasefire, the release of civilian hostages, the safe return of all Canadians and a dedicated humanitarian corridor. We must continue working hard to achieve a just and lasting peace for all Palestinians and Israelis for the sake of humanity.

Foreign Affairs

Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, we cannot turn away from the humanitarian crisis that is unfolding. In Gaza, there are over 50,000 pregnant women without access to medical care. Over 100 women give birth every single day amid the chaos. New Democrats, from the beginning, have called for a ceasefire, condemned Hamas’s violence and called for a release of all hostages. Now, as people who have nothing to do with Hamas’s violence are getting killed, we must centre our focus on human rights, international law and human decency. C-sections are being performed without anaesthetic.

Imagine being pregnant with no medicine, no food, no water and no electricity. Women are miscarrying. Mothers and their babies are dying daily amid bombings and attacks. Four thousand children have been killed since the start of this siege. Four thousand kids have been killed. How many more babies have to die before the government will call for a ceasefire?

[ Translation ] Trois‑Rivières Ferry

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, the Centre de jour et d'entraide en santé mentale Le Traversier, the drop-in and mental health support centre in Trois-Rivières, is celebrating its 35th anniversary. The organization’s mission is to support people living with mental health issues during the healing process and help them attain a better quality of life. To better respond to the growing needs of clients, the organization unveiled an innovative project that will allow it to expand its services and reach more people in need: a mobile response unit.

This unit will make it possible to reach out to people struggling with societal and mental health challenges, to meet them closer to their homes or communities. The fully autonomous vehicle is adapted to hold consultations and can even accommodate small groups for activities. I would be remiss if I did not mention the exceptional work of Ms. Shanaz Moussa, the executive director, and Ms. Isabelle Fortin, the board chair, who successfully mobilized the team and the board members behind this project. Congratulations to the entire Traversier team on this initiative.

[ English ] Carbon Tax

Mr. Dave Epp (Chatham-Kent—Leamington, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, after eight years, Canadians are seeing the Liberal-NDP government for what it is. The Prime Minister is just not worth the cost. He continues to divide Canadians over the carbon tax. He still plans to quadruple the tax on home heating, gas and groceries for 97% of Canadians, but he decided to pause the tax for 3% of families in areas where he was plummeting in the polls and where Liberal MPs were revolting. The Liberal rural affairs minister said that if people in other regions want to have the same pause, they should elect more Liberals. Is that politics or policy?

The people in Thunder Bay—Superior North did elect a Liberal MP, yet her constituents are not getting the pause. Why did she not use her influence with the Prime Minister to bring relief to her constituents? Why did the Prime Minister not allow the MP for Thunder Bay—Superior North to freely vote to take the tax off the heat and keep the heat on for her constituents?

McGill Public Policy Students

Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, public policy is a science and an art that relies on both rigorous analysis and an acute sense of the possible. Today, graduate students from McGill's Max Bell School of Public Policy are on Parliament Hill to learn first-hand about government decision-making in a Westminster parliamentary system. They are accompanied by the program's founding director, Professor Christopher Ragan, one of Canada's most respected and influential economists.

Through Professor Ragan's leadership, the Max Bell program has brought together academics and public policy practitioners in a full range of subject areas to create one of the country's leading faculties of public administration. I ask members to join me in welcoming Max Bell students to the nation's capital today. Government necessarily plays a crucial role in our complex and rapidly evolving world. We look forward to these bright, young minds taking up important roles and responsibilities for guiding our ship of state into a promising future.

Oral Questions Oral Questions

(1425) [ Translation ] Carbon Pricing

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois, who is not worth the cost, voted to increase the tax on heating across the country, in order to save the political career of this Prime Minister. We asked whether the Bloc Québécois is part of a costly coalition. The Minister of Environment and Climate Change confirmed it. He said that there is a coalition in the House of Commons that includes the Bloc Québécois. The Bloc Québécois does nothing for free. Will the Prime Minister tell us what he offered the Bloc to keep him in power and support the idea of quadrupling the tax?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, what I am offering Quebeckers and all Canadians is an opportunity to grow and thrive in a greener, more prosperous future. Three parties in the House of Commons are working together to fight climate change. The Conservatives are unwilling to do anything to fight climate change. They fail to understand that no plan for the economy is possible without a plan to fight climate change. We will continue to work with all members of the House who want to fight climate change and build a better world, while the Conservatives would have us return to the Stone Age.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, he just confused the Bloc Québécois with Quebeckers. There is a big difference. The Bloc Québécois has abandoned Quebeckers. Apparently, the Prime Minister thinks the Bloc Québécois suddenly speaks for Quebeckers. Perhaps it is because the Bloc Québécois wants to drastically raise taxes on the backs of Quebeckers. Now the Bloc Québécois wants to keep the Prime Minister in power, supporting his inflationary deficits and other centralizing policies. Just yesterday, the Minister of Environment admitted that there is a coalition with the Bloc Québécois. What did the Prime Minister offer the Bloc Québécois to get this coalition?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, there are nearly half a million Quebeckers who still heat with oil. All the members from Quebec, whether they are in the Bloc Québécois, Liberal Party or another party, should know that those who depend on oil to heat their homes—and therefore pay more and pollute more—are, for the most part, the poorer Canadians and Quebeckers. That is why we are offering to replace this oil heating with heat pumps. We are going to work with all the provinces that want them and deliver them free of charge to low-income people. Building a better world is something that needs to be done by all of us together.

[ English ]

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is not worth the cost or the division after eight years. Panicking under pressure from MPs in a region where he is plummeting in the polls, he paused the tax for some people in some places, but his minister said that other people should have voted Liberal if they wanted the same break. Now the panicking Prime Minister is further dividing the country with a confirmation from his environment minister that he is now in a coalition with the Bloc, the separatist party. We have a costly carbon tax coalition that includes the separatists. What did he promise the separatists to get them to sign on to keeping him in power for two more years?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, the only division in this country as to whether we should be doing everything we can to fight climate change is within the Conservative Party. Canadians are unequivocal that we need to fight climate change, and we need to support Canadians through that. That is why our price on pollution returns hundreds of dollars every three months to the average family of four while fighting climate change and watching our curve bend faster over the past two years than the curves of the other G7 countries. We will continue to hold Canadians together as we fight climate change, while Conservatives continue to bring us backward.

(1430) Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister 's own environment commissioner confirmed that he will not hit his targets, and the Prime Minister has admitted that his carbon tax is not worth the cost for oil-heated homes. He did that to save his political hide, but his desperation went one step further this week, when he relied on the separatists to vote with him to quadruple the tax on home heating for everyone else in Canada. The question is very clear: What did he promise the separatists to get their support to save his political hide and quadruple the tax?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, no matter how much the Conservatives try to deny it, every single day in this country, we get closer to never again using coal to generate electricity. Now, we are choosing to phase out home heating oil, which is dirtier, more expensive and disproportionately relied on by lower-income Canadians. The Conservatives may try to make up all the stuff they like, but the reality is that replacing home heating oil is good for Canadians when we put in heat pumps, and that is exactly what we are doing.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, after eight years, the Prime Minister has not eliminated coal-fired electricity. He has not eliminated oil-powered heating in homes. His carbon tax will not allow him to meet his own GHG targets, according to his environment commissioner. That is the reality: His carbon tax is not worth the cost. That is why all 10 premiers, Conservative, Liberal and NDP, are calling for him to take the tax off so Canadians will keep the heat on. Will he be fair to all Canadians, or will he sign on with the separatists to divide our country some more?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I have to admit, I am a little worried for the Leader of the Opposition . When he has to stoop to bringing up the separatist bogeyman to try to scare Canadians, he must be running out of material. The fact of the matter is that Canadians are afraid of climate change. They are afraid of the extreme weather events. They are afraid of the concerns we have about a brighter future. What we are doing is fighting climate change every day while we build a stronger economy, with greater careers, while we support Canadians every single day with the high cost of living. This is what we are delivering.

He has no plan to fight climate change, no plan for the future of the economy and no plan for Canadians.

[ Translation ] Foreign Affairs

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, this morning, the Prime Minister reiterated the government's position and called on Israel to agree to a truce in the Gaza Strip. Many international institutions and countries have reiterated this position over the past two weeks. Unfortunately, all calls have gone unheeded so far. Prime Minister Netanyahu is also completely ignoring the repeated calls made by Mr. Blinken, the U.S. Secretary of State. In view of Israel's deplorable attitude, would the Prime Minister agree that it is time to call for a ceasefire, along with effective means of implementation?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, we are calling for a humanitarian truce, a humanitarian pause, to allow the hostages, Canadians and other foreign nationals from all over the world, to get out of Gaza and, more importantly, to send humanitarian aid to civilians in Gaza. Violence must be curbed. We need to create a path towards a two-state solution. The terrible images we are seeing every night must stop. They are breaking the hearts of all Canadians and people around the world. We will continue to work together for peace and security for all.

(1435) Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, I regret to say that the State of Israel broke the trust the international community placed in it to act with restraint towards civilians in the Gaza Strip. Thousands of people have died needlessly. Israel is planning a lasting occupation of the Gaza Strip. There have been repeated calls for a truce, but have we not reached the point where strong action must be taken by the international community to implement a ceasefire enforced by international peacekeepers?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, as we all know, we are working with our international partners to try to protect the lives of civilians and restore safety and order for all citizens and residents of the region. We will continue to do that. At the same time, as parliamentarians and Canadians, we must be very concerned about the divisions, fear and even hatred that we are starting to see across Canada. We must be there to stand up against Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and all forms of hatred. Let us remember who we are as Canadians.

[ English ] Climate Change

Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal and Conservative corporate coalition may strike again today. We put forward a plan to help Canadians with their home heating bills, to help Canadians tackle the climate crisis and make big oil and gas pay for it. Environmental organizations are on board, but the “climate delay” Liberals and the “climate deny” Conservatives will back the profits of big oil again. How can the Prime Minister and the leader of the Conservative Party justify voting against this?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, it was with confusion and consternation that I noted the way the NDP voted with the Conservatives against one of the most successful measures Canada has ever seen in the fight against climate change. Putting a price on pollution is exactly how we have managed to bend the curve on our emissions faster than other G7 countries over the past two years and how we are moving forward with global leadership on the fight against climate change. Seeing the NDP vote with the Conservatives against a price on pollution is something that has disappointed millions of progressives across this country.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker :

I am going to ask members to please exercise great restraint. I would especially ask the member for York—Simcoe to allow other members who have the floor to hold the floor until it is his turn to speak. The hon. member for Burnaby South.

Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has missed literally every single target he has set on emissions. [ Translation ] Here is our plan: reduce heating bills for all Canadians, fight climate change and make the big oil companies pay. Many environmental organizations agree, but the Liberal-Conservative coalition of CEOs are going to keep protecting the profits of the big oil companies. How can the Prime Minister vote against our plan?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I know that progressives across the country were deeply disappointed to see the NDP vote with the Conservatives against the most successful measure to fight climate change that Canada has taken. Putting a price on pollution across the country has allowed us to fight climate change, invest in renewable energy and put more money in the pockets of eight out of 10 families where the federal price on pollution applies. We will continue to fight climate change. We hope that the NDP will rejoin the battle.

(1440) [ English ] Carbon Pricing

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, it is almost tragic and heartbreaking to see these two squabbling in this way. The Prime Minister was so disappointed in the NDP leader 's flip-flop on the carbon tax on heat, but the good news for the Prime Minister is that the NDP leader has flipped-flopped on his flip-flop and now supports the Prime Minister's plan to quadruple the tax, this with two million Canadians, a record-smashing number, going to a food bank. Will the Prime Minister create another carve-out on the carbon tax for farmers so Canadians can afford to eat?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, we know that farmers are always focused on being good stewards of the land, and we are working with them in investing and in supporting them in many different ways to ensure that we can continue to put good-quality affordable food on people's tables right across the country. That is what we are going to continue to do. Farmers, and indeed Canadians from coast to coast to coast, know that, as we fight climate change and as we put more money in people's pockets every three months, hundreds of dollars, with the pollution price return, we are going to continue to step up in building a strong economy for tomorrow, something the Conservatives simply do not understand.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is quadrupling his carbon tax on the farmers who make the food and quadrupling the tax on the truckers who ship the food, therefore quadrupling the tax on all who buy the food. The good news is that there is a common-sense Conservative bill that has passed through the House and is in the Senate, where the Prime Minister 's senators are holding it up. Will the Prime Minister, once again, cave and allow another carve-out on the carbon tax for farmers, yes or no?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, many people living in rural areas across the country, including many farmers, continue to be stuck heating their homes with home heating oil. It is dirtier and more expensive, and it is something that is expensive to replace. That is why we are stepping up with measures that are going to deliver heat pumps to families right across the country, to 1.2 million households across this country, in every part of this country, relying on home heating oil, so we can help them fight climate change and save money at the same time. That is our plan. The Conservatives have no plan.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, our common-sense plan is found in Bill C-234 , which would give another carve-out to farmers on the carbon tax. The Prime Minister has claimed that he will not cave again. He says there will be no more carve-outs. We are asking him to keep in mind that there are two million people who have to go to the food bank every month because of his policies. Will he put his ego and pride aside and ask his Liberal senators to pass common-sense Bill C-234 to axe the tax and create a carbon tax carve-out for our farmers?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, farmers across this country know the costs of climate change. They know the costs of extreme weather events, whether it be floods, fires or more intense storms. Farmers are worried about their future, worried about their kids' future and worried about the country's future. That is why we put forward a plan that is reducing our emissions and growing our economy at the same time, while putting more money in Canadians' pockets. The Conservatives have no plan to fight climate change, no plan for the future of the economy and no plan for future generations. We will continue to do what is necessary to support Canadians, including farmers, long into the future.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister will not answer a simple question. It is about the common-sense Conservative bill to carve out farming from the carbon tax. I understand why he feels he is in a bind, because his environment minister said that as long as he is environment minister, there will be no more exceptions to carbon pricing. That implies that he would resign if there were another carve-out. Will the Prime Minister sacrifice his crazy carbon tax minister and support our common-sense bill to take the tax off—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

(1445) The Speaker :

All colleagues should know that we cannot use language that calls into question the character of individual hon. members. I hear an explanation from the Leader of the Opposition , and I will repeat that so we could clarify the record. The Leader of the Opposition said that he was referring to the policy and not the person. I thank the hon. Leader of the Opposition for making that clarification because, otherwise, that language would clearly be unparliamentary.

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I think we will all be waiting for a long list of corrections on factual errors from the Leader of the Opposition if we go down this road. The fact of the matter is that millions of Canadians who understand that climate change poses an existential threat to our country, to our well-being and to our economy need action. They expect a government with a plan. They expect the government to deliver on that plan, and that is exactly what we have been doing for eight years.

Meanwhile, the only plan the Conservatives put forward is cuts: cuts to services, cuts to programs, cuts to rebates for Canadians and, yes, cuts to the most successful measure to reduce climate change emissions that this country has ever seen. When is the Leader of the Opposition going to come forward with a real plan?

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, it is crazy to quadruple the carbon tax on our farmers when two million people are going to a food bank every month. Now the Minister of Environment has threatened to resign if there are new carbon tax carve-outs. We have a common-sense Conservative bill that would carve out the carbon tax for farmers. All it needs is for the Prime Minister to give his senators permission to pass it. Will the Prime Minister please just cave at least one more time and allow a carve-out on the carbon tax for our farmers, yes or no?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I will not use the word “crazy”, but I will say it is deeply, deeply irresponsible for the Conservative Party of Canada to continue to deny that taking action against climate change is important and to continue to deny that climate change is a real threat to Canadians and to our economy. The fact is that we have put forward measures that both fight climate change and put more money back in the pockets of eight out of 10 Canadian families. We are going to continue to fight climate change because the cost of inaction against climate change is far more than the cost of action.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, his carbon tax is not working, he has missed every single target, he is on track to miss his 2030 targets and Canada is ranked 58th out of 63 on climate action. The question is about our farmers. There is a bill, Bill C-234 , a common-sense Conservative bill to carve out farmers from the carbon tax. All it needs is for the Prime Minister to give his senators permission to adopt this carve-out. Will the Prime Minister stand up to his environment minister and stand up for farmers and let Bill C-234 pass and allow this carve-out to go ahead?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I will admit it does not happen often, but every now and then I am a little bit envious of the position that the Leader of the Opposition finds himself in of being able to criticize, on the one hand, that we are not doing enough to fight climate change and then, on the other hand, saying that we need to stop everything we are doing to fight climate change. Fortunately, Canadians are smarter than he takes them for. Canadians know that the only way to build a strong economy for the future is to fight climate change at the same time. That is exactly what we are doing.

Until the member puts forward a plan that is responsible and real on fighting climate change and growing the economy, Canadians will continue to dismiss him.

(1450) [ Translation ] Justice

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, the next few seconds will be very difficult. Here is what preacher Adil Charkaoui said:

O Allah, destroy the Zionist aggressors. O Allah, destroy the enemies of the people of Gaza. O Allah, count their number, slay them one by one and spare not one of them!

Does the Prime Minister think imam Charkaoui committed a Criminal Code offence when he uttered those comments in public?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, these words are unacceptable. They are anti-Semitic. They are an insult to life and to the hopes of millions of people around the world, including millions of people who perished in the Holocaust because of their Jewish faith. We will always stand up against anti-Semitism. We will always be there to promote peace and compassion among peoples around the world.

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, I publicly warned the Prime Minister three hours ago that I was going to ask this question so that he could have a clear and precise answer. Is it a criminal act or not? Based on my understanding, it is criminal and warrants a reaction commensurate with a criminal act. As for government tools that could be used, someone has been appointed to act as a bridge between various communities. Where is Ms. Elghawaby now? Is she needed?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, it is true that there are people all over the world who say unacceptable things, even here in Canada. What we need to do here in the House and across the country is encourage people to listen, be compassionate and return to the values we all share as Canadians. We need to be sensitive to our neighbours' plights and cries; we need to show empathy and compassion. As far as criminal charges and prosecution are concerned, that is up to the police and the Public Prosecution Service, and I am counting on them to make the right decisions.

[ English ] Carbon Pricing

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the panicking Prime Minister is not worth the cost or the division after eight years. He recently announced that he would pause his carbon tax on heat for some people in some places where he is plummeting in the polls and his caucus is revolting. He claims this is not regional, but his own rural affairs minister said that if people on the Prairies want the same pause, they should elect more Liberals. Can he confirm whether he endorses these comments or whether he condemns them?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the Conservatives think phasing out coal was divisive, because some parts of the country had already phased out coal and it only targeted the parts of the country that still relied on coal to generate electricity. We are united in our desire to fight climate change, as Canadians. We are united in our desire to support Canadians who need it, through into a better future. That is why banning and phasing out home heating oil by replacing it with heat pumps right across the country is an approach that will unite Canadians. The only division is among Conservatives, who still think climate change is fake.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, stating falsehoods about our position will not distract from the original question. Here is the question. The Minister of Rural Development said that if people in the Prairies wanted a pause on the carbon tax for home heat, they should elect more Liberals. Does the Prime Minister denounce these comments or does he agree with them?

(1455) Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, tens of thousands of people across the Prairies are getting the chance to replace their home heating oil with heat pumps because we have put forward programs to help in that transition, as we pause the price on pollution for people in the Prairies who rely on home heating oil, tens of thousands of them. We are there for people in the Prairies who want to save thousands of dollars a year, who want to get heat pumps and who want to fight climate change. Why are the Conservatives not there for those people?

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, we are there for all Canadians. This is really troubling. We thought perhaps it was a gaffe when his Liberal rural affairs minister said that the Prairies would have to elect more Liberals if they wanted a pause. If it really just is a fair policy that applies evenly across the country, then why would one have to elect more of any particular party in one's region to benefit from it? I will just give him one last chance. If he cannot answer it, we will assume that he agrees with her. Does he agree with his rural affairs minister that if the Prairies want a pause on the carbon tax pain they have to elect more Liberals, yes or no?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, no, because people in the Prairies who heat with home heating oil already are benefiting from a pause on the carbon price. That is because this pause we put in applies right across the country, so the tens of thousands of Canadians in rural Canada, in the Prairies, are going to be able to benefit from the transition to heat pumps. That is why we are going to continue to step up, including in doubling the rural top-up on the carbon price rebate. We will continue to deliver for Canadians right across the country, and we will continue to be there for all Canadians, including women and—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister only divides to distract. That is all he ever does when he gets into trouble. He divides people along every possible battle line. He did that with the carbon tax carve-out for only some in a region where his support is plummeting and his caucus is revolting. For 10 days, he refused to condemn the comments of his own Liberal minister who said this policy was applying based on how people voted, and now he signs on with the separatists to divide Canadians again. Will the Prime Minister , instead of dividing Canadians, reverse the policies that are driving them to the food bank?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, we see the Conservatives' approach to partisan politics and to personal attacks. The reality is that when we stood with the 80% to 90% of Canadians who chose to get vaccinated, they called us divisive. When we chose to stand with women across this country who want to control their own bodies, they called us divisive. When we stand with the 2SLGBTQI+ kids who are being discriminated against in schools across this country, they call us divisive. I ask Canadians: Who is dividing Canadians more than Conservatives with their attacks, with their choices, with their politics?

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker :

I thank the hon. opposition whip for helping. I would ask all members to please exercise restraint so that we can hear the next question. The hon. member for Burnaby South.

(1500) Housing

Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, people are struggling to find a home they can afford and the federal government has the power, the land and the resources to end the housing crisis. On one side, we have the corporate-controlled Conservatives who want to sell off our public land to their rich investor friends, which helps no one, but on the other side, we have Liberals who are openly admitting that their plan is to use public lands to build luxury homes. How can the Prime Minister justify using public lands to build homes that people cannot afford?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, that is simply not true. We know Canadians are worried about paying their rent, finding an apartment or buying a home. That is why we are working on housing affordability right across the country. It is why we put forward the affordable housing and groceries act, which would help build more affordable apartments by cutting the GST on construction. Housing advocates and developers have described this move as a game-changer that will get more affordable housing built. It is why it is essential that all members work with us to move these important measures forward.

Health

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, every single Canadian deserves to have health care when they need it, public, universally accessible health care, but Conservative leader Danielle Smith just got caught trying to make health care more chaotic and more bureaucratic. She is not hiring more health care workers, not treating health care workers with respect and leaving the door wide open for more privatization. Does that sound familiar? This is right out of the Conservative playbook and on the Liberals' watch. Why is the Liberal government sitting on its hands while Alberta has its health care privatized?

The Speaker :

The Chair will soon be issuing some reflections upon the issue raised by several House leaders from different parties, who questioned the relevance of questions in terms of the administration of government or questions that should be directed to committee chairs. That will be coming shortly. In the meantime, I will ask all members to make sure they ask questions that are relevant. The Right Hon. Prime Minister.

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, it is a relevant question because we have taken actions in the past to claw back transfers to provinces that have not been obeying the Canada Health Act, and we will continue to do that. Let me be clear. We will always defend Canada's access to health care and will not hesitate to use all available tools under the Canada Health Act to protect this right. We expect all provinces and territories to adhere to the act when they make decisions regarding Canadians' access to health care.

The Minister of Health will be closely reviewing the details of the Alberta premier's plan, but we remain unequivocal that when it comes to access to our health care system and access to pension supports, we will always stand with Canadians.

Climate Change

Ms. Leah Taylor Roy (Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, the planet is burning and 72% of Canadians are worried about climate change. Sadly, the Leader of the Opposition does not appear to be one of them. He stated that he will do nothing to reduce our emissions, nor work with the global community within the Paris accord to protect our future. In fact, just like Donald Trump, the Leader of the Opposition will take Canada out of the Paris accord. The federal government is committed to net zero and has invested over $120 billion in a greener future. Will the government stand for future generations, unlike the reckless Conservatives with their—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker :

Fortunately, the Speaker was able to hear the question. The right hon. Prime Minister.

(1505) Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the MP for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill for her great question on this important file. It is shameful that the Conservative leader has no plan to address the crisis facing all of humanity. His emphasis on technology to fight climate change means nothing, because he is somebody who has been opposing the development of offshore wind technology in Atlantic Canada. While our government has a serious plan that addresses affordability and the climate crisis, that leader has no plan and no vision. Perhaps he should put his glasses back on.

Public Services and Procurement

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, with or without glasses, I will not lose $54 million on an app that does not work. This is a Prime Minister whose government is now under RCMP investigation again for giving out contracts to firms that did absolutely no work. Now senior members of the bureaucracy are blowing the whistle and saying that his top officials lied about it before committee. Will the Prime Minister personally co-operate with the police in this latest criminal investigation?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I cannot help but wonder how many millions of dollars Canadians would have lost if they had followed the Leader of the Opposition 's advice and bought Bitcoin so they could opt out of inflation. When it comes to serious matters, both the RCMP and the CBSA's professional integrity division are investigating. The CBSA has also launched an internal audit to look into contracting at the agency and has increased oversight processes when it comes to contracting.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the former director of the CBSA, our principal border authority, said that he felt “incredibly threatened”, in his words, by the former president of the organization, and members of the Prime Minister 's bureaucracy lied, according to this testimony, in order to cover up this $54-million scandal. The matter is now under Auditor General and RCMP investigation. Will the Prime Minister co-operate with the police, yes or no?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, obviously the reports coming out are extremely concerning, and I know that the respective authorities will be taking this extremely seriously. We expect our professional public servants to always conduct themselves with the utmost integrity, and I am sure that will continue to happen.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, well, the entire government only takes direction from a guy who has two convictions for breaking the law. In this case, it is not just $54 million. There was $11 million given to a two-person IT firm to do absolutely nothing. The same firm has gotten $60 million from the Liberal government since 2017 alone. The entire matter is under criminal investigation, so for a third time, will the Prime Minister personally co-operate with the police, yes or no?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, members can understand that I will not take overly seriously accusations from an individual who was minister of elections when he was found to have broken elections law. When we see matters of wrongdoing, we ensure that the proper authorities are looking into them. Of course, our government will always ensure full co-operation with investigating authorities.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is a man of conviction. He has had two of them. He actually doubled the amount of money spent on outside consultants after promising to bring it down. We pressured him on this. He said, “I know what I'll do. I'll pay $670,000 to another consulting firm to find out how we can spend less money on consulting firms.” Here is some free common-sense advice. Will he take it? Why not just stop spending on juicy contracts for his friends?

(1510) Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, of course, we need to ensure that we are getting the best value for funds spent in the public service. The minister agrees and is looking into it. Let us talk about being a person of conviction. I am convinced that we need to fight climate change. I am convinced that the only thing we can do to build a strong economy for the future is protect the environment and fight climate change while putting more money in people's pockets. These are my convictions. I have continued to be consistent on them over the past 15 years that I have been in politics. We look forward to hearing what the Leader of the Opposition believes in, because right now it sure is not clear.

[ Translation ] Climate Change

Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, the Copernicus observatory is reporting that 2023 will be the warmest year on record. At the same time, the commissioner of the environment has revealed that Canada will once again miss its 2030 greenhouse gas reduction target. This tenth federal climate plan since 1990 is headed for a tenth failure. The Liberals are all talk and no action. How many forest fires, heat waves and hurricanes will it take for the government to take meaningful action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, over the past eight years, we have done more than any other government in history to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The reality is, as my hon. colleague said, that we need to do even more. The big challenge is that it is difficult to have a debate in the House on the best way to do more, because we are stuck with an opposition party that insists that climate change requires no action, no plan and no rigour in how to tackle it. Unfortunately, they still want to debate whether or not climate change even exists. On this side of the House, we know it exists and we continue to take climate action.

Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals want to combat climate change, as long as it does not cost them too many votes. They will continue to grant subsidies to oil and gas companies and weaken carbon pricing if that is what it takes to win votes. The bottom line is that the federal government has never been able to meet its reduction targets, and the current plan will do nothing to change that. Meanwhile, the commissioner of the environment has clearly stated that it will soon be too late to avoid the catastrophic effects of climate change. It is time to be brave for the future of our planet. What is the government waiting for?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party has chosen to form a government that will fight climate change and bring together Canadians who are concerned about climate change. As a government, we are taking substantive action to put a price on carbon, to invest in green technologies and to find innovative ways to combat climate change by helping Canadians pay their bills. Unfortunately, the members of the Bloc Québécois have always chosen to remain in opposition. Instead of taking action, they are here to criticize. It is time for real action. Quebeckers and Canadians are joining forces to take action, to combat climate change. That is not the Bloc's doing.

[ English ] Innovation, Science and Industry

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, a leaked secret recording of a top Liberal government official reveals that the billion-dollar green fund the Prime Minister is running is not worth the cost or the corruption. Here are some extracts from that recording: “It was free money” and “a sponsorship-level kind of giveaway”. Since the Prime Minister learned of these allegations in March, he has not fired a single, solitary person. This is a billion-dollar slush fund. Is he worried about firing the insiders because he does not want them to blow the whistle on this broader Liberal scandal?

(1515) Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, earlier this year, ISED was made aware of allegations of mismanagement at SDTC. The Auditor General has now decided to conduct an audit of SDTC. Our government has been working closely with them on this and welcomes the decision. In addition, SDTC has agreed to enable a thorough third party review of the allegations regarding HR management. We are committed to ensuring that organizations that received federal funding adhere to the highest standards of governance.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, it is a billion-dollar taxpayer-funded slush fund that top officials now say amounts to a sponsorship scandal kind of corruption. It says they were giving away free money. This is at a time when a record-smashing two million people are forced to food banks every month and nine out of 10 people cannot afford homes. How could the Prime Minister have thought it appropriate to blow $1 billion when Canadians cannot afford to eat, heat or house themselves?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, allow me to be perfectly clear. Any allegation of wrongdoing in any government department must be fully investigated. There are established processes for situations such as these, and this is precisely why the Auditor General has made the decision to conduct an audit. This is a serious situation and we are taking it with the seriousness it requires. Unfortunately, the Conservatives, as usual, are looking for a way to score cheap partisan points. We are going to continue to govern responsibly.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing cheap about losing $1 billion. That is exactly why he is not worth the cost. He sees no problem throwing away $54 million on an ArriveCAN app that did not work, that we did not need and that is now under criminal investigation. Now, six months after he learned of corruption, cronyism and mismanagement in this billion-dollar fund, he has kept his handed-picked cronies in their positions. If he really thinks it is serious that this billion-dollar fund had so much corruption, why will he not fire the people running it?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, Canada is a country of rules and laws, and that is why we need to make sure we are doing proper investigations and ensuring appropriate consequences for any people involved in wrongdoing. This is how a country of laws and rules functions. Unfortunately, Conservatives are still choosing to make cheap partisan points on very serious issues. We are going to continue to take these issues seriously.

[ Translation ] Veterans Affairs

Mr. Sean Casey (Charlottetown, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are proud of those who have worn the Canadian Forces uniform and defended our rights and freedoms. However, the important contributions of our indigenous veterans have not always been properly recognized. On this Indigenous Veterans Day, I would like to ask the Prime Minister what the government is doing to ensure that the sacrifices of these brave men and women are given the recognition they deserve.

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Charlottetown for his question and his commitment to veterans. Even when previous governments were not there for indigenous communities, the indigenous people were there to defend Canada and our freedoms. That is why it is so important to recognize their immense sacrifice. That is why we are taking measures like the creation of a team dedicated to supporting indigenous veterans. We are also committed to redoubling our efforts to commemorate their sacrifice, as we did with a delegation to the Netherlands earlier this year. Lest we forget.

[ English ] Public Safety

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, the United Kingdom's foreign office has given travel advice to its citizens that says the risk of terrorist attacks happening in Canada is “very likely”. Does the Prime Minister agree with the U.K. foreign office's assessment, and what is he doing to protect Canadians from such an attack?

(1520) Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, Canada has a robust and sophisticated process around determining levels of threats to Canadians. We elevated the level of threat back in 2014 to medium, and it is staying there right now. We are continuing to make sure that we are doing everything we possibly can to keep Canadians safe. We understand that these are trying times around the world right now, but the best thing we can do as Canadians is stay true to our values, be respectful of one another, feel each other's pain and be there to support others through these very difficult times of a rise in hatred, including Islamophobia and anti-Semitism.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, terrorists are not interested in feeling other people's pain; they are interested in causing other people pain. The U.K. Foreign Office has said that “the risk of terrorist attacks happening in Canada is very likely”, yet the Canadian government rates that risk at medium. Why is there this difference?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, obviously I cannot speak to how other countries make their determinations on travel advisories, but I can say that the work is done daily in Canada to assess the threat level to Canadians and what can be communicated to keep them safe. We elevated the threat level to medium in 2014, and it has remained at that level since. Every single day, we re-evaluate and ensure that we are doing everything we can, privately and publicly, to keep Canadians safe.

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, if they simply read the U.K. foreign department's assessment of Canada, that “the risk of terrorist attacks happening in Canada is very likely”, then there is a very serious risk. Why did Canadians have to learn from a foreign government about an increasing threat of terrorism in Canada?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, once again, I cannot speak to how the U.K. makes its determinations, but I can certainly say that, in Canada, we have top security agencies and officials who work daily to reassess the threat levels to Canadians. They are working every single day to keep Canadians safe, and they will continue to keep Canadians informed on the best ways to keep safe.

International Trade

Ms. Julie Dzerowicz (Davenport, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, the residents of my riding of Davenport are proud of Canada's unwavering support for Ukraine and our proposed modernized Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement, also known as CUFTA. It is becoming increasingly clear, though, that the Conservative caucus does not support CUFTA, criticizing it in committee. The opposition leader had no shame in filibustering CUFTA in this House. While the Conservative leader would gladly let Ukraine down, can the Prime Minister tell this House why this trade legislation is so important?

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Davenport for her advocacy on this file and her steadfast hard work. We have been solid in our support of Ukraine since day one, and we will be there to help it rebuild when it wins. We have committed over $9.5 billion in financial, military and humanitarian aid. The modernization of our trade deal with Ukraine is another important area of co-operation between our two countries and will be crucial to rebuilding Ukraine. On this side of the House, our support for Ukraine has been unwavering. Unfortunately, the leader of the Conservative Party cannot say the same.

Climate Change

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, the planet is on fire, so what is the difference between the Conservative leader 's approach and the Prime Minister 's? The Conservative leader is a climate denier, and he would pull us out of the Paris accord; the Prime Minister is simply a denier of his global obligations, which is why we are not going to meet our 2030 targets. The United Nations is pointing out that, under the Prime Minister, Canada is planning a massive increase in oil and gas production. It is no wonder we are the worst country in the G7 for tackling emissions. There has been enough of the denial of facts; where is that emissions cap?

(1525) Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. member to be a staunch advocate for the environment and a strong defender of more action against climate change. This is why I know it must have been extraordinarily difficult for him the other day to vote with the Conservatives against the most effective measure Canada has ever used to fight against climate change. On this side of the House, we will continue to step up in the fight against climate change every single day, while putting more money in the pockets of Canadians right across the country.

[ Translation ] Finance

Mr. Alain Rayes (Richmond—Arthabaska, Ind.) :

Mr. Speaker, for the past few weeks I have been asking questions about the Governor General's outrageous spending. Each time, the ministers who answer me get a little offended and they half-heartedly condemn the practice, but then nothing is done to change the culture that has taken root in this institution. Meanwhile, we keep changing governors general, but the extravagant spending on meals, alcohol, luxury hotels, travel and cleaning services continues unabashedly. Today, I put my question to the Prime Minister. Does his government intend to cut the Governor General's $33-million budget? Clearly, she does not seem to be able to manage taxpayers' money seriously and responsibly.

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, Governor General Mary Simon is a dignified and humane individual with tremendous compassion. She plays a key role in our society and our democracy. We will continue to ensure that expenses are well managed, but the reality is that she occupies an important position for the stability and future of our democracy.

[ English ]

Ms. Heather McPherson :

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I believe if you seek it you will find unanimous consent from the House for the following motion: We need a ceasefire in Gaza and we also need all hostages returned.

The Speaker :

Is there consent?

Some hon. members: No.

Situation in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank

Mr. Anthony Housefather (Mount Royal, Lib.) :

Motion Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, I think you will find unanimous consent to adopt the following motion:

That the House unequivocally rejects and condemns the heinous terrorist attacks against Israel by terrorist organization Hamas on October 7, 2023, and demands that Hamas unconditionally and immediately release all hostages, regardless of nationality, that it kidnapped during its attacks.

The Speaker :

All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay. It is agreed. The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay. (Motion agreed to)

Mr. Sameer Zuberi (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Diversity, Inclusion and Persons with Disabilities, Lib.) :

Motion Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent to adopt the following motion:

That the House immediately and unequivocally demands that unimpeded humanitarian aid be allowed into Gaza, and in particular, food, fuel and water; that every measure be taken to protect civilian life in Gaza; that all foreign nationals be allowed to immediately leave Gaza, including Canadians and their families; and that the House reiterate its firm and unwavering commitment to a two-state solution, with a viable Palestinian state, living side-by-side in peace and security with Israel.

The Speaker :

All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay. It is agreed. The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay. (Motion agreed to)

Orders of the Day Orders of the Day

(1530) [ English ] Committees of the House International Trade

The House resumed from November 1 consideration of the motion, and of the amendment.

The Deputy Speaker :

Motion for concurrence It being 3:30 p.m., pursuant to order made on Tuesday, October 31, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the amendment of the hon. member for Brantford—Brant to the motion for concurrence in the sixth report of the Standing Committee on International Trade. Call in the members.

(1540) [ Translation ]

(The House divided on the amendment, which was negatived on the following division:)

(Division No. 445)

YEAS Members Aboultaif Aitchison Albas Allison Arnold Baldinelli Barlow Barrett Barsalou-Duval Beaulieu Bergeron Berthold Bérubé Bezan Blanchet Blanchette-Joncas Block Bragdon Brassard Brock Brunelle-Duceppe Calkins Caputo Carrie Chabot Chambers Champoux Cooper Dalton Dancho Davidson DeBellefeuille Deltell Desbiens Desilets Doherty Dowdall Dreeshen Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry) Ellis Epp Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster) Falk (Provencher) Fast Ferreri Findlay Fortin Gallant Garon Gaudreau Généreux Genuis Gill Gladu Goodridge Gourde Gray Hallan Hoback Jeneroux Kelly Khanna Kitchen Kmiec Kram Kramp-Neuman Kurek Kusie Lake Lantsman Larouche Lawrence Lehoux Lemire Leslie Lewis (Essex) Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk) Lloyd Lobb Maguire Majumdar Martel Mazier McCauley (Edmonton West) McLean Melillo Michaud Moore Morantz Morrison Motz Muys Nater Normandin Patzer Paul-Hus Pauzé Perkins Perron Poilievre Rayes Redekopp Reid Rempel Garner Richards Roberts Rood Ruff Savard-Tremblay Scheer Schmale Seeback Shields Shipley Simard Sinclair-Desgagné Small Soroka Steinley Ste-Marie Stewart Strahl Stubbs Thériault Therrien Thomas Tochor Tolmie Trudel Uppal Van Popta Vecchio Vidal Vien Viersen Vignola Villemure Vis Wagantall Warkentin Waugh Webber Williams Williamson Zimmer -- 145

NAYS Members Aldag Alghabra Ali Anand Anandasangaree Angus Arya Ashton Atwin Bachrach Badawey Bains Baker Barron Battiste Beech Bendayan Bennett Bibeau Bittle Blaikie Blair Blaney Blois Boissonnault Boulerice Bradford Brière Cannings Carr Casey Chagger Chahal Champagne Chatel Chen Chiang Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek) Collins (Victoria) Cormier Coteau Dabrusin Damoff Davies Desjarlais Dhaliwal Dhillon Diab Dubourg Duclos Duguid Dzerowicz Ehsassi El-Khoury Erskine-Smith Fillmore Fisher Fonseca Fortier Fragiskatos Fraser Freeland Fry Gaheer Garrison Gazan Gerretsen Gould Green Guilbeault Hajdu Hanley Hardie Hepfner Holland Housefather Hughes Hutchings Iacono Idlout Ien Jaczek Johns Jowhari Julian Kayabaga Kelloway Khalid Khera Koutrakis Kusmierczyk Kwan Lalonde Lambropoulos Lametti Lamoureux Lapointe Lattanzio Lauzon LeBlanc Lebouthillier Lightbound Long Longfield Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga) MacAulay (Cardigan) MacDonald (Malpeque) MacGregor MacKinnon (Gatineau) Maloney Martinez Ferrada Masse Mathyssen May (Cambridge) May (Saanich—Gulf Islands) McDonald (Avalon) McGuinty McKay McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam) McLeod McPherson Mendès Mendicino Miao Miller Morrice Morrissey Naqvi Ng Noormohamed O'Connell Oliphant O'Regan Petitpas Taylor Powlowski Qualtrough Robillard Rodriguez Rogers Romanado Rota Sahota Sajjan Saks Samson Sarai Scarpaleggia Schiefke Serré Shanahan Sheehan Sidhu (Brampton East) Sidhu (Brampton South) Singh Sorbara Sousa St-Onge Sudds Tassi Taylor Roy Thompson Trudeau Turnbull Valdez Van Bynen van Koeverden Vandal Vandenbeld Weiler Wilkinson Yip Zahid Zarrillo Zuberi -- 174

PAIRED Members Drouin Godin Joly Liepert Plamondon Virani -- 6

The Deputy Speaker :

I declare the amendment lost. Amendment negatived [ English ] The next question is on the main motion. The hon. whip for the government.

[ Translation ]

Hon. Steven MacKinnon :

Mr. Speaker, I believe that if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to apply the results of the previous vote to this vote, with Liberal members voting yes.

[ English ]

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay :

Mr. Speaker, Conservatives agree to apply the vote, with Conservatives voting nay.

[ Translation ]

Mrs. Claude DeBellefeuille :

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois agrees to apply the results of the previous vote and will vote in favour of the motion.

(1545) Mr. Peter Julian :

Mr. Speaker, the NDP agrees to apply the results of the previous vote and will vote yea.

[ English ]

Ms. Elizabeth May :

Mr. Speaker, the Green Party agrees to apply the vote, and we will be voting yes.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

(Division No. 446)

YEAS Members Aldag Alghabra Ali Anand Anandasangaree Angus Arya Ashton Atwin Bachrach Badawey Bains Baker Barron Barsalou-Duval Battiste Beaulieu Beech Bendayan Bennett Bergeron Bérubé Bibeau Bittle Blaikie Blair Blanchet Blanchette-Joncas Blaney Blois Boissonnault Boulerice Bradford Brière Brunelle-Duceppe Cannings Carr Casey Chabot Chagger Chahal Champagne Champoux Chatel Chen Chiang Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek) Collins (Victoria) Cormier Coteau Dabrusin Damoff Davies DeBellefeuille Desbiens Desilets Desjarlais Dhaliwal Dhillon Diab Dubourg Duclos Duguid Dzerowicz Ehsassi El-Khoury Erskine-Smith Fillmore Fisher Fonseca Fortier Fortin Fragiskatos Fraser Freeland Fry Gaheer Garon Garrison Gaudreau Gazan Gerretsen Gill Gould Green Guilbeault Hajdu Hanley Hardie Hepfner Holland Housefather Hughes Hutchings Iacono Idlout Ien Jaczek Johns Jowhari Julian Kayabaga Kelloway Khalid Khera Koutrakis Kusmierczyk Kwan Lalonde Lambropoulos Lametti Lamoureux Lapointe Larouche Lattanzio Lauzon LeBlanc Lebouthillier Lemire Lightbound Long Longfield Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga) MacAulay (Cardigan) MacDonald (Malpeque) MacGregor MacKinnon (Gatineau) Maloney Martinez Ferrada Masse Mathyssen May (Cambridge) May (Saanich—Gulf Islands) McDonald (Avalon) McGuinty McKay McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam) McLeod McPherson Mendès Mendicino Miao Michaud Miller Morrice Morrissey Naqvi Ng Noormohamed Normandin O'Connell Oliphant O'Regan Pauzé Perron Petitpas Taylor Powlowski Qualtrough Robillard Rodriguez Rogers Romanado Rota Sahota Sajjan Saks Samson Sarai Savard-Tremblay Scarpaleggia Schiefke Serré Shanahan Sheehan Sidhu (Brampton East) Sidhu (Brampton South) Simard Sinclair-Desgagné Singh Sorbara Sousa Ste-Marie St-Onge Sudds Tassi Taylor Roy Thériault Therrien Thompson Trudeau Trudel Turnbull Valdez Van Bynen van Koeverden Vandal Vandenbeld Vignola Villemure Weiler Wilkinson Yip Zahid Zarrillo Zuberi -- 205

NAYS Members Aboultaif Aitchison Albas Allison Arnold Baldinelli Barlow Barrett Berthold Bezan Block Bragdon Brassard Brock Calkins Caputo Carrie Chambers Cooper Dalton Dancho Davidson Deltell Doherty Dowdall Dreeshen Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry) Ellis Epp Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster) Falk (Provencher) Fast Ferreri Findlay Gallant Généreux Genuis Gladu Goodridge Gourde Gray Hallan Hoback Jeneroux Kelly Khanna Kitchen Kmiec Kram Kramp-Neuman Kurek Kusie Lake Lantsman Lawrence Lehoux Leslie Lewis (Essex) Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk) Lloyd Lobb Maguire Majumdar Martel Mazier McCauley (Edmonton West) McLean Melillo Moore Morantz Morrison Motz Muys Nater Patzer Paul-Hus Perkins Poilievre Redekopp Reid Rempel Garner Richards Roberts Rood Ruff Scheer Schmale Seeback Shields Shipley Small Soroka Steinley Stewart Strahl Stubbs Thomas Tochor Tolmie Uppal Van Popta Vecchio Vidal Vien Viersen Vis Wagantall Warkentin Waugh Webber Williams Williamson Zimmer -- 113

PAIRED Members Drouin Godin Joly Liepert Plamondon Virani -- 6

The Deputy Speaker :

Motion agreed to I declare the motion carried.

Government Orders Business of Supply

[ English ] Business of Supply Opposition Motion—Reducing Home Heating Costs Motion

The House resumed from November 7 consideration of the motion.

The Deputy Speaker :

The House will now proceed to the deferred recorded division on the motion from the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley relating to the business of supply. The question is as follows. May I dispense?

Some hon. members: No. [ Chair read text of motion to House ]

(1555) (The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)

(Division No. 447)

YEAS Members Angus Ashton Bachrach Barron Blaikie Blaney Boulerice Cannings Collins (Victoria) Davies Desjarlais Erskine-Smith Garrison Gazan Green Hughes Idlout Johns Julian Kwan MacGregor Masse Mathyssen May (Saanich—Gulf Islands) McPherson Morrice Singh Vuong Weiler Zarrillo -- 30

NAYS Members Aboultaif Aitchison Albas Aldag Alghabra Ali Allison Anand Anandasangaree Arnold Arseneault Arya Atwin Badawey Bains Baker Baldinelli Barlow Barrett Barsalou-Duval Battiste Beaulieu Beech Bendayan Bennett Bergeron Berthold Bérubé Bezan Bibeau Bittle Blair Blanchet Blanchette-Joncas Block Blois Boissonnault Bradford Bragdon Brassard Brière Brock Brunelle-Duceppe Calkins Caputo Carr Carrie Casey Chabot Chagger Chahal Chambers Champagne Champoux Chatel Chen Chiang Chong Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek) Cooper Cormier Coteau Dabrusin Dalton Damoff Dancho Davidson DeBellefeuille Deltell Desbiens Desilets Dhaliwal Dhillon Diab Doherty Dong Dowdall Dreeshen Dubourg Duclos Duguid Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry) Dzerowicz Ehsassi El-Khoury Ellis Epp Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster) Falk (Provencher) Fast Ferreri Fillmore Findlay Fisher Fonseca Fortier Fortin Fragiskatos Fraser Freeland Fry Gaheer Gainey Gallant Garon Gaudreau Généreux Genuis Gerretsen Gill Gladu Goodridge Gould Gourde Gray Guilbeault Hajdu Hallan Hanley Hardie Hepfner Hoback Holland Housefather Hutchings Iacono Ien Jaczek Jeneroux Jowhari Kayabaga Kelloway Kelly Khalid Khanna Khera Kitchen Kmiec Koutrakis Kram Kramp-Neuman Kurek Kusie Kusmierczyk Lake Lalonde Lambropoulos Lametti Lamoureux Lantsman Lapointe Larouche Lattanzio Lauzon Lawrence LeBlanc Lebouthillier Lehoux Lemire Leslie Lewis (Essex) Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk) Lightbound Lloyd Lobb Long Longfield Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga) MacAulay (Cardigan) MacDonald (Malpeque) MacKinnon (Gatineau) Maguire Majumdar Maloney Martel Martinez Ferrada May (Cambridge) Mazier McCauley (Edmonton West) McDonald (Avalon) McGuinty McKay McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam) McLean McLeod Melillo Mendès Mendicino Miao Michaud Miller Moore Morantz Morrison Morrissey Motz Muys Naqvi Nater Ng Noormohamed Normandin O'Connell Oliphant O'Regan Patzer Paul-Hus Pauzé Perkins Perron Petitpas Taylor Poilievre Powlowski Qualtrough Rayes Redekopp Reid Rempel Garner Richards Roberts Robillard Rogers Romanado Rood Rota Ruff Sahota Sajjan Saks Samson Sarai Savard-Tremblay Scarpaleggia Scheer Schiefke Schmale Seeback Serré Shanahan Sheehan Shields Shipley Sidhu (Brampton East) Sidhu (Brampton South) Simard Sinclair-Desgagné Small Sorbara Soroka Sousa Steinley Ste-Marie Stewart St-Onge Strahl Stubbs Sudds Tassi Taylor Roy Thériault Therrien Thomas Thompson Tochor Tolmie Trudeau Trudel Turnbull Uppal Valdez Van Bynen van Koeverden Van Popta Vandal Vandenbeld Vecchio Vidal Vien Viersen Vignola Villemure Vis Wagantall Warkentin Waugh Webber Wilkinson Williams Williamson Yip Zahid Zimmer Zuberi -- 293

PAIRED Members Drouin Godin Joly Liepert Plamondon Virani -- 6

The Deputy Speaker :

Motion negatived I declare the motion defeated.

Private Members' Business Private Members' Business

(1600) [ English ] Radiocommunication Act

The House resumed from November 2 consideration of the motion that Bill S-242,

An Act to amend the Radiocommunication Act , be read the second time and referred to a committee. Bill S-242. Second reading

The Deputy Speaker :

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at second reading stage of Bill S-242 under Private Members' Business.

(1610) (The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)

(Division No. 448)

YEAS Members Aboultaif Aitchison Albas Allison Angus Arnold Ashton Bachrach Baldinelli Barlow Barrett Barron Berthold Bezan Blaikie Blaney Block Boulerice Bragdon Brassard Brock Calkins Cannings Caputo Carrie Chambers Chong Collins (Victoria) Cooper Dalton Dancho Davidson Davies Deltell Desjarlais Doherty Dowdall Dreeshen Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry) Ellis Epp Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster) Falk (Provencher) Fast Ferreri Findlay Gallant Garrison Gazan Généreux Genuis Gladu Goodridge Gourde Gray Green Hallan Hoback Hughes Idlout Jeneroux Johns Julian Kelly Khanna Kitchen Kmiec Kram Kramp-Neuman Kurek Kusie Kwan Lake Lantsman Lawrence Lehoux Leslie Lewis (Essex) Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk) Lloyd Lobb MacGregor Maguire Majumdar Martel Masse Mathyssen May (Saanich—Gulf Islands) Mazier McCauley (Edmonton West) McLean McPherson Melillo Moore Morantz Morrice Morrison Motz Muys Nater Patzer Paul-Hus Perkins Poilievre Rayes Redekopp Reid Rempel Garner Richards Roberts Rood Ruff Scheer Schmale Seeback Shields Shipley Singh Small Soroka Steinley Stewart Strahl Stubbs Thomas Tochor Tolmie Uppal Van Popta Vecchio Vidal Vien Viersen Vis Vuong Wagantall Warkentin Waugh Webber Williams Williamson Zarrillo Zimmer -- 143

NAYS Members Aldag Alghabra Ali Anand Anandasangaree Arseneault Arya Atwin Badawey Bains Baker Barsalou-Duval Battiste Beaulieu Beech Bendayan Bennett Bergeron Bérubé Bibeau Bittle Blair Blanchet Blanchette-Joncas Blois Boissonnault Bradford Brière Brunelle-Duceppe Carr Casey Chabot Chagger Chahal Champagne Champoux Chatel Chen Chiang Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek) Cormier Coteau Dabrusin Damoff DeBellefeuille Desbiens Desilets Dhaliwal Dhillon Diab Dong Dubourg Duclos Duguid Dzerowicz Ehsassi El-Khoury Erskine-Smith Fillmore Fisher Fonseca Fortier Fortin Fragiskatos Fraser Freeland Fry Gaheer Gainey Garon Gaudreau Gerretsen Gill Gould Guilbeault Hajdu Hanley Hardie Hepfner Holland Housefather Hutchings Iacono Ien Jaczek Jowhari Kayabaga Kelloway Khalid Khera Koutrakis Kusmierczyk Lalonde Lambropoulos Lametti Lamoureux Lapointe Larouche Lattanzio LeBlanc Lebouthillier Lemire Long Longfield Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga) MacAulay (Cardigan) MacDonald (Malpeque) MacKinnon (Gatineau) Maloney Martinez Ferrada May (Cambridge) McDonald (Avalon) McGuinty McKay McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam) McLeod Mendès Mendicino Miao Michaud Miller Morrissey Naqvi Ng Noormohamed Normandin O'Connell Oliphant O'Regan Pauzé Perron Petitpas Taylor Powlowski Qualtrough Robillard Rodriguez Rogers Romanado Rota Sahota Sajjan Saks Samson Sarai Savard-Tremblay Scarpaleggia Schiefke Serré Shanahan Sheehan Sidhu (Brampton East) Sidhu (Brampton South) Simard Sinclair-Desgagné Sorbara Sousa Ste-Marie St-Onge Sudds Tassi Thériault Therrien Thompson Trudeau Trudel Turnbull Valdez Van Bynen van Koeverden Vandal Vandenbeld Vignola Villemure Weiler Wilkinson Yip Zahid Zuberi -- 178

PAIRED Members Drouin Godin Joly Liepert Plamondon Virani -- 6

The Deputy Speaker :

Motion negatived I declare the motion defeated. [ Translation ] I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded divisions, Government Orders will be extended by 40 minutes.

[ English ]

Hon. Rechie Valdez :

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I had technical difficulties on the app, and I am requesting unanimous consent to allow me to change my vote on the opposition day motion to against.

The Deputy Speaker :

Is it agreed?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

[ Translation ] Points of Order Alleged Unparliamentary Gesture in the House—Speaker's Ruling Speaker's Ruling

The Speaker :

The Chair would like to follow up on the point of order raised by the chief opposition whip regarding an alleged offensive gesture by the member for Avalon during a recorded division held on Monday, November 6, 2023. [ English ] As mentioned when the matter was first raised, the Chair committed to reviewing the video in order to determine if an offensive gesture was made by the member during the vote. Having done so, the Chair cannot make a conclusive determination as to the nature of the gesture. For his part, the member for Avalon stated that he did not make the gesture in question.

The Chair is left with two versions of the same event, and consistent with past practice, the Chair must take members at their word. I therefore consider the matter closed. [ Translation ] The final point I would make is the responsibility for improved decorum falls to every one of us. As I said in my statement of October 18, 2023, found at pages 17592 and 17593 of Debates, and I quote:

Because of the collegial character of the House and the broad privileges enjoyed by its members, no one—not even the Speaker—can act unilaterally to improve the level of decorum in the chamber.

Despite my own strong individual determination to maintaining the dignity and decorum of the House, ultimately those efforts will come to naught without members themselves taking responsibility for their behaviour and conduct, and showing their own personal efforts in comporting their business in an appropriate and civil manner. I will therefore need your help in order to succeed.

(1615) [ English ] There was obviously disorder in the House during the vote that took place last Monday. All members must be mindful of the impact that their sometimes heated words and behaviours might have on others. I ask all colleagues to do their part to elevate the proceedings to ensure that they are more respectful and constructive. Remember that Canadians are watching us and that we are all accountable for our words and actions in this place. Rather than finding ways to skate right up to the line of what is acceptable, I would encourage all members to stay well inside the boundaries of respect and decorum. I thank all members for their attention.

Mr. Ken McDonald :

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. On Monday, after the vote on the opposition day motion, the member for South Surrey—White Rock rose and accused me of making an obscene gesture. You offered me the opportunity to defend myself, which I did. Your ruling today confirms that the accusation was false. Members of the official opposition used footage of my vote and posted it on social media, encouraging people to email and call my parliamentary and constituency offices. In the last 48 hours, I have received threats of violence.

I have had people threaten to cause violence at my constituency office, and I regret to say that I have also received death threats. This is not okay. My staff are scared and members of my family are scared, and this is all because members of the official opposition misled this House and misled Canadians because they were unhappy with the way I voted on their motion. I was elected to this place to represent the people of Avalon.

On two separate occasions, I have stood in this chamber and voted in support of Conservative opposition motions on carbon taxes because I believed it was the right thing to do for my constituents. Monday's opposition day motion did not reflect the needs of my constituents, so I voted against it. I will continue to stand up for what is best for the people in my riding. I ask that the member for South Surrey—White Rock take responsibility for her actions, apologize and recognize that this misleading accusation fuelled hate and threats of violence against my staff and me.

I thank the Speaker for allowing me to address this matter.

The Speaker :

I am not certain that this is a point of order, but I see that the member for South Surrey—White Rock is on her feet, and I would be happy to recognize her.

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay :

Mr. Speaker, if you are ruling that it is an appropriate point of order, I am prepared to respond, but I do not think it was a point of order. It was a prepared statement, written out. We all face threats being public servants and being in the public eye in this House, including me and many of my colleagues, for a variety of reasons. The ruling here was not that the member did not do what I stated I saw him do and what others stated they saw him do. The ruling was that it was inconclusive.

The Speaker :

The hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle is rising on a point of order.

Hon. Andrew Scheer :

Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the hon. whip, has raised a very important point. Your ruling is that you are not in a position to make a determination. The Canadians who saw that gesture can and clearly are, and they know what the hon. member did; they can see the obvious gesture. Mr. Speaker, you have said that you are not in a position to take one member's word over another, which is fine. It is now on social media. It lives on there. Canadians, especially the voters in Avalon , can make their own determination about whether they think it is appropriate, when people are struggling with their home heating bills, to get the finger from a member who was voting against our common-sense motion.

(1620) Oral Questions Points of Order

Hon. Andrew Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle, CPC) :

Mr. Speaker, we had a question in question period today from the hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona that had absolutely nothing to do with the administrative responsibilities of government. It was directed at the Conservative opposition, and you allowed the Prime Minister to respond. In a question currently before you, the House leader for the NDP quoted extensively from one of my previous rulings as Speaker on questions that have nothing to do with the administrative role of government. I just want to quote it, only because it has been referenced in previous points from other members intervening on this question. I said:

...as I said on December 1, 2011, (Debates, p. 3875), the Speaker is called upon to make decisions about the admissibility of questions on the fly. In that regard, since members have very little time to pose their questions and the Chair has even less time to make decisions about their admissibility, it would be helpful if the link to the administrative responsibility of the government were made as quickly as possible.

Accordingly, these kinds of questions will continue to risk being ruled out of order and members should take care to establish the link to government responsibility as quickly as possible.

I have had a chance to look at the blues and the question from the member for Edmonton Strathcona . There is nothing about the federal government's area of responsibility in it. It was an attack levelled at the leader of the Conservative Party . I wanted to cite that part about making the point as quickly as possible because what we found today is that you allowed basically a 35-second attack against the Leader of the Opposition but did not allow the Leader of the Opposition to respond. You allowed the Prime Minister to respond.

I understand why that would be the normal instinct, as it is government members who answer questions during question period. However, what I would urge you to reflect on as you come back to the House on this larger point about these questions is that if you wait until the very end of a question to make that determination and if members do not make a link to the administrative responsibility of the government early, you end up running the risk of having an unanswered attack on a member or another party.

When the government has the ability to defend itself, you, as many Speakers have in the past, have allowed the government to answer questions that may otherwise have been ruled out of order for precisely that reason: An attack has been levelled and a charge has been made. The courteous thing to do is to allow a minister who would like to respond to use the opportunity to do so. However, when that attack is made against an opposition leader, there is no opportunity for a response to be made. It puts the House in a difficult situation when we have members being accused of something.

In every other aspect of debate, including questions and comments during speeches and when we have motions for time allocation, there is an attack and a counterattack. There is a response to the questions being asked. The scenario we had today was an attack on the Leader of the Opposition , followed by an attack on the Leader of the Opposition. It was a coalition partner asking another coalition partner a question about the Leader of the Opposition. That is the unfortunate situation that arose out of question period today.

What I would urge you to do when an attack is being made against an opposition party is to quickly determine early on in the question whether there is as link to government business and then not allow the government coalition partner to respond to an attack from the junior coalition partner. That does not respect the tradition and purpose of question period.

The Speaker :

I thank the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle for his intervention on this matter. I am certainly going to review the blues and very much reflect upon what the member has raised about previous ruling that the member had the benefit of sharing with this House when he occupied the chair. I think the member has made a prima facie case as to why it is important to make sure that questions asked quickly come to a point relating to the administrative affairs of government or of a committee chair.

It will be useful in the reflection I am working on as we speak, on which I will come back to the House, on the point of order originally raised by the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby . Speaking of which, I see the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby on his feet. I am assuming it is on a point of order. I hope it is a new point of order the member is going to make, because I think we have exhausted, on all sides of this House, the issues that have been raised, which are going to be helpful to me in making my determination. The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP) :

Mr. Speaker, I will be brief, because I have raised this issue a number of times, quoting of course my friend, the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle , but also Speaker Bosley and Speaker Milliken. It is absolutely true we have seen a lot of examples from the Conservatives of questions that have had nothing to do with the administration of government. In the case of the member for Edmonton Strathcona , she established that link to government administration in the responsibility for the Canada Health Act in the very first sentence of the question.

I agree with the argument of my friend from Regina—Qu'Appelle that questions should carry on government administration. That is exactly why the member for Edmonton Strathcona established that link in the first sentence of her question.

(1625) The Speaker :

I thank all members for their interventions, and I also appreciate the interventions being brief. I would like to thank again the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle for a very substantive intervention. I hope to come back to the House soon. It might be after the constituency break, but I hope it can be sooner than that.

Routine Proceedings Routine Proceedings

[ English ] Government Response to Petitions

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(

a) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to six petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.

Committees of the House Public Accounts

Mr. Kelly McCauley (Edmonton West, CPC) :

Motion for concurrence Mr. Speaker, I move that the 26th report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, presented to the House on Tuesday, February 14, be concurred in. To start, I want to say that I will be splitting my time with my hon. colleague, the member for Battle River—Crowfoot . Before I begin, I want to mention that this week is the birthday of the member's predecessor, the wonderful Kevin Sorenson. It was his 65th birthday. Since Mr. Sorenson and I used to fly together a lot, I had the pleasure of enjoying a birthday with Kevin one night.

We were flying back to Edmonton, we landed and we went to our cars. I got into an Uber to go home and Kevin went to pick up his car from the outdoor lot. It turned out that, although it was a brand new car, it would not start. He thought, “crap, it is my birthday”, and so he went back to the airport to rent a car. He handed over his credit card and driver's licence, but it turned out his licence had expired about five minutes earlier, because we were five minutes in.

So, poor Kevin, not only on his birthday did he have to spend it with me on a plane, but his car would not start, he could not get a rental car and he had to catch a cab all the way home to Battle River—Crowfoot. I am pleased to be talking today regarding the study in question. Actually, Kevin, at the time I first started doing some work on public accounts, was the chair of the committee. However, the greening government report that we are chatting about today is actually perfect timing for a lot of reasons, and I will comment on some of the timing as I go.

One of the reasons this is great timing is because in public accounts we are actually studying the green hydro sham. I call it a sham, because there are various issues that come up about the government's actions, and I will cover them later in my talk. On the greening government report, I will give a couple of points to give some background. Treasury Board launched the greening government strategy back in 2017 with the ultimate goal to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.

I will comment from the Auditor General's report, which says that “The Government of Canada has indicated that it is committed to leading by example in both the domestic and global transition to a low‑carbon economy.” Again, I get back to the great timing, because we just heard from the environment commissioner commenting that the government has not once yet achieved a single one of its environmental goals. Yet, we have here the public accounts committee looking at a report stating that the government's goal was to be a domestic and global leader and transition to a lower-carbon economy, but failed.

It is an interesting comment from the Auditor General that said that the federal government is responsible for 3% of all GHG emissions, which is larger than any single corporation or company in Canada. One would think that this government would actually work to reduce its own GHG emissions instead of driving out of business so many companies across Canada. Instead, we see its goal is to reduce GHG by eliminating revenue-producing companies, especially in Alberta, but at the same time growing its own emissions.

From the findings of this report, the Auditor General comments that “5 years into the strategy, the [Treasury Board] secretariat’s efforts to reduce emissions were not as complete as they could have been—especially considering...[their statement that they were going to be a] global leader in transitioning”. So here we have the Auditor General pointing out that the government is all talk and no action on this issue. Further into the report there is the comment, “We found that the overall reported results from Crown corporations were neither included on the secretariat’s website nor aggregated”.

Why is this important? Again, I talked about timing and the government. Treasury Board does not cover Crown corporations. We, of course, have the green scam going on right now with the SDTC where we have a $1-billion Liberal green slush fund and where we know millions have been diverted to companies without any oversight. Here we have the Auditor General herself commenting that the Treasury Board has provided no oversight on these programs with Crown corporations.

The Auditor General continues to argue that the Treasury Board Secretariat of the government also left an important context out of its reporting, such as “an overview of...government's key sources of emissions”; “key activities undertaken by the secretariat”; “opportunities, risks, and related mitigation measures likely to affect the government’s ability to implement the strategy over the remaining 28 years”; and “information about how the strategy supported the United Nations 2030 Agenda.”

(1630) Liberals did not know what they were doing, they did not know what they were going to achieve, they did not know how they were going to achieve it and they did not know when they were going to achieve it. That pretty much sums up the government in a lot of areas, but especially on the green front. The Auditor General also concluded, “we found that the Greening Government Strategy did not contain sufficient detail about some important commitments.

Additional information would give parliamentarians and Canadians a clearer picture of what is to be accomplished, including the government’s plans [how] to transition”. It is very clear that throughout this report it says there was a lack of transparency in the government's reporting. Then the Auditor General finished up commenting on limited risk management. This is important because at this time in the ethics committee and others, we are talking about the $1-billion slush fund, with no oversight and no risk of management on the government's programs for spending.

She stated, “We also found that the secretariat did not identify how it would consult departments on their risks in order to come up with a more comprehensive, accurate list of these.... We found that only 8 of 27 departments had created emission reduction plans for...” government programs, and that was all. I want to talk about the SDTC. It is important because the Auditor General has made it clear that Treasury Board, which is responsible for oversight, has not provided oversight. It failed on the oversight of Crown corporations, which the SDTC is, and did not provide risk management or risk mitigation.

There is a comment in the SDTC mission statement that says their “investments translate to economic and environmental benefits.” We heard earlier that the environment commissioner stated the Liberals have not achieved one target in their environmental plans. I have to disagree. The Liberals have achieved one plan, and that is stuffing taxpayers' money into connected Liberals' pockets through the SDTC. We have looked up donations from the directors of the SDTC.

Tens of thousands of dollars have flown into the Liberal government's coffers and, at the same time, millions are going out the door that are unaccounted for. The SDTC also said, “We help Canadian companies develop and deploy sustainable technologies by delivering critical funding”. The SDTC mission statement further stated, “committed to full transparency”. That is very similar to the government saying “open by default”. Both are not true. We have had to fight in committee to get information.

I will read a couple of comments from the whistle-blower on the SDTC about some of the money that was wasted, “There's a lot of sloppiness and laziness. There is some outright incompetence and, you know, the situation is just kind of untenable at this point.” It seems very similar to the $54-million ArriveCAN scandal, but I think this is going to be much larger.

The whistle-blower went on to say, “The minister is going to flip out when he hears the stuff and he's going to want an extreme reaction, like shut it all down.” I will note that the minister found out in March and here we are in November before we have seen some action by the government. “It's unlikely that certain members of the board”, we will remember the board that funnelled tens of thousands of donations into the Liberal coffers, “or the entire board, and executives are going to be able to continue to serve. Like they've kind of lost the confidence.

So really, the discussion will be the mechanisms for getting them out.” It continues, “...pretty well prepared to talk him off the ledge. Like minister, '[That's a] bad idea, we've got other ideas'.” We have the Auditor General's report on the greening government strategy very clearly laying out problems. Back in 2022, a year ago, we knew there were problems with Crown corporations. In March, whistle-blowers came forward about the waste of taxpayers' money. Now it is November and we still have not seen action.

It is very clear that Canadians cannot afford the costly government after eight years and, after eight years, it is very clear the environment cannot afford the government either.

(1635) Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.) :

Mr. Speaker, I am sure the member was aware that, according to today's agenda, we were supposed to be debating Bill S-9 , which deals with the chemical weapons convention and updating that legislation. It was brought in through the Senate. My understanding was that there would be unanimous consent for getting this bill passed. I wonder if the member could explain why the Conservatives chose to play games today, games that will ultimately prevent Bill S-9 from being introduced. This means that Canadians will have to wait once again because of the filibustering methods of the Conservative Party. How does the member justify filibustering important legislation?

Mr. Kelly McCauley :

Mr. Speaker, the question I would ask of the member is how he justifies the continuing cover-up of this slush fund. At committee, we tried to get this information. The Liberal government and its Bloc allies voted against requiring documents related to the Liberals' green slush fund to be released at committee. He talks about games. I would like his party to end the game of this cover-up and release the information to Canadians, Canadians who are suffering across the country, coast to coast, with paying their bills, paying their rent and affording food. They are struggling, and the government continues to cover up. That is at least $40 million of taxpayers' money wasted.

[ Translation ]

Mr. Sébastien Lemire (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, BQ) :

Mr. Speaker, the timing of this report is rather odd. I would like to ask my Conservative colleague if that was intentional. The Conservatives have led the charge, which the Bloc Québécois and the NDP support, to get to the bottom of public funds being used or misused in a green fund that was created by the government. We are dealing with an independent group, but we see that the use of funds is not optimal. Is there an order to follow when we question the use of these funds?

The purpose of these funds is to invest more in our green economy, which is a good thing, but if, at the end of the day, the money is not going to the right place, we can ask questions about that. Is the member's goal to highlight that today?

(1640) [ English ]

Mr. Kelly McCauley :

Mr. Speaker, I agree with what my colleague is saying. The money is not being used as it was intended. Whether someone is for one type of ideology or the other, we do have very clear rules about our spending. We have clear rules about how the Treasury Board should react and what rules they should follow. It is very clear from the greening government report from the Auditor General that the government is not following the rules. In fact, only eight out of 27 of the government's departments handed over documents backing up its emission reduction claims. That is how much confidence the government has in its propaganda. It was only eight out of 27, so 75% of