House Publications
The Debates are the report—transcribed, edited, and corrected—of what is said in the House. The Journals are the official record of the decisions and other transactions of the House. The Order Paper and Notice Paper contains the listing of all items that may be brought forward on a particular sitting day, and notices for upcoming items.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
44th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION
EDITED HANSARD • No. 335
CONTENTS
Wednesday, June 19, 2024
House of Commons Debates
Volume 151
No. 335
1st SESSION
44th PARLIAMENT
OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)
Wednesday, June 19, 2024
Speaker: The Honourable Greg Fergus
The House met at 2 p.m.
Prayer
[English]
It being Wednesday, we will now have the singing of the national anthem led by the hon. member for Miramichi—Grand Lake.
[Members sang the national anthem]
Statements By Members
[Statements by Members]
[English]
Prime Minister's Award for Excellence in Early Childhood Education
Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in the House today to recognize a constituent of mine who has received the Prime Minister's Award for Teaching Excellence. Margaret Burke began her career as an early childhood educator in 1978 and has been caring for little ones in her community ever since.
Margaret trail-blazed to create accessible and accommodating learning spaces for children of all abilities. This was particularly impactful during the early years of her work, as during this period, many complex learning needs went unaddressed. In the words of her colleagues, Margaret is a true leader in her field and continues to inspire them with her passion and her commitment to the children and families in Glace Bay and beyond.
With that, on behalf of my constituents in Cape Breton—Canso, I extend my heartfelt congratulations again to Margaret Burke on this award for teaching excellence.
8 Wing CFB Trenton
Mr. Speaker, this year, we celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Canadian Air Force, a century of dedication, bravery and excellence in the skies.
At the heart of this legacy stands CFB Trenton, celebrating its 93rd anniversary. This year, its spectacular air show not only showcases our advanced aircraft and skilled pilots, but also symbolizes the spirit and the strength of our air force.
At 93 years old, 8 Wing, CFB Trenton is more than just a base. It is a cornerstone of our national defence, a strategic hub with global significance. From humanitarian missions of critical operations, its role in supporting both domestic and international efforts is unparalleled.
Our men and women in Trenton exemplify the commitment and capability to define our air force, ensuring peace and security in an ever-changing world. It is not just the members; it is also the families of the members and the military families who serve alongside them.
Here is to another century of the Royal Canadian Air Force. Let us give a hand to our men and women in the military.
Surrey—Newton Rotary Club
Mr. Speaker, the Rotary Club of Surrey—Newton, founded under the presidency of Harjinder Singh Thind, embodies the spirit of community service.
Recently, at the Taj Park Convention Centre, the club held a successful gala event, which exceeded fundraising goals and drew significant community support. Under the guidance of current co-presidents, Nimmi Daula and Dr. Sukhbir Kang; incoming president, Dr. Sarabjit Romana; and treasurer, Binny Jassal, the event’s success highlights the club’s strong leadership and civic engagement. The funds raised will support various projects and initiatives, reflecting the club’s ongoing commitment to making a positive impact in our community.
I want to thank all the members of the Rotary Club for their unwavering dedication to building a better and more inclusive community for residents of Surrey—Newton.
[Translation]
Maxime Boulay
Mr. Speaker, they were pulling lobster traps on May 27, off Forillon, in the Gaspé, when a beam sea capsized the Malbaie Star. What could have easily become the St. Lawrence's worst maritime tragedy in a very long time was avoided thanks to Maxime Boulay.
Four of the five men ended up under the boat. Only Maxime managed to hold on to the upside-down hull. Numb from the ice-cold water, he dialled 911 and also managed to call the nearest boat, belonging to Steeve Boulay. Then, one by one, he pulled his four co-workers back onto the hull and kept them out of the water with him. Twenty minutes later, Steeve Boulay's boat and his crew brought them back to shore. Still reeling from the shock, some no longer want to go back out to sea, but at least they are all alive.
The entire Bloc Québécois team would like to commend Maxime on his mental strength and courage. Without him, four Quebeckers would have left us. Well done, Maxime Boulay, and thank you.
Robert Plante
Mr. Speaker, today I would like to pay tribute to one of Laval's great community builders, Robert Plante, president of R. & R. Plante. Robert also served as a municipal councillor for the L'Orée-des-Bois sector of Fabreville in Laval for 25 years.
The family business was founded in 1957 by Robert Plante and his wife Rita Robitaille. The couple built thousands of single-family homes and rental buildings in Laval. Their company received the APCHQ Diamond Award, given to companies with over 25 years of customer service excellence.
Now, the time has come for Mr. Plante to hand over the business to the next generation after more than 68 years of loyal service, and after Ms. Robitaille sadly passed away on April 15 at the age of 90. The family will continue the company's tradition of excellence in honour of their dedicated parents.
Forestry Industry
Mr. Speaker, after nine years of interfering in Quebec's jurisdictions, the Liberals are at it again, and as usual, they are targeting forestry workers.
We learned that the Minister of Environment, who is from Plateau-Mont-Royal, does not understand what is happening in the regions and that he did not even go to Saguenay to meet people in the industry. All he cares about is imposing his radical decree, which will be disastrous for the forestry industry, a key industry in the regions. We are talking about 30,000 jobs, 30,000 paycheques. My leader has rejected this decree. Enough with the radical ideas.
What is more, the Bloc Québécois believes that the federal government should interfere in Quebec's jurisdictions when it comes to the caribou. I am not the one who said it. It was the Bloc member for Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia. That is why the Conservative Party will always protect forestry workers and their paycheques, so that they can continue to do their jobs and feed their families.
[English]
National Field of Honour
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge the Government of Canada to purchase the National Field of Honour military cemetery in Pointe-Claire, Quebec, where 22,500 Canadians and allied veterans are laid to rest. It is Canada's largest military cemetery, a national historic site, and it is under the care and responsibility of the non-profit Last Post Fund, which is quickly running out of funds.
[Translation]
Temporary funding is a short-term solution. We need a permanent solution.
[English]
This initiative is essential, because it maintains the site in perpetuity, demonstrates the commitment to veterans and families, and preserves national and international honour. We can can show support by signing petition e-4984, which has already been signed by hundreds, including former federal and provincial ministers, a former governor general and the chief of the armed forces.
[Translation]
Let us make sure that this symbol of our national pride remains a meaningful site that is respected by all Canadians.
[English]
It is the right thing to do.
Canada-Ireland Relations
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honour a distinguished diplomat, an accomplished historian, a great Irishman and, most of all, a wonderful friend to Canada.
His Excellency Dr. Eamonn McKee and his wife Mary McGillis-McKee came to Canada four years ago. For anyone else, coming during a pandemic would have caused many hardships to make a mark. For Eamonn, he dove into what he called a journey of discovery, discovering the rich, shared heritage between our two countries.
Eamonn has greatly contributed to increasing trade and business, and to strengthening our ties, as any accomplished diplomat does. We have all celebrated those ties with him, during Irish nights on the Hill and during Irish Heritage Month, and with many visits by Irish leaders. However, his historical research and exploration have unearthed the depth of the Irish contribution to Canada. In short, he has taught us about ourselves over and over again.
I thank Eamonn and Mary for their contributions in furthering this fantastic relationship, but most of all, for their friendship.
Ethics
Mr. Speaker, who is Randy?
The Minister of Employment has a 50% stake in a shady company. Someone named Randy from the company is implicated in a half-million-dollar fraud. The minister says that he is not that Randy, yet incredibly, for the past two weeks, he has been unable to identify who that other Randy is. Global News cannot find him, and the company's COO conveniently cannot recall his name. There is no trace of him. We are talking about a five-person company. If there were another Randy, it would not be so difficult to find this individual.
Everyone knows who Randy is. It is the The Minister of Employment. The minister is implicated in a half-million-dollar fraud. He broke the Conflict of Interest Act, and he needs to face the consequences.
[Translation]
Waterloo
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to represent the constituents of the riding of Waterloo here in the House of Commons.
[English]
My best days in Ottawa are when constituents visit me to advocate on behalf of organizations and issues of importance to them, as well as to discover Parliament Hill and our House of Commons.
Today, I rise to personally thank everyone who helps to make these experiences even more memorable, including the Sergeant-at-Arms, Pat McDonell, and his entire team; the Parliamentary Protective Service officers; pages; interpreters; parking, bus and food service teams; and the amazing crews at the parliamentary restaurant and cafeterias.
I also share my appreciation with Clara, Alison, Nikki, Josh, Sarafia and Catherine. On countless occasions, colleagues have taken the time to exchange a hello or to pose for a picture with my guests. To me, these remain some of the best moments on Parliament Hill, and I am grateful. On behalf of the constituents of the riding of Waterloo, I thank all who work on the Hill. Their kindness is both noticed and appreciated, and we wish everyone a safe and happy summer.
Liberal Party of Canada
Mr. Speaker, the current government is not worth the cost or the corruption.
Yesterday, the RCMP confirmed that there it has not just one but numerous ongoing investigations into the Prime Minister's arrive scam. It was also disclosed that there are more than six ongoing investigations related to the arrive scam fraud and shady government contracting. The app, which could have been built over a weekend for a mere $200,000, instead ballooned into a $60-million disaster. It was built on corrupt practices, mismanagement and a blatant disregard for taxpayer money.
The RCMP should be interviewing everyone as part of its mandate, including the Prime Minister, his ministers and all government officials involved. Canadians deserve to know how deep the Liberal rot really is. Conservatives will continue to demand transparency, expose criminality and show Canadians why it is time for common-sense Conservatives to lead this country.
Carbon Tax
Mr. Speaker, Food Banks Canada released a report saying that, under the Liberal government, Canadians are living in poverty. The rate has risen from one in 10 to now one in four, which is nearly six million more Canadians than reflected in Stats Canada's most recent poverty rate data. If one is indigenous, it is worse still, with one in three living in poverty. According to the MDI, a poverty metric that is widely used in Europe, 30% of 18- to 30-year-olds, 44.5% of single-parent households and 42% of renters cannot afford two or more household essentials.
The Liberal government's own carbon tax data shows that the scheme costs every household in Canada almost $2,000 and has deprived the country of $30.5 billion in lost economic activity. While the Liberals raise taxes, more and more Canadians are falling into poverty. The Minister of the Environment is not worth the cost. When will he resign?
[Translation]
Sylvie Lauzon
Mr. Speaker, today I pay tribute to my sister, Sylvie, who left us far too young at the age of 67. She was a caring woman who loved her family. She dedicated 37 years of her life to the Library of Parliament.
She loved her husband, Frank, deeply, she was a trusted confidante to her daughter, Giovanna, and she loved her granddaughter, Giada, unconditionally. Sylvie was my number one supporter. She was always there through good times and tougher times, also.
She was inseparable from her cousin Michel and so proud of her two brothers, one of whom was in business and the other in politics, as she used to say. To the family, she was much more than a sister. She was a loving mother and a devoted grandmother. She was everyone's heart and soul. Sylvie was a champion during election campaigns and a great leader to the volunteers.
I love you, sister. I will think of you always. Your memory and your love continue to live in each of us. We will miss your advice. Give a hug to mom, dad, and my two other sisters in heaven. We miss you terribly, but your spirit guides us every day. Rest in peace, sister.
[English]
National Indigenous History Month
Mr. Speaker, June is National Indigenous History Month, a time to celebrate the peoples whose land we call Canada. As settlers on Turtle Island, it is our job to stand up and attest to the genocide perpetrated by Canada against indigenous peoples, to acknowledge the truth and to seek reconciliation.
However, National Indigenous History Month is not just about the past; it is also about today, tomorrow and every day to come. Right now, indigenous people are sleeping on the street or in an encampment, if they are lucky and the police have not come to tear down their homes.
There will be celebrations. There will be glorious dances and the beat of the drum. There will be love and gratitude for all that the Creator has given. However, for me and for Canadians like me, there must also be a reckoning, a recognition not only of the genocide of the past but also of the racist systems and institutions that we have designed and built. They persist today to destroy indigenous peoples.
[Translation]
Quebec's National Holiday
Mr. Speaker, in a few days, Quebec will be celebrating and will be celebrated.
Quebec will be proudly celebrated in song, in dance and in words, as well as in the tributes to the great Jean-Pierre Ferland and the great Karl Tremblay, who have sadly left us.
Quebec will celebrate each and every person who has contributed over the past four centuries to the diversity of a francophone nation in America, a nation founded on the lands of the first nations who had been breathing life into the continent for millennia and would breathe life into the country that would be.
Let us celebrate our country and its caring people. Let us celebrate our generous and welcoming nation, a nation of solidarity, a nation with its heart in the right place. Let us celebrate the French language, which only brings us closer together the more it is imperilled, the language that unites our way of life.
My friends, let us celebrate our Quebec, which is certainly a country in the making, and let us cheerfully make this a truly national holiday. Happy national holiday to all Quebeckers.
[English]
Edmonton Oilers
Mr. Speaker, last week, when the Edmonton Oilers were down by three games, just one game away from elimination, many people wrote them off. However, Oilers fans across the country knew it was not over yet. There was a hard-fought win in game four, and, last night, the Oilers pulled off another victory and dragged the Panthers all the way back to Alberta.
This team is firing on all cylinders. Edmonton-born Stuart Skinner, who played with the South Side Athletic Club in my riding, has been phenomenal in net. The third line has stepped up, with Connor Brown getting a crucial short-handed goal when they needed it. Of course, the team captain, Connor McDavid, is setting all new points records.
Now the Stanley Cup final is back in Edmonton for game six. Let us bring it home.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Women's Health
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about women's health and the need for a greater understanding of how injury and disease present and are treated in the female body. I do so following my own experience after suffering a concussion. Reviews have shown that as few as 7% of the studies on brain injuries take into account gender differences and how women are impacted. I understand that women's bodies are more complex in a number of ways, but this is the anatomy of 51% of the population. Accounting for gender differences in health care is the next frontier. After gender parity, pay equity and the #MeToo movement, this is where we are going.
[Translation]
I am recovering from a concussion, which has been a difficult experience, but one from which I have learned so much.
I would like to address my constituents, my colleagues and everyone who has reached out to me to share their own stories. It is through them that I have learned to accept my own vulnerability. After all, being vulnerable is an integral part of being human. I want to thank everyone from the bottom of my heart.
Oral Questions
[Oral Questions]
[Translation]
The Economy
Mr. Speaker, what this parliamentary session has taught us is that everything is broken in Canada.
After nine years of this Prime Minister, with the help of the Bloc Québécois, the cost of housing has doubled, two million Canadians have to use food banks and a record-breaking number of Canadians, 25%, are living in poverty.
Will the Prime Minister force Canadians to endure another year and a half of this costly hell or will he call an election today so that Canadians can elect a government that will axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime?
Mr. Speaker, if the leader of the Conservative Party really cared about the affordability crisis Canadians are facing, he would be supporting our plan to provide dental care to seniors and young people under 18. He would be helping us provide school lunches to 400,000 more children per year. He would be supporting our measures to create child care spaces. He would be supporting our ambitious measures to create densification and build more housing.
However, he prefers to play political games rather than help meet Canadians' needs.
Forestry Industry
Mr. Speaker, we have nine years of experience with these policies that have caused the misery I was just talking about. Now, the Prime Minister wants to issue an order for Quebec to shut down the forestry sector.
Today we learned from Quebec's ministry of natural resources that this is going to kill between 2,400 and 30,000 jobs, but the Bloc Québécois remains silent.
Will the Prime Minister reverse this radical order so that we can save the jobs of 30,000 Quebec workers?
Mr. Speaker, unlike the leader of the Conservative Party, Quebeckers know full well that the only way to build a stronger future is to protect the economy and the environment at the same time. That is how we are going to create a more prosperous future for Quebeckers and for all Canadians. Again, we are seeing the Conservative Party's anti-environment approach.
We will continue to work with the Government of Quebec. We will continue to work on protecting forestry jobs and protecting caribou. That is what people expect from a responsible government.
[English]
The Economy
Mr. Speaker, what this session of Parliament taught us is that, after nine years under the Prime Minister, everything is broken. There are 25% of Canadians now living in poverty, with two million lined up at food banks; 38% more people are homeless, and housing costs have doubled. It was not like this before, and it will not be like this after the Prime Minister is gone.
Will he put us through another year and a half of this costly hell, or will he call a carbon tax election today so that we can elect a common-sense government to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime?
Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the Opposition actually cared more about Canadians than he does about his own political interests, he would be supporting the 400,000 kids we are going to help with the national school food program. Instead of opposing it at every turn, he would be voting in favour of the dental care program that has already helped over 200,000 seniors and will, as of next week, start helping young people and Canadians with disabilities. He would be standing with us on expanding child care spaces instead of campaigning against it.
However, he does not care about Canadians. He cares only about himself.
Mr. Speaker, these are the same promises that he has been making for nine years. Instead of the theoretical utopia that he has promised, what Canadians are living through is hell. There are tent cities popping up across the country in places they never existed before. There are two million people lined up at food banks, with one in 10 Torontonians included in that number. Toronto is a town where, right now, it is impossible for almost anyone to afford a home, and there are 256 tent cities.
Why will he not recognize that these are the very real consequences of his policy of wackonomics?
Mr. Speaker, our plan is to invest in the most ambitious housing plan this country has ever seen and to invest in supports for seniors, supports for young people and supports for Canadians with disabilities. The Conservative leader is choosing to demonstrate what everyone knows Conservative parties do, which is protect the wealthiest and let everyone else fend for themselves. While we are asking the wealthiest Canadians to pay a little more by raising the capital gains inclusion rate for anyone making over $250,000 in a given year on selling properties, he is standing with the wealthiest, not with the middle class and people working hard to join it.
Mr. Speaker, the middle class does not exist after nine years of the Prime Minister. Here are the facts: Of young people, 76% believe they will never afford a home. There are 38% more homeless people, and, in Toronto alone, 256 homeless encampments. Two million people lined up at a food bank, and one in four Canadians is skipping meals because they cannot afford the price of food.
Is this what he meant when he said sunny ways for the middle class?
Mr. Speaker, we have seen throughout this session, and indeed throughout his career, which covers more than 19 years as a parliamentarian, that the leader of the Conservative Party is very quick to use sound bites that use Canadians, that exacerbate, exaggerate and indeed amplify the real concerns people are facing, but he is nowhere on solutions for them. He is standing against dental care, against pharmacare, against investments in the middle class and people working hard to join it, and against investments to create jobs and a future for Canadians because all he cares about is himself and his future.
[Translation]
Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, according to Canada Post, employees do not need to speak French to deliver or sort mail in Quebec. The reason given is that letter carriers do not talk to anyone, not even the dogs chasing them, not at the post office, not on the street, not at people's homes, never.
Will the Prime Minister call Canada Post to order and demand that its employees in Quebec speak French?
Mr. Speaker, our government has always been there to defend official languages in Canada. We were the first federal government to recognize that we have a special responsibility to protect French, including in Quebec. That is why we will continue to ensure that the Official Languages Act is respected across the country, including in federal institutions like Canada Post. We will follow up on this issue, because it is important that we continue to defend our two official languages across Canada.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to French, the Liberal government is a false advertiser. In public, with their grand gestures and ridiculous rhetoric, more reminiscent of Molière than Shakespeare, the Liberals love the French language, save for a few outliers in Montreal. The truth is that the government is looking on as French declines everywhere, all the time, yet it invests in protecting English.
Does the Prime Minister recognize that his policies are causing French to decline?
Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Bloc Québécois is constantly trying to pick fights over identity issues. The truth is that no previous federal government has done more than we have to protect and support official languages across the country, including to protect French in Quebec. We will always be there to defend official languages, and we will always be there to defend linguistic minorities. I know that the Bloc Québécois cares nothing about francophone communities in Canada outside Quebec, but we will be there for the official languages across the country.
[English]
The Economy
Mr. Speaker, in this last week of Parliament, the Prime Minister showed us whose side he is really on. At a time when one in four Canadians is living in poverty, the out of touch Liberals voted against stronger penalties for corporations that are ripping off Canadians and against banning mergers that hurt people.
Why is the Prime Minister letting corporations rip off Canadians when one out of four is living in poverty?
Mr. Speaker, as a government, we have been focused from day one on helping young Canadians succeed. That is why, on day one, we raised taxes on the wealthiest 1% and lowered them for the middle class, which, at the time, the NDP voted against. We have continued to step up on asking the wealthiest to pay a little more in this most recent budget by raising the capital gains inclusion tax so that people making $250,000 or more on capital gains share a little more of those profits with Canadians who actually need it.
Unfortunately, once again, the Conservatives have aligned themselves with the wealthiest in this country and are not there for people who need it.
Mr. Speaker, once again, the Prime Minister is letting big corporations continue to rip off Canadians.
[Translation]
In our country, 25% of the population is living in poverty. The Prime Minister cannot even support the words “lowering prices for Canadians” in my bill.
I know the Prime Minister has not experienced the kind of challenges people are living through today, but how can he be so out of touch?
Mr. Speaker, we recognize that Canadians are struggling with affordability challenges. That is why we are setting up programs and making investments that are helping people. I am talking about $10 day care, pharmacare for insulin and reproductive health, a code of conduct for major grocery chains to better protect consumers and a national school food program to ensure that 400,000 children will have access to meals.
We will continue to be there to help Canadians and to make sure that those who are better off pay their fair share.
[English]
Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, a vote in Parliament in favour of banning the IRGC was not enough to convince the Prime Minister to list it as a terrorist organization six years ago. The organization killing 55 Canadians in an unprovoked attack on a passenger aircraft was not enough to make him do it. Even its role in the October 7 attack and its subsequent role in inciting hatred on our streets was not enough. It took a by-election for the Prime Minister to change his mind.
Why is the Prime Minister always putting his political security above national security?
Mr. Speaker, today we have listed the IRGC as a terrorist entity. This sends a strong message that Canada will use all tools of our disposal to hold the Iranian regime to account. There can be no impunity for Iran's disregard for human rights and its support of terrorism. This is yet another of the extremely strong measures we have taken against the Iranian regime, some of the strongest measures in the world.
Carbon Pricing
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister was also forced to release data from his own government showing that there would be a $30-billion-a-year hit to our economy as a result of his job-killing carbon tax, data that he had, up until then, been hiding. He has been going around claiming that Canadians are better off because they pay this tax.
Did the calculations that went into his “eight out of 10 Canadians” talking points include this $30-billion-a-year cost to the Canadian economy and to Canadian families?
Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer has confirmed that eight out of 10 Canadians in jurisdictions that have the federal carbon price get more money back from the Canada carbon rebate than they pay with this price on pollution. That is fact. The Conservative leader has been using erroneous figures, which the Parliamentary Budget Officer has said he made a mistake on, to continue to attack our plan on fighting climate change and putting more money back in people's pockets. Eight out of 10 Canadians are better off.
Mr. Speaker, does that include the $30-billion-a-year economic cost when distributed among those eight out of 10 families?
Mr. Speaker, once again, the Conservatives are basing their attacks on climate action and affordability on erroneous calculations that the Parliamentary Budget Officer has admitted that he made. The fact that the Parliamentary Budget Officer also calculated, without making any mistakes, that eight out of 10 Canadians are better off with the Canada carbon rebate and the price on pollution means that we are not only fighting climate change and bringing down emissions, but also putting more money back in the pockets of Canadians who need support right now, money that the Conservative Party wants to take away.
Mr. Speaker, I am not using Parliamentary Budget Officer numbers. I am using numbers that the Liberal government has now published. The government has admitted that its carbon tax will hit Canadians with $30 billion in annual losses to wages and higher prices. That is the government's data. It published those numbers.
Once again, I have a very specific question: When the Prime Minister claims that eight out of 10 families are better off, does that include the $30 billion in costs that he now admits the government will impose on the economy?
Mr. Speaker, I do not know how much clearer I can be, but I will try.
Based on everything the government knows, all the studies we have made and all the studies the Parliamentary Budget Officer has made, we can affirm very clearly, and it is backed up by independent economists, that eight out of 10 families in jurisdictions across the country where the federal price on pollution applies do better off with more money in their pockets than the price on pollution costs them with the Canada carbon rebate.
Liberals are fighting to put more money in the pockets of Canadians, and the Conservatives are wrong on this.
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister cannot say yes because he knows that, when we take the $30 billion a year and divide it by the 17 million Canadian families, we come up with almost $2,000 per Canadian family based on numbers published by his own government. It is like he is saying someone can afford a house as long as they do not take into consideration the down payment and the monthly mortgage payments. If we take out $30 billion of costs, we do not have a real calculation.
Why does the Prime Minister not put the $30 billion back into the calculator and show Canadians whether they are really better off?
Mr. Speaker, it is quite stunning to hear the leader lay it out so clearly that all of his math depends on one factor that he believes, which is climate change is not real. That is according to the Leader of the Opposition. That is the only way to make sure his math works. He says there are no costs to Canadians from extreme weather events and there are no costs to Canadians about degrading competition when the world is switching toward greener solutions. If people do not believe in climate change, then his math works. However, if we know that climate change is a real threat to Canadians and the economy, then we need to act, and that is what we are doing.
Mr. Speaker, all we have to accept is the fact that the Prime Minister's carbon tax will not reduce, by one penny, the cost of climate change to Canadians. It will not eliminate one flood, one drought, one storm or one anything. The carbon tax literally does nothing to change the weather or the climate. What it does is make Canadians poorer.
Will the Prime Minister finally admit that all along he has been misleading Canadians, and that he knew he had the data that Canadians pay more, get less and get screwed over by the carbon tax?
I encourage all members to try to find ways to use polite words in the House of Commons.
The right hon. Prime Minister.
Mr. Speaker, the only way the Conservative leader's math makes sense is that he believes that climate change has no cost for Canadians. Canadians right across the country are seeing the impacts of climate events. There is a need to innovate and create greener, cleaner jobs for the future as we deliver our resources to the world.
The fact that the Conservative leader does not believe in climate change means that he does not believe that the climate action that puts more money in people's pockets is worth it. That is exactly where we disagree, and we are going to continue to help Canadians get through this.
[Translation]
Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, because American companies misunderstand Bill 96 on French in Quebec, they are pressuring Joe Biden's government to impose U.S. sanctions to counter Quebec's language law.
Will the Prime Minister shoulder his responsibilities when it comes to the United States? Will the Prime Minister protect a law that was legitimately passed in Quebec, or will he let our largest trading partner dictate our own language laws?
Mr. Speaker, I know that, for many years, the Government of Quebec has had very good representatives in Washington and elsewhere in the world to talk about issues relating to its provincial laws.
At the same time, as a bilingual country that protects French and English within its borders, we will continue to be there during negotiations—as we were during the renegotiation of NAFTA several years ago with the American government—to protect Canada's culture and linguistic reality as well as the distinct character of our citizens from coast to coast to coast.
Mr. Speaker, he is allergic to the simple word “yes”.
We can see it: The inability to ensure that the number of immigrants Quebec so generously welcomes learn French, the decline of French in the Canadian public service, the unilingual English federally regulated employees in Quebec, the protection given a member who insults researchers duly invited to Parliament, all the money for protecting so-called minority languages in Canada sent to anglophones in Quebec, and the funds spent on fighting Bill 96 all the way to the Supreme Court.
Does the Prime Minister realize that francophones in Quebec and Canada—and we might be their only friends—are wondering if French even has a future here?
Mr. Speaker, I understand that the leader of the Bloc Québécois is always looking to pick a fight. I would remind him that there are more Quebeckers in our Liberal caucus than in his Bloc Québécois caucus and that we will always stand up for French both in Quebec and across the country.
We will be there to invest hundreds of millions of dollars for Quebec, for ensuring that newcomers learn French. We will continue to defend French from coast to coast to coast, with a special focus on Quebec, because we know that Quebec must remain French, first and foremost, and we are there to support it.
Taxation
Last week, the Bloc Québécois voted in favour of a tax hike for Quebec farmers during a food-pricing crisis, a tax hike for home builders during a housing crisis, a tax on doctors during a doctor shortage and a tax on small businesses in Quebec during an economic crisis.
Why is the Liberal Bloc always trying to take Quebec's money to feed the massive, centralist Liberal government?
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I followed what the leader of the Conservative Party was saying, but I can say that, although the Bloc Québécois is a party that sometimes picks fights with the federal government, it still recognizes the Conservatives' propensity for defending the wealthy and doing less for those who need it most. That is not the right way to go for anyone in this country, no matter what our political affiliation may be.
The fact that the Conservatives continue to oppose an initiative that will ask the wealthiest members of our society to contribute a little more to help our young people and seniors is really disappointing, and I am pleased that the Bloc Québécois is adopting the same position we are.
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois always aligns itself with the Liberals to keep them in power. It is the Liberal Bloc.
Today the Angus Reid Institute reported that one in five Canadians earning between $50,000 and $100,000 a year believe they will be impacted by the Liberal Bloc tax hike.
If the Prime Minister wants to deny that, there is a very clear way for him to do it. He can support an amendment to exclude from the tax hike anyone who holds less than 1% of Canada's wealth. Will he do that, yes or no?
Mr. Speaker, everyone in the House knows full well that there are issues on which the Bloc leader and I disagree. We have talked about them often enough. However, from time to time, we come together to pick a fight with the Conservatives, who want to continue to defend those who are better off and protect the wealthiest in this country. We also go after them for not investing in housing, for not investing in assistance for seniors and for not investing in more child care spaces.
We know we need to be there for the middle class and those who are working hard to join it, while the Conservatives want to protect their rich friends instead. That is not how we are going to create a stronger economy for everyone.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, people who make between $50,000 and $100,000 a year are too rich for the Prime Minister? I guess he wants to make them poor. He is succeeding at that. One in five Canadians told Angus Reid that they will be affected, including one in five people making between $50,000 and $100,000 a year. It is another tax targeting the middle class by the promise-breaking Prime Minister.
If those Canadians are wrong and they will not be affected, will the Prime Minister announce that he will amend his tax increase law to exclude anybody making less than $100,000 a year?
Mr. Speaker, our increase of the capital gains inclusion rate will affect people who make more than $250,000 in profits when they sell successful investments within a given year. We feel that those people can make a slightly smaller amount of profit so that we can make sure we are investing in young people who can afford housing, so that we can help seniors with the cost of dental care, and so that can we can deliver free insulin and free prescription contraceptives across this country.
We are asking the wealthiest and the most successful to pay a little bit more so we can help those who need it, and the Conservatives are choosing to stand with the wealthiest.
Mr. Speaker, “socialist bafflegab” are not my words but the words of Scott Brison, the former Liberal president of the Treasury Board, the very person to whom the Prime Minister entrusted all of his spending. Add to that Bill Morneau and John Manley, two former finance ministers who have now said they are against the tax increase, and David Dodge, a Liberal former governor of the Bank of Canada.
Now that all of these Liberals say the Prime Minister is up to socialist bafflegab, will he reverse the job-killing tax on Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, it should actually be no surprise to Canadians to see the Conservatives, after pretending to care about workers and after pretending to care about vulnerable people revert to type, stand against an ask for the wealthiest to pay a little bit more in taxes so we can invest even more in Canadians who need it, whether it is through a national school food program, whether it is expanding places in child care or whether it is delivering dental care for seniors and Canadians with disabilities. These are all things the Conservatives stand against, just like they stand against asking the wealthiest to pay their fair share. That is a shame.
Housing
Mr. Speaker, the housing crisis is hurting seniors in Port Moody. The Liberals have promised to build more affordable housing, yet they continue to sit on their hands and drag their feet. The closed Canada Post office at 45 Mary Street is a good location for quality affordable homes for seniors. New affordable homes at this location have the support of the city and the community, but the Liberals have yet to put a shovel in the ground.
Why will the Prime Minister not step up and build the affordable homes seniors need in Port Moody?
Mr. Speaker, we are pleased that we have been able to contribute to a massive number of seniors' homes across the country over the past years, but we also know we get to do even more with the most ambitious plan on housing this country has ever seen. From increased density to more affordable homes and to using public lands and federally held lands like post office buildings and Department of National Defence properties to build more homes that are affordable for Canadians, this is our plan to ensure that we are delivering for seniors and for future generations.
While the Conservatives want to sell off public lands to the highest bidders, we are going to make sure long-term leases give affordable homes for seniors and all Canadians.
Fisheries and Oceans
Mr. Speaker, finally, after years of dragging their heels, word is out that the Liberals are moving open-net fish farms out of B.C. coastal waters. Most first nations and British Columbians want to see these polluting farms out of our waters, but where is the plan? The Liberals have spent years delaying on a real job strategy for all those people impacted. Coastal communities cannot be left behind.
Will the Prime Minister's decision include the delivery of necessary funds to support impacted first nations and coastal communities?
Mr. Speaker, protecting our environment is one of the top priorities of the current government and has been since we took office in 2015, as has reconciliation. As we move forward on the right kinds of things to protect our environment, including protecting wild salmon, we are also going to be there to make sure that we are supporting indigenous communities with economic opportunities and growth to continue to be able to provide for their communities, to continue to be able to thrive in Canada's economy of the future.
Indigenous Affairs
Mr. Speaker, as we approach National Indigenous Peoples Day on June 21, indigenous and non-indigenous people from across Canada will engage in meaningful celebrations. At the same time, we will undertake important reflections on our past and on the path that we are on to secure a better future. Manitoba is home to Canada's largest indigenous population. Alongside our provincial colleagues, we have been working hard to build bridges through new investments and partnerships, including with Canada's first-ever first nations premier.
Can the Prime Minister offer the House his reflections on the important progress that we have made together on our collective journey towards truth and reconciliation?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Winnipeg South Centre for his commitment to reconciliation.
We will always be there for indigenous people, and we will keep working with them in full partnership. As a government, we created the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. We appointed the first-ever indigenous Governor General and indigenous Supreme Court Justice, and we created the indigenous languages commissioner. We also recently passed legislation, Bill C-29, to keep future governments accountable on the path of reconciliation to work with indigenous peoples.
We are all excited to celebrate National Indigenous Peoples Day with indigenous communities later this week.
Taxation
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Premier of Newfoundland says the Prime Minister's carbon tax will harm working-class people just trying to heat their home or drive to work. The former Liberal finance minister, whom he appointed, says that the latest job-killing tax that he has brought in will drive investment out of the country, and the Liberal Treasury Board president, whom he appointed, accuses the Prime Minister of socialist bafflegab.
With Liberals accusing the Prime Minister of socialist bafflegab, will he just admit that he is actually not even a Liberal? He is Canada's first NDP Prime Minister.
Mr. Speaker, we have demonstrated over the past nine years that investing in the middle class and people working hard to join it can create growth for the country. That is why we are continuing to step up to put back growth for work by putting more money in the pockets of Canadians, whether it is through a plan to fight climate change that puts more money in the pockets of eight out of 10 Canadian families across the country, or whether it is by moving forward on asking the wealthiest who are selling off profitable investments to share a little more of those profits with Canadians who need it, by countering the housing crisis by investing in young people.
Once again, Conservatives stand with the wealthiest. We stand with the middle class.
Housing
Mr. Speaker, he is countering the housing crisis? He doubled housing costs. He is helping young people? Seventy-six per cent of them who say they cannot afford a home after nine years of the Prime Minister, but it is getting worse. The Prime Minister gave half a billion dollars to the Liberal-NDP mayor and council at Toronto City Hall, supposedly to accelerate homebuilding. What is the consequence? Since that money was handed over, Toronto City Hall has increased wait times and costs for building permits by 50%.
Why does the Prime Minister keep forcing taxpayers to bloat the gatekeeping bureaucracies instead of doing what we want: build the homes?
Mr. Speaker, the challenging fact that the Leader of the Opposition is trying to avoid is that just last week it was demonstrated that housing starts are up across this country. That is part of where we have been investing with communities across the country in the housing accelerator fund that is delivering more homes built faster. Indeed, we are going to see close to four million new homes in the coming decade because Canadians know that more density, better use of public lands, better protection for renters and better math for home builders to be able to build more affordable homes are the things that are going to make a difference in Canadians' lives.
Mr. Speaker, well, I think we can all agree that the Prime Minister needs better math.
However, here is the math. The Altus Group says that Canada's development charges are significantly higher and our wait times for getting building permits are the second-slowest in the entire OECD. What is the Prime Minister doing? He is giving half a billion dollars to the City of Toronto, which has just increased its development charges and its permit wait times by 50%.
Once again, why does the Prime Minister keep funding the gatekeepers instead of removing them so we can build the homes?
Mr. Speaker, here is a concrete example of how one makes the math work to build more homes.
Last year, we made a decision to take off the GST on purpose-built, middle-income apartment buildings, the kind of apartment buildings we need more of right across the country. Within a few days after having announced that we would no longer be charging the GST on new apartment buildings, thousands of new units were being announced by developers across the country, because, suddenly, they were able to bring projects onto the table that had not been on it before. That is how to invest in housing. That is how we deliver for Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, permits take three times longer to get in Canada than in the U.S. and in the U.K. In the last two years, in Toronto, the wait time has gone from 21 months to 32 months, all while the Prime Minister has given that bureaucracy $500 million to subsidize its building-blocking bureaucracy.
Why will he not follow my common-sense plan to require municipalities to permit 15% more housing completions as a condition of getting their federal funds?
Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear. The Conservative leader has no plan to address the housing crisis. When he was housing minister under the Harper government, he had no plan to address the housing crisis. That government decided to get out of any federal engagement in housing, and we are seeing those consequences even 10 years later.
The reality is that his plan to reimpose GST on apartment building construction would slow down apartment building construction. His plan to withdraw funds that are needed for densification of permitting would slow down housing construction. That is not what Canadians need.
[Translation]
Forestry Industry
Mr. Speaker, with some help from the Conservatives, the woodland caribou is at risk of extinction. That must not happen. However, thousands of forestry jobs are also at risk of extinction, with some help from the Liberals. Our forests are one of Quebec's most ecological and important assets.
I cannot accept either prospect. Does the Prime Minister agree that the woodland caribou issue is a test of our ability to reconcile the creation of wealth with the environment? Does he agree to let Quebec, the forestry industry and indigenous peoples negotiate a solution together?
Mr. Speaker, over the past 10 years, from the time before we took office, the Government of Canada has been working hard to help the Government of Quebec come up with a plan to protect the caribou and achieve our common objectives of protecting the environment and jobs.
The federal government remains ready to work with and assist the Quebec government while it implements measures to ensure the species' recovery as part of a comprehensive strategy.
We remain ready to support local communities, jobs and, of course, Quebec's dynamic economy.
Mr. Speaker, if the government imposes decrees, that will lead to economic disaster for the forest industry. If Quebec does not reach an agreement with the industry, environmentalists, indigenous peoples, unions and municipalities, the woodland caribou will disappear.
The Conservatives claim to be fixing this, but in a year and a half, businesses will already be closed, the species will be more at risk and jobs will be lost.
I do not know what the Prime Minister will say, but I will say this. The Bloc Québécois and I will commit to finding negotiated and agreed-upon solutions to support the Quebec government, which has exclusive jurisdiction over forestry.
Mr. Speaker, we agree that we need to work hand in hand with Quebec. That is exactly what we have been doing for years. Various federal governments over the past 10 years have been committed to protecting the woodland caribou, while also protecting communities and jobs.
We are here to work in partnership with Quebec, but after so many years, we had to demonstrate that we are a state governed by the rule of law and that we respect our own laws on the protection of species at risk. That is what all Quebeckers and all Canadians expect.
Mr. Speaker, it is rather ironic to see the Bloc Québécois looking for the federal government to play a role in an area of provincial jurisdiction. The Bloc MP from Matane said that the federal government has the right to get involved and to sacrifice forestry jobs. What is more, if the Bloc Québécois had not voted confidence in the government and kept this Prime Minister in power, this decree would not have existed in the first place.
The Conservatives are going to reverse this decree to protect the jobs and to allow the government to protect nature and the industry. That is common sense to us.
Mr. Speaker, day after day, the Conservative Party is showing us that it does not understand that the only way to build a healthy economy for Canadians for years to come is also to protect the environment. It refuses to accept any responsibility for protecting the environment.
The other parties in the House and the vast majority of Canadians understand very well that we have to work to protect the environment and work to protect the economy. It is just the Conservatives who made the choice to abandon the environment and Canadians' future.
Mr. Speaker, the Quebec nation is capable of protecting nature and jobs without interference from this incompetent Liberal Bloc government here in Ottawa. We believe that we can do both, but it is up to the Government of Quebec to decide how to protect nature. There are now 30,000 jobs at stake.
Will the Prime Minister rescind his Liberal minister's radical decree?
Mr. Speaker, this so-called radical decree is based on a bill proposed by the prime minister that all experts say did the most to protect the environment in Canada. I am talking about former prime minister Brian Mulroney, a Progressive Conservative. It is unfortunate to see the Conservative Party abandoning something that the Progressive Conservatives understood very well. They understood that we can only build a strong economy by protecting the environment. Brian Mulroney demonstrated that time and time again over the course of his career. Now, the Conservatives have forgotten all that and are attacking the planet and our future.
Public Services and Procurement
Mr. Speaker, Brian Mulroney knew that protecting the environment had nothing to do with raising taxes and eliminating jobs.
[English]
Moving on to the Liberal scandals, the RCMP commissioner just confirmed that there are now six active criminal investigations into contracts awarded by the NDP-Liberal government. That is on top of the $60-million arrive scam app, which saw $20 million go to two contractors who work out of their basement and do not even do IT work.
Will the Prime Minister promise to personally co-operate with this criminal investigation so that Canadians can know where their money went?
Mr. Speaker, the situation is obviously unacceptable, which is why authorities are looking into the procurement process. Anyone who took advantage of our COVID responses to save Canadian lives should face consequences. All federal contracts with these companies have been suspended as the investigations continue.
[Translation]
The Economy
Mr. Speaker, the pandemic and the war in Europe have caused a global inflationary crisis. Our government has endeavoured to curb inflation, and our plan is working. Canada was the first G7 nation to lower its interest rates. The only thing that the Conservatives know how to do is make cuts.
Can the Prime Minister tell us our plan for making life more affordable for Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Ottawa—Vanier for her question and for her hard work.
Too many Canadians are struggling with the cost of living. That is why Canadians need a government that has their backs. That is why we are investing in programs like dental care, pharmacare, child care, and the Canada child benefit, which is going out to millions of families tomorrow.
Every step of the way, the Conservatives have tried to stop us from supporting Canadians. Despite their empty slogans, they do not care about Canadians, just themselves.
[English]
Government Priorities
Mr. Speaker, speaking of taking care of their friends, the Prime Minister has literally doubled the amount spent on outside consultants, all the way up to $21 billion a year. That works out to $1,400 per family in taxes, just to fund federal government consultants. One of them is $200 million to the Prime Minister's famous consulting firm, McKinsey. It is no wonder that Canadians are forced to pay higher taxes. Will the Prime Minister finally put an end to this costly, self-licking ice cream cone and stop sending the bill to Canadians?
Mr. Speaker, the only Canadians we are asking to pay a little more are those who have been very successful in these past years and are able to make more than $250,000 in profit from selling off investments. These are things that we think we can be asking of Canadians who have been successful, to support Canadians who need a little more help, whether it is with the most ambitious housing plan this country has ever seen; whether it is dental care that has already delivered supports, in just eight weeks, to 200,000 seniors; or whether it is more spaces in child care. However, the Conservatives continue to protect the wealthiest instead of supporting Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, that is a bit rich, coming from him as he raises taxes on single moms for the crime of driving to the grocery store, while he treats himself to a jet-setting experience where the food on the plane of a six-day trip was $220,000: beef brisket, parsley potatoes with truffle oil, beef tenderloin with port wine sauce, braised lamb shanks and even cheesecake with pistachio brittle. With Canadians lined up at the food bank, what is on the menu for the Prime Minister this summer?
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative leader continues to use cheap attacks and slogans while he tries to hide from the fact that he is standing with the wealthiest Canadians and against the idea of their paying a little more so that young Canadians can buy a home, so that seniors can get their teeth fixed, so that young families can find a place in child care. These are the investments we are making that the Conservatives are standing against. We will continue to deliver for Canadians who need them, while the Conservative leader chooses to protect the interests of his wealthy friends.
Mr. Speaker, there is nothing cheap about the $220,000 that the Prime Minister spent on one trip, for food alone.
I will let the hon. Leader of the Opposition ask his question. I am going to ask all members to please keep their voices down.
The hon. Leader of the Opposition, from the top.
Mr. Speaker, there is nothing cheap about the Prime Minister's spending $220,000 for food alone on a six-day jet-setting tour for himself. All the while, homelessness is up 38%. Toronto has 256 homeless encampments, where one in 10 people in that city are now eating at food banks. They join two million Canadians. The good news is that life was not like this before this Prime Minister, and it will not be like this after he is gone. Can we not have a carbon tax election now to choose a government that would axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime?
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives over this past session have stood in this House to stand against dental care for seniors. They have stood in this House to stand against expanding child care investments in spaces. They have stood in this House to stand against the kinds of investments that are helping Canadians with diabetes and helping Canadians afford birth control. These are the choices that they are making. They are filled with slogans and bumper stickers that do not solve problems, but amplify anger, while we are focused on supporting Canadians.
Canadians can make their choice about the kind of country they want to live in.
Housing
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are looking for strong action from their government on making housing more affordable. The results of decades of Conservative government inaction are in, and it is no wonder. When the Leader of the Opposition was housing minister, he only got six units built. Since 2015, we have been committed to getting the government back into housing.
Can the Prime Minister—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
I truly cannot hear the hon. member ask this question.
I am going to ask all members to please not take the floor while an hon. member is asking a question or answering a question. I ask members to please keep it together for a couple more minutes.
The hon. member for Vaughan—Woodbridge has the floor, from the top.
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are looking for strong action from their government on making housing more affordable. The results of decades of Conservative government inaction are in, and it is no wonder. When the Leader of the Opposition was housing minister, he was a disaster, and he only got six units built. Since 2015, we have been committed to getting the government back into housing.
Can the Prime Minister provide an update on how the government is making life more affordable through housing investments?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge for his extraordinary hard work.
For decades, governments have ignored the important role the federal government has to play in housing. That is why we brought the federal government back into the business of homebuilding, working through an ambitious plan to build four million more homes, and as we just saw this week, Canada's housing starts are going up with more homes being built right across the country.
While the Conservatives would abandon the most vulnerable so their rich friends can pay less, we will not rest until we ensure fairness for every generation.
Indigenous Affairs
Mr. Speaker, the Trade Winds to Success training society helps indigenous people build up the trade skills we need to rebuild our own communities and our own future. Not only does the organization create a pathway to apprenticeship, but it also guarantees indigenous peoples' opportunity for good-paying jobs.
Despite the Liberals' commitment to support them, no movement has been made. Is this yet another empty promise to indigenous peoples? When will the Prime Minister establish a five-year funding plan for Trade Winds to Success so it can continue to empower indigenous labour?
Mr. Speaker, as my colleague well knows, we are unequivocally committed to working in partnership with first nations, Inuit and Métis communities to advance self-determination, reconciliation and economic opportunity. We have indeed tripled investments in indigenous communities since 2015, with $32 billion in investments expected in 2024-25 alone. Budget 2024 includes over $1 billion to improve access to proper health care for indigenous people, $338 million to support indigenous entrepreneurship and a monumental investment of $5 billion for the indigenous loan support program. There is lots more to do.
Democratic Institutions
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentarians who serve on the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians have done an amazing job and deserve the thanks of all Canadians. In the face of foreign interference, we need to put Canada first and commit to working together.
My question to the Prime Minister is this. Is the Prime Minister open to working over the summer with all members of Parliament with top secret security clearance who are willing, in a confidential setting, to work in the hope of determining a shared course of action to reduce the threat of foreign interference?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the leader of the Green Party and other party leaders who have taken this issue seriously by getting their security clearances. We feel that the public inquiry is the best place for these discussions to continue, and we are pleased that the commission has agreed to study this. Unfortunately, the Leader of the Opposition would actually have to get his top secret security clearance in order to have a top secret discussion among party leaders.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to put forward, but before I do that, I would like to thank you and all of the other chair occupants.
I want to thank the clerk and all of his staff. I also want to thank all of the staff who support us so well in the House. I am, of course, talking about the pages and the members of the Parliamentary Protective Service. We are exceptionally well served by the parliamentary staff and I want to express gratitude for all that they do on behalf of all parliamentarians.
[English]
I also want to thank all of my colleagues on the government side for their support for a rookie House leader. I want to thank all the colleagues who chose the wrong political path for their support as well, including my colleague House leaders. Despite all indications to the contrary, we have developed a very good working relationship. I thank them and, through them, thank their caucuses as well.
[Translation]
Business of the House
That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order, or usual practice of the House:
(a) in relation to Bill C-26, An Act respecting cyber security, amending the Telecommunications Act and making consequential amendments to other Acts, the report stage motions in amendment, standing on the Notice Paper in the name of the Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs, be deemed adopted on division, and the bill, as amended, be deemed concurred in at report stage with further amendments on division and deemed read a third time and passed on division;
(b) Bill C-40, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to repeal a regulation (miscarriage of justice reviews), be deemed read a third time and passed on division;
(c) Bill S-6, An Act respecting regulatory modernization, be deemed read a second time on division and referred to the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology;
(d) Bill S-9, An Act to amend the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act, be deemed read a second time and referred to a committee of the whole, deemed considered in committee of the whole, deemed reported without amendment, deemed concurred in at report stage and deemed read a third time and passed;
(e) Bill S-16, An Act respecting the recognition of the Haida Nation and the Council of the Haida Nation, be deemed read a second time on division and referred to the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs; and
(f) following Routine Proceedings later today, the House shall stand adjourned until Monday, September 16, 2024, provided that, for the purposes of Standing Order 28, it shall be deemed to have sat on Thursday, June 20, and Friday, June 21, 2024.
Telecommunications Act
(Bill C-26: On the Order: Government Orders)
April 19, 2024—Consideration at report stage of Bill C-26, An Act respecting cyber security, amending the Telecommunications Act and making consequential amendments to other Acts, as reported by the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security with amendments—Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs.
(Bill concurred in at report stage, read the third time and passed)
Miscarriage of Justice Review Commission Act (David and Joyce Milgaard's Law)
(Bill C-40: On the Order: Government Orders)
June 17, 2024—Third reading of Bill C-40, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to repeal a regulation (miscarriage of justice reviews)—Minister of Justice.
(Bill read the third time and passed)
An Act Respecting Regulatory Modernization
(Bill S-6: On the Order: Government Orders)
May 3, 2023—Resuming consideration of the motion of Ms. Fortier (President of the Treasury Board), seconded by Ms. Khera (Minister of Seniors),—That Bill S-6, An Act respecting regulatory modernization, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology.
(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)
An Act to amend the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act
(Bill S‑9: On the Order: Government Orders:)
December 15, 2023 — Resuming consideration of the motion of Ms. Joly (Minister of Foreign Affairs), seconded by Mr. Beech (Minister of Citizens' Services), — That Bill S‑9, An Act to amend the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.
(Bill read the second time, considered in committee of the whole, reported, concurred in, read the third time and passed)
[English]
Haida Nation Recognition Act
(Bill S-16. On the Order: Government Orders)
June 6 2024—Second reading and reference to the Standing
Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs of Bill S-16, An Act respecting the recognition of the Haida Nation and the Council of the Haida Nation—Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations.
(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)
Mr. Speaker, I am rising to ask that Bill S-16, an act respecting the recognition of the Haida Nation and the Council of the Haida Nation—
Some hon. members: No.
Mr. Speaker, I will add my voice to that of the government House leader, thanking all the support staff on the precinct here, the pages who help us out in the Commons, the wise clerks who guide the proceedings and all of the support staff around.
[Translation]
I would also like to thank the interpreters. There are a lot of challenges related to simultaneous translation in Parliament. I would like to thank the interpreters for all their hard work.
[English]
Of course, I thank the security forces around the precinct that keep us all safe as we go about doing the people's work. I thank all of them for the excellent level of service that they provide parliamentarians so that we can provide excellent service to the people of Canada.
Pursuant to Standing Order 65, I move that the House instruct each of the following standing committees to hold five meetings between Monday, July 8, and Friday—
Some hon. members: No.
I regret that the hon. opposition House leader does not have unanimous consent.
Rising on a point of order, the hon. member for Willowdale.
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 on the humanitarian situation in Sudan: That the House recognize that the conflict in Sudan has displaced over 10 million civilians, has resulted in an unprecedented—
Some hon. members: No.
The member does not have unanimous consent from the House.
The hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask for unanimous consent that, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice—
Some hon. members: No.
I regret to inform the hon. member that a number of noes have already been expressed.
The hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford is rising.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for unanimous consent for the following motion: That notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practices of the House, the bill entitled—
Some hon. members: No.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, if I may, on behalf of the members of the Bloc Québécois and our teams, I too would like to thank you and to thank the Clerk of the House, the Chief Administrator, the Sergeant-at-Arms and their entire teams in all areas, including finance, human resources, IT, the Parliamentary Protective Service and food services. I would like to thank all the staff who, day in and day out, make our jobs easier and support us in our daily work.
I wish to extend a special, sincere and heartfelt thanks to our Bloc Québécois allies, for they are our voice and our ears. A very special thank you goes to the interpreters, who have had a tough time this year. We in the Bloc Québécois owe them a great deal because they truly are our voice and our ears. They never cease to impress. I congratulate them. We are impressed with the work of all the employees of the House of Commons and the entire administration, but it is fair to say that the interpreters are the favourites of the Bloc Québécois.
We want to thank the government, leader and whip teams. We also want to thank the official opposition and the NDP. We have proven time and time again that when we work as a team toward the collective good, we can succeed. We would also like to thank the extraordinary staff who make us better MPs and better legislators. On behalf of myself and the Bloc Québécois, I hope everyone has a great summer. Enjoy.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the incredible folks who support the work that we do in this place. I would like to offer my gratitude, and the gratitude of all members of the New Democratic Party, to those who help us do our jobs in this esteemed place; to you, Mr. Speaker; to the clerks at the table; to the security personnel; and the incredible interpreters, who do so much. I thank all of our interpreters. I give a special mention to Cindy Runzer, who will be retiring. I thank her very much for her service to us. I would also like to thank those who feed us every day. I thank the amazing team of pages and the page supervisor.
On behalf of all New Democrats, I want to thank everyone from the bottom of our hearts. I hope everyone in the House has a wonderful summer with their family and loved ones in their ridings, listening to their constituents.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, I would also like to add a few words to say a big thank you to all the teams at the House of Commons. I would like to thank the Speaker, the clerks and the pages, who have done great work while also studying.
[English]
These young people from across Canada continue to inspire me. They work so hard. When we work long hours, we sometimes forget that our pages are here working hard too. They then have to go back and cram for exams. I say thanks to the pages, their families across Canada and all of the team here on the Hill, from the catering team to the waitresses, the cooks and waiters, and our security team. I particularly thank the Parliamentary Protective Service here on the Hill, which is here to keep us safe every single day. We have immense gratitude.
[Translation]
I thank all of my colleagues.
[English]
I thank the member for Battle River—Crowfoot and the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley. It is too bad that we could not get unanimous consent. I was hoping for a team win here in the last few minutes.
Dear colleagues, as we prepare to focus on our families and our constituents, I too want to take a moment to thank all those who have made it possible for us to do our work here in the House of Commons.
[Translation]
On behalf of all members, all parliamentarians, I offer my sincere thanks to administration employees. Without them, we could never have continued our work. I am referring to the interpreters, the IT team, the maintenance staff, the clerks, the pages, the broadcasting team, and members of the Parliamentary Protective Service, here to keep us safe, day after day. This year they faced some challenges.
I would like to sincerely thank members of the team for their daily dedication. Their service inspires us, and we always appreciate it.
[English]
All members, and especially those who support them, have earned a break. I wish everyone a safe and restful summer and time to connect with their constituents and with their loved ones.
Government Orders
[Government Orders]
[English]
Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1
The House resumed from June 18 consideration of the motion that Bill C-69, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 16, 2024, be read the third time and passed.
It being 3.34 p.m., the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at the third reading stage of Bill C-69.
Call in the members.
[Translation]
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
(Division No. 847)
YEAS
Members
AlghabraAli
Anand
Anandasangaree
Angus
Arseneault
Arya
Atwin
Bachrach
Badawey
Bains
Barron
Battiste
Beech
Bendayan
Bibeau
Bittle
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
Dong
Drouin
Dubourg
Duclos
Duguid
Dzerowicz
Ehsassi
El-Khoury
Erskine-Smith
Fillmore
Fisher
Fonseca
Fortier
Fragiskatos
Fraser
Freeland
Fry
Gaheer
Gainey
Garrison
Gazan
Gerretsen
Gould
Green
Guilbeault
Hajdu
Hanley
Hardie
Hepfner
Holland
Housefather
Hughes
Hussen
Hutchings
Iacono
Idlout
Ien
Jaczek
Johns
Joly
Jowhari
Julian
Kayabaga
Kelloway
Khalid
Khera
Koutrakis
Kusmierczyk
Kwan
Lalonde
Lambropoulos
Lamoureux
Lapointe
Lattanzio
Lauzon
LeBlanc
Lebouthillier
Long
Longfield
Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga)
MacAulay (Cardigan)
MacDonald (Malpeque)
MacGregor
MacKinnon (Gatineau)
Maloney
Martinez Ferrada
Masse
Mathyssen
May (Cambridge)
McDonald (Avalon)
McGuinty
McKay
McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam)
McLeod
McPherson
Mendès
Mendicino
Miao
Miller
Morrice
Morrissey
Murray
Naqvi
Ng
Noormohamed
O'Connell
Oliphant
O'Regan
Petitpas Taylor
Powlowski
Qualtrough
Robillard
Rogers
Romanado
Sahota
Sajjan
Saks
Samson
Sarai
Scarpaleggia
Schiefke
Serré
Sgro
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
Virani
Weiler
Wilkinson
Yip
Zahid
Zarrillo
Zuberi
Total: -- 173
NAYS
Members
AboultaifAitchison
Albas
Allison
Arnold
Baldinelli
Barlow
Barrett
Barsalou-Duval
Beaulieu
Bergeron
Berthold
Bezan
Blanchet
Blanchette-Joncas
Block
Bragdon
Brassard
Brock
Brunelle-Duceppe
Calkins
Caputo
Carrie
Chabot
Chambers
Champoux
Chong
Cooper
Dalton
Dancho
Davidson
DeBellefeuille
Deltell
d'Entremont
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
Godin
Goodridge
Gourde
Gray
Hallan
Hoback
Jeneroux
Jivani
Kelly
Khanna
Kitchen
Kmiec
Kram
Kramp-Neuman
Kurek
Kusie
Lake
Lantsman
Larouche
Lawrence
Lehoux
Lemire
Leslie
Lewis (Essex)
Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Liepert
Lloyd
Lobb
Maguire
Majumdar
Martel
May (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
Mazier
McCauley (Edmonton West)
McLean
Melillo
Michaud
Moore
Morantz
Morrison
Motz
Muys
Nater
Normandin
Patzer
Paul-Hus
Pauzé
Perkins
Perron
Plamondon
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
Strahl
Stubbs
Thériault
Therrien
Thomas
Tochor
Tolmie
Trudel
Uppal
Van Popta
Vecchio
Vidal
Vien
Vignola
Villemure
Vis
Vuong
Wagantall
Warkentin
Waugh
Webber
Williams
Williamson
Zimmer
Total: -- 150
PAIRED
Members
BérubéRodriguez
Total: -- 2
[English]
Electoral Participation Act
The House resumed from June 18 consideration of the motion that Bill C-65, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.
(The House divided on the amendment, which was negatived on the following division:)
(Division No. 848)
YEAS
Members
AboultaifAitchison
Albas
Allison
Arnold
Baldinelli
Barlow
Barrett
Berthold
Bezan
Block
Bragdon
Brassard
Brock
Calkins
Caputo
Carrie
Chambers
Chong
Cooper
Dalton
Dancho
Davidson
Deltell
d'Entremont
Doherty
Dowdall
Dreeshen
Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry)
Ellis
Epp
Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster)
Falk (Provencher)
Fast
Ferreri
Findlay
Gallant
Généreux
Genuis
Gladu
Godin
Goodridge
Gourde
Gray
Hallan
Hoback
Jeneroux
Jivani
Kelly
Khanna
Kitchen
Kmiec
Kram
Kramp-Neuman
Kurek
Kusie
Lake
Lantsman
Lawrence
Lehoux
Leslie
Lewis (Essex)
Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Liepert
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
Vuong
Wagantall
Warkentin
Waugh
Webber
Williams
Williamson
Zimmer
Total: -- 119
NAYS
Members
AlghabraAli
Anand
Anandasangaree
Angus
Arseneault
Arya
Atwin
Bachrach
Badawey
Bains
Baker
Barron
Barsalou-Duval
Battiste
Beaulieu
Beech
Bendayan
Bergeron
Bibeau
Bittle
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
Dong
Drouin
Dubourg
Duclos
Duguid
Dzerowicz
Ehsassi
El-Khoury
Erskine-Smith
Fillmore
Fisher
Fonseca
Fortier
Fortin
Fragiskatos
Fraser
Freeland
Fry
Gaheer
Gainey
Garon
Garrison
Gaudreau
Gazan
Gerretsen
Gill
Gould
Green
Guilbeault
Hajdu
Hanley
Hardie
Hepfner
Holland
Housefather
Hughes
Hussen
Hutchings
Iacono
Idlout
Ien
Jaczek
Johns
Joly
Jowhari
Julian
Kayabaga
Kelloway
Khalid
Khera
Koutrakis
Kusmierczyk
Kwan
Lalonde
Lambropoulos
Lamoureux
Lapointe
Larouche
Lattanzio
Lauzon
LeBlanc
Lebouthillier
Lemire
Long
Longfield
Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga)
MacAulay (Cardigan)
MacDonald (Malpeque)
MacGregor
MacKinnon (Gatineau)
Maloney
Martinez Ferrada
Masse
Mathyssen
May (Cambridge)
May (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
McGuinty
McKay
McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam)
McLeod
McPherson
Mendès
Mendicino
Miao
Michaud
Miller
Morrice
Murray
Naqvi
Ng
Noormohamed
Normandin
O'Connell
Oliphant
O'Regan
Pauzé
Perron
Petitpas Taylor
Plamondon
Powlowski
Qualtrough
Rayes
Robillard
Rogers
Romanado
Sahota
Sajjan
Saks
Samson
Sarai
Savard-Tremblay
Scarpaleggia
Schiefke
Serré
Sgro
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 Koeverden
Vandal
Vandenbeld
Vignola
Villemure
Virani
Weiler
Wilkinson
Yip
Zahid
Zarrillo
Zuberi
Total: -- 204
PAIRED
Members
BérubéRodriguez
Total: -- 2
The next question is on the main motion.
If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
[Translation]
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
(Division No. 849)
YEAS
Members
AlghabraAli
Anand
Anandasangaree
Angus
Arseneault
Arya
Bachrach
Badawey
Bains
Baker
Barron
Battiste
Beech
Bendayan
Bibeau
Bittle
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
Dong
Drouin
Dubourg
Duclos
Duguid
Dzerowicz
Ehsassi
El-Khoury
Erskine-Smith
Fillmore
Fisher
Fonseca
Fortier
Fragiskatos
Fraser
Freeland
Fry
Gaheer
Gainey
Garrison
Gazan
Gerretsen
Gould
Green
Guilbeault
Hajdu
Hanley
Hardie
Hepfner
Holland
Housefather
Hughes
Hussen
Hutchings
Iacono
Idlout
Ien
Jaczek
Johns
Joly
Jowhari
Julian
Kayabaga
Kelloway
Khalid
Khera
Koutrakis
Kusmierczyk
Kwan
Lalonde
Lambropoulos
Lamoureux
Lapointe
Lattanzio
Lauzon
LeBlanc
Lebouthillier
Long
Longfield
Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga)
MacAulay (Cardigan)
MacDonald (Malpeque)
MacGregor
MacKinnon (Gatineau)
Maloney
Martinez Ferrada
Masse
Mathyssen
May (Cambridge)
May (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
McGuinty
McKay
McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam)
McLeod
McPherson
Mendès
Mendicino
Miao
Miller
Morrice
Murray
Naqvi
Ng
Noormohamed
O'Connell
Oliphant
O'Regan
Petitpas Taylor
Powlowski
Qualtrough
Robillard
Rogers
Romanado
Sahota
Sajjan
Saks
Samson
Scarpaleggia
Schiefke
Serré
Sgro
Shanahan
Sheehan
Sidhu (Brampton East)
Sidhu (Brampton South)
Singh
Sorbara
Sousa
St-Onge
Sudds
Tassi
Taylor Roy
Thompson
Trudeau
Turnbull
Valdez
van Koeverden
Vandal
Vandenbeld
Virani
Weiler
Wilkinson
Yip
Zahid
Zarrillo
Zuberi
Total: -- 170
NAYS
Members
AboultaifAitchison
Albas
Allison
Arnold
Baldinelli
Barlow
Barrett
Barsalou-Duval
Beaulieu
Bergeron
Berthold
Bezan
Blanchet
Blanchette-Joncas
Block
Bragdon
Brassard
Brock
Brunelle-Duceppe
Calkins
Caputo
Carrie
Chabot
Chambers
Champoux
Chong
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
Godin
Goodridge
Gourde
Gray
Hallan
Hoback
Jeneroux
Jivani
Kelly
Khanna
Kitchen
Kmiec
Kram
Kramp-Neuman
Kurek
Kusie
Lake
Lantsman
Larouche
Lawrence
Lehoux
Lemire
Leslie
Lewis (Essex)
Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Liepert
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
Plamondon
Poilievre
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
Vuong
Wagantall
Warkentin
Waugh
Webber
Williamson
Zimmer
Total: -- 148
PAIRED
Members
BérubéRodriguez
Total: -- 2
Private Members' Business
[Private Members' Business]
[Translation]
Amendments to the Standing Orders
The House resumed from June 12 consideration of Motion No. 109.
The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on Motion No. 109 under Private Members' Business in the name of the member for Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston.
[English]
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
(Division No. 850)
YEAS
Members
AboultaifAitchison
Albas
Alghabra
Ali
Allison
Anand
Anandasangaree
Angus
Arnold
Arseneault
Arya
Atwin
Bachrach
Badawey
Bains
Baker
Baldinelli
Barlow
Barrett
Barron
Barsalou-Duval
Battiste
Beaulieu
Beech
Bendayan
Bergeron
Berthold
Bezan
Bibeau
Bittle
Blair
Blanchet
Blanchette-Joncas
Blaney
Block
Blois
Boissonnault
Boulerice
Bradford
Bragdon
Brassard
Brière
Brock
Brunelle-Duceppe
Calkins
Cannings
Caputo
Carr
Carrie
Casey
Chabot
Chagger
Chahal
Chambers
Champagne
Champoux
Chatel
Chen
Chiang
Chong
Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek)
Collins (Victoria)
Cooper
Cormier
Coteau
Dabrusin
Dalton
Damoff
Dancho
Davidson
Davies
DeBellefeuille
Deltell
Desbiens
Desilets
Desjarlais
Dhaliwal
Dhillon
Diab
Doherty
Dong
Dowdall
Dreeshen
Drouin
Dubourg
Duclos
Duguid
Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry)
Dzerowicz
Ehsassi
El-Khoury
Ellis
Epp
Erskine-Smith
Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster)
Falk (Provencher)
Fast
Ferreri
Fillmore
Findlay
Fisher
Fonseca
Fortier
Fortin
Fragiskatos
Fraser
Freeland
Fry
Gaheer
Gainey
Gallant
Garon
Garrison
Gaudreau
Gazan
Généreux
Genuis
Gerretsen
Gill
Gladu
Godin
Goodridge
Gould
Gourde
Gray
Green
Guilbeault
Hajdu
Hallan
Hanley
Hardie
Hepfner
Hoback
Holland
Housefather
Hughes
Hussen
Hutchings
Iacono
Idlout
Ien
Jaczek
Jeneroux
Jivani
Johns
Joly
Jowhari
Julian
Kayabaga
Kelloway
Kelly
Khalid
Khanna
Khera
Kitchen
Kmiec
Koutrakis
Kram
Kramp-Neuman
Kurek
Kusie
Kusmierczyk
Kwan
Lake
Lalonde
Lambropoulos
Lamoureux
Lantsman
Lapointe
Larouche
Lattanzio
Lauzon
Lawrence
LeBlanc
Lebouthillier
Lehoux
Lemire
Leslie
Lewis (Essex)
Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Liepert
Lloyd
Lobb
Long
Longfield
Louis (Kitchener—Conestoga)
MacAulay (Cardigan)
MacDonald (Malpeque)
MacGregor
MacKinnon (Gatineau)
Maguire
Majumdar
Maloney
Martel
Martinez Ferrada
Masse
Mathyssen
May (Cambridge)
May (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
Mazier
McCauley (Edmonton West)
McDonald (Avalon)
McGuinty
McKay
McKinnon (Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam)
McLean
McLeod
McPherson
Melillo
Mendès
Mendicino
Miao
Michaud
Miller
Moore
Morantz
Morrice
Morrison
Morrissey
Motz
Murray
Muys
Naqvi
Nater
Ng
Noormohamed
Normandin
O'Connell
Oliphant
O'Regan
Patzer
Paul-Hus
Pauzé
Perkins
Perron
Petitpas Taylor
Plamondon
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
Sgro
Shanahan
Sheehan
Shields
Shipley
Sidhu (Brampton East)
Sidhu (Brampton South)
Simard
Sinclair-Desgagné
Singh
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
Virani
Vis
Vuong
Wagantall
Warkentin
Waugh
Webber
Weiler
Wilkinson
Williams
Williamson
Yip
Zahid
Zarrillo
Zimmer
Zuberi
Total: -- 325
NAYS
NilPAIRED
Members
BérubéRodriguez
Total: -- 2
Excise Tax Act
The House resumed from June 17 consideration of the motion that Bill C-323, An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act (mental health services), be read the third time and passed, and of the amendment.
The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the amendment of the member for Cariboo—Prince George to the motion at third reading stage of Bill C-323 under Private Members' Business.
The question is on the amendment.
(The House divided on the amendment, which was agreed on the following division:)
(Division No. 851)
YEAS
Members
AboultaifAitchison
Albas
Allison
Angus
Arnold
Bachrach
Baldinelli
Barlow
Barrett
Barron
Barsalou-Duval
Beaulieu
Bergeron
Berthold
Bezan
Blanchet
Blanchette-Joncas
Blaney
Block
Boulerice
Bragdon
Brassard
Brock
Brunelle-Duceppe
Calkins
Cannings
Caputo
Carrie
Chabot
Chambers
Champoux
Chong
Collins (Victoria)
Cooper
Dalton
Dancho
Davidson
Davies
DeBellefeuille
Deltell
Desbiens
Desilets
Desjarlais
Doherty
Dowdall
Dreeshen
Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry)
Ellis
Epp
Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster)
Falk (Provencher)
Fast
Ferreri
Findlay
Fortin
Gallant
Garon
Garrison
Gaudreau
Gazan
Généreux
Genuis
Gill
Gladu
Godin
Goodridge
Gourde
Gray
Green
Hallan
Hoback
Hughes
Idlout
Jeneroux
Jivani
Johns
Julian
Kelly
Khanna
Kitchen
Kmiec
Kram
Kramp-Neuman
Kurek
Kusie
Kwan
Lake
Lantsman
Larouche
Lawrence
Lehoux
Lemire
Leslie
Lewis (Essex)
Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Liepert
Lloyd
Lobb
MacGregor
Maguire
Majumdar
Martel
Masse
Mathyssen
May (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
Mazier
McCauley (Edmonton West)
McLean
McPherson
Melillo
Michaud
Moore
Morantz
Morrice
Morrison
Motz
Muys
Nater
Normandin
Patzer
Paul-Hus
Pauzé
Perkins
Perron
Plamondon
Rayes
Redekopp
Reid
Rempel Garner
Richards
Roberts
Rood
Ruff
Savard-Tremblay
Scheer
Schmale
Seeback
Shields
Shipley
Simard
Sinclair-Desgagné
Singh
Small
Soroka
Steinley
Ste-Marie
Stewart
Strahl
Stubbs
Thériault
Therrien
Thomas
Tochor
Tolmie
Trudel
Uppal
Van Popta
Vecchio
Vidal
Vien
Viersen
Vignola
Villemure
Vis
Vuong
Wagantall
Warkentin
Waugh
Webber
Williams
Williamson
Zarrillo
Zimmer
Total: -- 174
NAYS
Members
AlghabraAli
Anand
Anandasangaree
Arseneault
Arya
Atwin
Badawey
Bains
Baker
Battiste
Beech
Bendayan
Bibeau
Bittle
Blair
Blois
Boissonnault
Bradford
Brière
Carr
Casey
Chagger
Chahal
Champagne
Chatel
Chen
Chiang
Collins (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek)
Cormier
Coteau
Dabrusin
Damoff
Dhaliwal
Dhillon
Diab
Dong
Drouin
Dubourg
Duclos
Duguid
Dzerowicz
Ehsassi
El-Khoury
Erskine-Smith
Fillmore
Fisher
Fonseca
Fortier
Fragiskatos
Fraser
Freeland
Fry
Gaheer
Gainey
Gerretsen
Gould
Guilbeault
Hajdu
Hanley
Hardie
Hepfner
Holland
Housefather
Hussen
Hutchings
Iacono
Ien
Jaczek
Joly
Jowhari
Kayabaga
Kelloway
Khalid
Khera
Koutrakis
Kusmierczyk
Lalonde
Lambropoulos
Lamoureux
Lapointe
Lattanzio
Lauzon
LeBlanc
Lebouthillier
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
Miller
Morrissey
Murray
Naqvi
Ng
Noormohamed
O'Connell
Oliphant
O'Regan
Petitpas Taylor
Powlowski
Qualtrough
Robillard
Rogers
Romanado
Rota
Sahota
Sajjan
Saks
Samson
Sarai
Scarpaleggia
Schiefke
Serré
Sgro
Shanahan
Sheehan
Sidhu (Brampton East)
Sidhu (Brampton South)
Sorbara
Sousa
St-Onge
Sudds
Tassi
Taylor Roy
Thompson
Trudeau
Turnbull
Valdez
Van Bynen
van Koeverden
Vandal
Vandenbeld
Virani
Weiler
Wilkinson
Yip
Zahid
Zuberi
Total: -- 151
PAIRED
Members
BérubéRodriguez
Total: -- 2
I declare the amendment carried.
The next question is on the main motion, as amended.
[Translation]
If a member participating in person wishes that the motion, as amended, be adopted or adopted on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
[English]
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
(Division No. 852)
YEAS
Members
AboultaifAitchison
Albas
Allison
Angus
Arnold
Bachrach
Baldinelli
Barlow
Barrett
Barron
Barsalou-Duval
Beaulieu
Bergeron
Berthold
Bezan
Blanchet
Blanchette-Joncas
Blaney
Block
Boulerice
Bragdon
Brassard
Brock
Brunelle-Duceppe
Calkins
Cannings
Caputo
Carrie
Chabot
Chambers
Champoux
Chong
Collins (Victoria)
Cooper
Dalton
Dancho
Davidson
Davies
DeBellefeuille
Deltell
Desbiens
Desilets
Desjarlais
Doherty
Dowdall
Dreeshen
Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry)
Ellis
Epp
Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster)
Falk (Provencher)
Fast
Ferreri
Findlay
Fortin
Gallant
Garon
Garrison
Gaudreau
Gazan
Généreux
Genuis
Gill
Gladu
Godin
Goodridge
Gourde
Gray
Green
Hallan
Hoback
Hughes
Idlout
Jeneroux
Jivani
Johns
Julian
Kelly
Khanna
Kitchen
Kmiec
Kram
Kramp-Neuman
Kurek
Kusie
Kwan
Lake
Lantsman
Larouche
Lawrence
Lehoux
Lemire
Leslie
Lewis (Essex)
Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Liepert
Lloyd
Lobb
MacGregor
Maguire
Majumdar
Martel
Masse
Mathyssen
May (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
Mazier
McCauley (Edmonton West)
McLean
McPherson
Melillo
Michaud
Moore
Morantz
Morrice
Morrison
Motz
Muys
Nater
Normandin
Patzer
Paul-Hus
Pauzé
Perkins
Perron
Plamondon
Rayes
Redekopp
Reid
Rempel Garner
Richards
Roberts
Rood
Ruff
Savard-Tremblay
Scheer
Schmale
Seeback
Shields
Shipley
Simard
Sinclair-Desgagné
Singh
Small
Soroka
Steinley
Ste-Marie
Stewart
Strahl
Stubbs
Thériault
Therrien
Thomas
Tochor
Tolmie
Trudel
Uppal
Van Popta
Vecchio
Vidal
Vien
Viersen
Vignola
Villemure
Vis
Vuong
Wagantall
Warkentin
Waugh
Webber
Williams
Williamson
Zarrillo
Zimmer
Total: -- 174
NAYS
Members
AlghabraAli
Anand
Anandasangaree
Arseneault
Arya
Atwin
Badawey
Bains
Baker
Battiste
Beech
Bendayan
Bibeau
Bittle
Blair
Blois
Boissonnault
Bradford
Brière
Carr
Casey
Chagger
Chahal
Champagne
Chatel
Chen
Chiang
Cormier
Coteau
Dabrusin
Damoff
Dhaliwal
Dhillon
Diab
Dong
Drouin
Dubourg
Duclos
Duguid
Dzerowicz
Ehsassi
El-Khoury
Erskine-Smith
Fillmore
Fisher
Fonseca
Fortier
Fragiskatos
Fraser
Freeland
Fry
Gaheer
Gainey
Gerretsen
Gould
Guilbeault
Hajdu
Hanley
Hardie
Hepfner
Holland
Housefather
Hussen
Hutchings
Iacono
Ien
Jaczek
Joly
Jowhari
Kayabaga
Kelloway
Khalid
Khera
Koutrakis
Kusmierczyk
Lalonde
Lambropoulos
Lamoureux
Lapointe
Lattanzio
Lauzon
LeBlanc
Lebouthillier
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
Miller
Morrissey
Murray
Naqvi
Ng
Noormohamed
O'Connell
Oliphant
O'Regan
Petitpas Taylor
Powlowski
Qualtrough
Robillard
Rogers
Romanado
Rota
Sajjan
Saks
Samson
Sarai
Scarpaleggia
Schiefke
Serré
Sgro
Shanahan
Sheehan
Sidhu (Brampton East)
Sidhu (Brampton South)
Sorbara
Sousa
St-Onge
Sudds
Tassi
Taylor Roy
Thompson
Trudeau
Turnbull
Valdez
Van Bynen
van Koeverden
Vandal
Vandenbeld
Virani
Weiler
Wilkinson
Yip
Zahid
Zuberi
Total: -- 149
PAIRED
Members
BérubéRodriguez
Total: -- 2
I declare the motion, as amended, carried.
As this is my last time in the chair, I hope everybody has a wonderful summer.
Criminal Code
The House resumed from June 18 consideration of Bill S-224, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in persons), as reported (with amendments) from the committee, and of the motions in Group No. 1.
The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motions at report stage of Bill S-224 under Private Members' Business.
[Translation]
(The House divided on Motion No. 1, which was negatived on the following division:)
(Division No. 853)
YEAS
Members
AboultaifAitchison
Albas
Allison
Arnold
Baldinelli
Barlow
Barrett
Berthold
Bezan
Block
Bragdon
Brassard
Brock
Calkins
Caputo
Carrie
Chambers
Chong
Cooper
Dalton
Dancho
Davidson
Deltell
d'Entremont
Doherty
Dowdall
Dreeshen
Duncan (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry)
Ellis
Epp
Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster)
Falk (Provencher)
Fast
Ferreri
Findlay
Gallant
Généreux
Genuis
Gladu
Godin
Goodridge
Gourde
Gray
Hallan
Hoback
Jeneroux
Jivani
Kelly
Khanna
Kitchen
Kmiec
Kram
Kramp-Neuman
Kurek
Kusie
Lake
Lantsman
Lawrence
Lehoux
Leslie
Lewis (Essex)
Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Liepert
Lloyd
Lobb
Maguire
Majumdar
Martel
Mazier
McCauley (Edmonton West)
McLean
Melillo
Moore
Morantz
Morrison
Motz
Muys
Nater
Patzer
Paul-Hus
Perkins
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
Vuong
Wagantall
Warkentin
Waugh
Webber
Williams
Williamson
Zimmer
Total: -- 118
NAYS
Members
AlghabraAli
Anand
Anandasangaree
Angus
Arseneault
Arya
Atwin
Bachrach
Badawey
Bains
Baker
Barron
Barsalou-Duval
Battiste
Beaulieu
Beech
Bendayan
Bergeron
Bibeau
Bittle
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
Dong
Drouin
Dubourg
Duclos
Duguid
Dzerowicz
Ehsassi
El-Khoury
Erskine-Smith
Fillmore
Fisher
Fonseca
Fortier
Fortin
Fragiskatos
Fraser
Freeland
Fry
Gaheer
Gainey
Garon
Garrison
Gaudreau
Gazan
Gerretsen
Gill
Gould
Green
Guilbeault
Hajdu
Hanley
Hardie
Hepfner
Holland
Housefather
Hughes
Hussen
Hutchings
Iacono
Idlout
Ien
Jaczek
Johns
Joly
Jowhari
Julian
Kayabaga
Kelloway
Khalid
Khera
Koutrakis
Kusmierczyk
Kwan
Lalonde
Lambropoulos
Lamoureux
Lapointe
Larouche
Lattanzio
Lauzon
LeBlanc
Lebouthillier
Lemire
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
Miao
Michaud
Miller
Morrice
Morrissey
Murray
Naqvi
Ng
Noormohamed
Normandin
O'Connell
Oliphant
O'Regan
Pauzé
Perron
Petitpas Taylor
Plamondon
Powlowski
Qualtrough
Rayes
Robillard
Rogers
Romanado
Rota
Sahota
Sajjan
Saks
Samson
Sarai
Savard-Tremblay
Scarpaleggia
Schiefke
Serré
Sgro
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
Virani
Weiler
Wilkinson
Yip
Zahid
Zarrillo
Zuberi
Total: -- 207
PAIRED
Members
BérubéRodriguez
Total: -- 2
I declare Motion No. 1 negatived. I therefore declare Motion No. 2 negatived.
At this time, the question would ordinarily be put on the motion for concurrence at report stage of Bill S‑224. However, as the House has just defeated the amendments to restore the bill, nothing remains of the bill except the number.
The Chair is therefore obliged to exercise the authority provided by Standing Order 94(1)(a) to ensure the orderly conduct of Private Members' Business. I therefore rule that the order for consideration at report stage of Bill S-224, an act to amend the Criminal Code regarding trafficking in persons, be discharged and that the bill be dropped from the Order Paper.
(Order discharged and bill withdrawn)
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. My app malfunctioned for the first vote, on Bill C-69 in the third reading, and I am asking for unanimous consent to have it recorded as no.
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
[Routine Proceedings]
[English]
Public Sector Integrity Commissioner
It is my duty to lay upon the table, pursuant to subsection 38(3.3) of the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act, the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner's report for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2024.
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), this report is deemed to have been permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates.
Government Response to Petitions
Mr. Speaker. Pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table in both official languages the government's responses to two petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.
While I am on my feet, I would like to thank my caucus for the wonderful gift and recognition in giving me some chicken nuggets.
Interparliamentary Delegations
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, reports of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association respecting the 16th Conference of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region in Kiruna, Sweden, from March 20 to 22, 2024, and respecting the participation of David Wells, vice-chair of CAEU at the Atlantik-Brücke German-Canadian Conference in Berlin, Germany, from May 12 to 14, 2024.
While I am still on my feet, I would like to wish my honourable and esteemed colleagues a wonderful summer.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour and privilege to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canada-Japan Inter-Parliamentary Group's co-chairs' annual visit to Japan from November 13 to 17, 2023, as well as the report of the Canada-China Legislative Association and the Canada-Japan Inter-Parliamentary Group's 31st annual meeting of the Asia-Pacific Parliamentary Forum in Manila, Philippines from November 23 to 26, 2023.
I wish all Filipino Canadians a fabulous Filipino Heritage Month.
While I have the floor, I want to extend wishes for all of summer's greatness to you, Mr. Speaker, and to all members of the House, as well as to everyone in Sault Ste. Marie. We will see everyone in the fall.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the six following reports of the Canadian Group of the Inter-Parliamentary Union: the report respecting its participation at the annual parliamentary hearing at the United Nations in New York, New York, United States of America, from February 13 to 15, 2023; the report respecting its participation at the parliamentary meeting on the occasion of the 67th session of the commission on the status of women in New York, New York, United States of America, from March 7 to 8, 2023; the report respecting its participation at the 146th IPU assembly and related meetings in Manama, Bahrain, from March 11 to 15, 2023; the report respecting its participation at the parliamentary forum at the UN high-level political forum on sustainable development in New York, New York, United States of America, on July 18, 2023; the report respecting its participation at the 147th IPU assembly and related meetings in Luanda, Angola, from October 23 to 27, 2023; and the report respecting its participation at the parliamentary meeting on the occasion of the 68th session of the commission on the status of women in New York, New York, United States of America, from March 12 to 13.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the two following reports of the Canada-Africa Parliamentary Association: the report respecting its participation at the bilateral mission to Cameroon, Yaoundé, Cameroon, from November 13 to 17, 2023; and the report respecting its participation at the observation mission on the margins of the African union summit in Ethiopia and its bilateral mission to the United Republic of Tanzania, Addis Ababa, Dar es Salaam, Dodoma and Zanzibar, from February 16 to 23, 2024.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, five reports on behalf of the Canada-United States Inter-Parliamentary Group: the report respecting its participation at the national conference of state legislature annual meeting in Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America, from August 13 to 16, 2023; the report respecting its participation at the council of state governments eastern regional conference annual meeting in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, from August 20 to 23, 2023; the report respecting its participation at the congressional visit in Washington, D.C., United States of America, from November 14 to 15, 2023; the report respecting its participation at the council of state governments national conference in Raleigh, North Carolina, United States, from December 6 to 9, 2023; and the report respecting its participation at the Canada Day in Albany hosted by the New York Consulate General of Canada in Albany, New York, United States of America, February 27 to 28.
Committees of the House
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 20th report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, entitled “Improving the Resilience of Canada's Horticultural Sector.”
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.
I would like to thank all the witnesses who were involved and all the stakeholders. There are some really good recommendations that we would encourage the government to move on. I wish all the best to my colleagues this summer.
Mr. Speaker, there were some very important recommendations in this report about the horticulture sector, but there were some things that were missing. Yesterday I had the opportunity to visit Carleton Mushroom Farms, not far from Ottawa, and it spent $170,000 in carbon tax last year alone. We know that 44% of produce growers are selling at a loss.
One recommendation that was removed from this report was the importance of approving Bill C-234 unamended because the amendment would remove the carbon tax carve-out for greenhouses and mushroom farms, which would cost them more than $300 million by 2030.
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 12th report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, entitled “Safe Sport in Canada.” This is a report everyone should read because it tells us about the deplorable state of safety in sports in Canada.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to the report.
Mr. Speaker, in fact, I do have a dissenting report, in both official languages, on behalf of the Conservative members of the committee. The fact that this report is being tabled more than two years after the original Hockey Canada scandal broke shows that the current Liberal government does not take this issue seriously at all. We think Sport Canada has failed to hold the national sporting organizations to account.
I want to wish everyone on both sides of the aisle a happy summer.
[Translation]
Mr. Speaker, that is the same report we are talking about right now. I just want to mention that the Bloc Québécois is tabling a supplementary opinion, which notes that this study took more than two years.
I want to put forward the fact that one of the motions adopted—
The hon. member is a seasoned member. He is well aware that in order to table a supplementary opinion, he must obtain the unanimous consent of the House.
I invite the hon. member to seek unanimous consent immediately.
Mr. Speaker, would it be possible to have unanimous consent to table a supplementary opinion on the safe sport file?
Mr. Speaker, as mentioned, more than two years after I moved a motion to call in the heads of Hockey Canada, I want to acknowledge the work done by all parties to delve deeper into the issue of safe sport.
I think it is important to mention today that one of the recommendations of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage is to launch an independent inquiry into the situation around sports and the practice of safe sport across Canada.
I hope that the government will take note and establish this commission.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 11th report of the Standing Committee on Science and Research, entitled “Incorporating Indigenous Knowledge and Science in Canadian Research and Policy Development”.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.
I extend my best wishes to all members of the House for a wonderful summer at home, with your constituents.
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 20th report of the Standing Committee on International Trade in relation to the motion adopted on Thursday, June 13, regarding the duty-free industry in Canada.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.
I wish everybody a wonderful summer.
Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 25th report of the The Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, entitled “Promoting and Encouraging Intergenerational Volunteerism”. This is a crisis that the nation needs to deal with.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of Conservatives, I am tabling a supplementary report, in both official languages, on the report entitled “Promoting and Encouraging Intergenerational Volunteerism”.
During its study, the committee repeatedly heard from witnesses who serve vulnerable members of their community about the impact that inflation and the rising cost of living are having not only on their needs in their community, but also on their ability to recruit and retain volunteers. In fact, a representative from the Central Okanagan Food Bank, from my community of Kelowna—Lake Country, told the committee that they knew of seniors who were no longer able to volunteer because they had to go back to work. We even heard how some volunteers had to stop volunteering due to the rising cost of transportation.
The benefits of intergenerational volunteerism are tremendous. However, without a government that promotes tackling inflationary deficits and the affordability crisis in this country, Canada's not-for-profit, volunteer and charity sectors cannot truly overcome the challenges they are facing in recruiting and retaining volunteers.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to present, in both official languages, the 19th report of the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology in relation to Bill C-352, an act to amend the Competition Act and the Competition Tribunal Act.
This was, members will recall, a private member's bill from the leader of the NDP. The Bloc-Liberal coalition proceeded to delete every clause, including the apparently offensive title of the bill. I am reporting back, on behalf of the committee, a blank piece of paper for consideration in the House because that is what has resulted from these amendments.
I am pleased to report that this bill now no longer has a clause in it, much like the blank slate or the blank commitment of Liberals on their promises.
Mr. Speaker, again, in the interest of time, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the following two reports. The first is the 12th report entitled “A Time For Change: Reforming Defence Procurement in Canada”.
The 13th report is entitled “Providing Aid to the Civil Power: Disaster Relief and the Canadian Armed Forces’ Domestic Operations”.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to each of the reports.
Mr. Speaker, Conservatives on the defence committee are submitting dissenting reports and opinions for both of the reports from the committee.
As we learned at the procurement study, the global threat environment is increasingly precarious. The decision by the government to cut $1 billion a year over the next three years from the defence budget is unconscionable. We are asking that the government reverse that budget cut.
We are asking for more leadership coming from the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister's Office. We believe that we have to have more ministers who are actually in control and accountable. That includes having a secretary within the PCO and a prime minister who actually takes this seriously.
We are asking the Prime Minister to designate one minister to be ultimately accountable for all defence procurement. We are also calling on the government to grant members of the defence committee classified defence-related information and clearances so that we can do a better job of oversight and accountability.
I would also just want to say, on the issue of aid to civil power, which we also talked about, one of the important messages that we did hear when the committee was meeting is that, while part IV of the National Defence Act does outline that CAF can provide aid to civil power, it always should be the force of last resort. It is ultimately the responsibility of provincial, municipal and territorial governments to provide protection, and they need to invest more in mitigation and response assistance.
We also know that the Canadian Armed Forces are dealing with a retention and recruitment crisis, about which General Eyre was very blunt in his assessment. He said, “The demand signal for those primary tasks we're responsible for is only increasing. However, our readiness to do that is decreasing, due in part to the incessant demand for these types of domestic operations.”
Therefore, we are asking again that the budget cut be reversed and that we restore the $2.7 billion that was announced in September 2023. We also say that we want to see the private member's bill, Bill C-386, an act respecting the establishment and award of a special service medal for domestic and emergency relief operations, from the member for Cariboo—Prince George, be accepted by the government and concurred in, and that we can recognize those Canadians who step up to participate in domestic operations, such as disaster assistance, pandemic relief and other avenues, and recognize their contributions.
Also, we are saying that there should be an increase in youth involvement in aiding and assisting in civilian volunteer disaster relief.
Mr. Speaker, this is with respect to a bill that I placed on the notice paper just yesterday. Because today is the last day, I am asking for unanimous consent to introduce the bill that is currently on the notice paper entitled “an act to establish a national framework to improve food price transparency” notwithstanding the usual notice period.
National Framework for Food Price Transparency Act
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-406, an act to establish a national framework to improve food price transparency.
He said: Mr. Speaker, Canadians have been struggling with the high cost of food for more than two years now. They have been struggling, while corporate grocery giants have made record profits and continue to use their market dominance to stifle competition.
As the NDP's food price inflation critic, I have responded by getting the agriculture committee to look at this issue and hold rich grocery CEOs to account. As a result of that work, one of the committee's recommendations was to adopt a standardized approach to unit pricing labelling practices in the grocery sector to assist Canadian consumers in making informed decisions in their purchasing.
Today, I am pleased to rise and introduce the national framework for food price transparency act. This legislation would require the Minister of Industry, in consultation with the provinces, to develop a national framework on grocery pricing, unit display practices, transparency on price increases, and promoting unit pricing education to consumers across Canada. There would also be a requirement for the minister to table a report in Parliament, so we can keep the government accountable on the framework.
This bill is an important legislative measure to hold grocery giants accountable. I hope all members will join me in supporting it.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Business of the House
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties and, if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion:
That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order, or usual practice of the House, a bill entitled “An Act to recognize a national livestock brand as a symbol of Canada and of the role of the West and frontier culture in building our nation”, be deemed to have been placed on notice on Monday, June 17, 2024, in the name of the member for Battle River—Crowfoot, provided that it be eligible to be introduced and read a first time during the rubric of Introduction of Private Members' Bills during Routine Proceedings later today.
National Livestock Brand of Canada Act
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-407, An Act to recognize a national livestock brand as a symbol of Canada and of the role of the West and frontier culture in building our nation.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce my private member's bill today to recognize a national livestock brand as a national symbol in Canada. I want to thank the hon. member for Calgary Centre for seconding this bill. His constituency happens to be the home of the Calgary Stampede; I hope to see many members there in a couple of weeks.
This act seeks to recognize a national livestock brand as an official symbol of Canada. This is meant to acknowledge and promote the role that western and frontier heritage has played in building our nation. It is not only in western Canada; agriculture, animal husbandry and pioneers have played a role in building our entire country from coast to coast.
It would be fitting to have a livestock brand as a Canadian national symbol. For many, a livestock brand holds heraldic significance and is used as a cultural symbol. This bill would give credit to so many, past and present, who have spent their lives building Canada. Livestock brands also have historical significance with indigenous peoples across Canada, particularly on the prairies.
It is time that we recognize the work pioneers, farmers, ranchers and indigenous peoples have done in building our economy and our communities. This bill aims to do just that: recognize the importance of Canada's western and frontier heritage by adding this livestock brand to our inventory of national symbols, which include the maple tree, hockey and lacrosse, and the Canadian tartan, among others.
I hope all members will support this bill and the recognition that it brings.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Referendum Act
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-408, An Act to amend the Referendum Act.
She said: Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to put forward this private member's bill.
[Translation]
This private member's bill seeks to amend the Referendum Act.
[English]
We rarely use referenda in Canada. One reason a referendum is so difficult to use, which my private member's bill attempts to remedy, is that we can only put forward a referendum, under our current law, for a constitutional question, and it cannot be on the same ballot with a federal election. Of course, it is far more cost-effective to have them run together. This bill would open up some possibilities, as a private member's bill. I think it is long overdue, and I hope that it will achieve the support of all parties in this place, in a non-partisan effort, which is why I was so keen to have a member of another party join me in seconding.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Sudan
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions amongst the parties, and if you seek it, I think you will find unanimous consent to adopt the following motion on the dire situation in Sudan. I move:
That the House:
(a) recognize that the conflict in Sudan has displaced over 10 million civilians, has resulted in an unprecedented level of gender-based violence, and is causing the largest man-made famine in decades, where civilians in Darfur are suffering the most dire consequences, including ethnically targeted mass killing and sexual violence;
(b) publicly support the UN Security Council Resolution 2736 adopted last week that urged civilian protection, demanded the RSF end its siege on El Fasher and called for all members of the international community to halt the transfer of arms to Sudan; and
(c) urge the government to support international justice initiatives to hold the perpetrators and external enablers accountable and ramp up immediate humanitarian relief for Sudanese civilians.
Fairness for Flight Attendants Act
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-409, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (hours of work of flight attendants).
She said: Mr. Speaker, Conservatives have been travelling across this country, and we have heard for years from flight attendants that flight attendants in Canada are not paid until their aircraft is in motion. This is unfair, and it puts many women and diverse Canadians at a disadvantage.
Conservatives believe that people should be paid for the work they do. That is why, today, I am honoured to table the flight attendants fairness act. This bill would make changes to the Canada Labour Code to require airlines to pay flight attendants for the work they do before, during and after a flight.
The lack of action from the government on this matter proves once again that the NDP-Liberals are all talk, while Conservatives take action and provide common-sense solutions.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Income Tax Act
moved for leave to introduce C-410, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (campgrounds).
She said: Mr. Speaker, Canada is home to over 5,600 campgrounds that are enjoyed by over 70% of Canadians who actively participate in outdoor and wilderness activities. These businesses employ over 140,000 Canadians and operate on very thin margins, making reinvestment for their facilities and upkeep hard to manage. My riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex is home to many campgrounds, and I have heard from people across this country that they are being treated unfairly as small seasonal businesses. The story is universal.
After nine years of the NDP-Liberal government, life is unaffordable and Canadian small businesses deserve a break. That is why I am glad today to table an act to amend the Income Tax Act for campgrounds. The change proposed in the bill will allow campgrounds extra capital to use toward conservation, facilities maintenance, managing wildlife, recovery from the elements and increasing services to their campers.
Once again, Conservatives are providing common-sense solutions that will cut back on punishing taxes, help grow our small businesses like campgrounds, and give Canadian families more opportunity to enjoy the great outdoors.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Criminal Code
moved for leave to introduce C-411, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (arson — wildfires and places of worship).
He said: Mr. Speaker, today I am tabling legislation to protect Canada's forests and places of worship from arson. My bill, the anti-arson act, will create two new offences in the Criminal Code.
The first offence increases the maximum sentence for causing a wildfire to 18 years, and for subsequent offences to 18 years. After nine years, the Liberal-NDP government has failed to protect Canadians from the rising threat of wildfires. Over half of wildfires are human-caused. Many of these fires are ignited by arsonists from Nova Scotia, to British Columbia and everywhere in between. These fires have led to evacuations, destruction of private and public property, expensive firefighting costs to the taxpayer, increased carbon emissions and significant health repercussions from smoke.
The second offence introduces a minimum sentence of five years in prison for a first offence and seven years for repeat offences of damage to a place of worship by fire or explosion. Over 100 churches have been burned, desecrated or vandalized since 2021. Last month, the Jewish synagogue Schara Tzedeck, in Vancouver, suffered an arson attack, leaving community members shocked and horrified. In Peterborough, a mosque was torched by an arsonist and suffered tens of thousands of dollars in damages. Ex-president Kenzu Abdella stated, “The issue should be taken seriously by all levels of government and the crime should carry a serious enough consequence that could potentially deter arsonists”.
Churches, mosques, synagogues and temples are more than buildings. These places of worship are where Canadians go to find strength, fellowship with God and others. Pyro-terrorist attacks are an assault on their entire faith community and undermine Canadians' sense of security and freedom. Canadians of any faith should never wake up to find out that their sanctuary has been criminally destroyed. Conservatives will defend their freedom of worship and assembly from pyro-terrorism.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Fairness for All Canadian Taxpayers Act (measuring the tax gap to fight international tax evasion)
moved for leave to introduce Bill S-258, An Act to amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act (reporting on unpaid income tax).
He said: Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in the chamber to introduce a bill from the Senate, from Senator Downe.
This bill would do three things. First, it would amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act to require that the Canada Revenue Agency list all those individuals who have been convicted of tax evasion, whether here or abroad. Second, it would require the CRA to publish, every three years, the tax gap, which is the amount of money that the CRA believes it is owed versus what it received. Third, it would require the CRA to provide more information to the Parliamentary Budget Officer so their office can do a better job in reporting on the tax gap.
I would like to thank the senator for his wonderful work. This is the third time the bill has been introduced. The second time, in this chamber, it was narrowly defeated in the 42nd Parliament, but I believe we have the votes with all opposition parties, as we did last time, to make the bill law.
I would like to thank the member for Calgary Rocky Ridge, who has done an excellent job on the file as well.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Petitions
Mr. Speaker, I bring to the attention of the House a petition that has been signed by members of my community who bring forward the issue of severe clashes between the military and insurgents that are continuing in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Specifically, they are highlighting the fact that an escalation in violence in eastern Congo has resulted in a desperate humanitarian situation.
In addition to that, there are vulnerable women and children, including many children orphaned by the war, who are living in extreme poverty in camps. Petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to provide humanitarian aid for the children suffering in eastern DRC.
Mr. Speaker, I rise briefly to present three petitions. The first recognizes that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has warned us repeatedly that rising temperatures over the next two decades, if left unabated, will bring, in their words, widespread devastation and extreme weather.
The petitioners go on to note that the summer of 2023 was the hottest three months, globally, on record. They note that over the past decade, 85% of warming from greenhouse gases has come from burning fossil fuels, that the oil and gas sector is the largest emitter in the country and that the federal government in 2021 committed to an oil and gas cap. Petitioners then call on the government to move forward immediately with a bold emissions cap for the oil and gas sector that is comprehensive in scope and realistic in achieving an interim and science-based target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.
Mr. Speaker, the next petition I would like to present is with respect to safety for truck drivers. In 2020, the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators issued standard 16 with respect to entry-level training under the National Safety Code. As part of this, provinces and territories are meant to implement these, but only five have done so to date. As a result, the training requirements vary widely across the country and there is a bit of a patchwork of training requirements.
Petitioners note that nearly 2,000 Canadians are killed and 10,000 are injured in collisions involving commercial trucks, with most victims being occupants of other vehicles, and that the federal government can issue regulations to ensure more uniform road safety requirements.
Petitioners have three calls. The first is to establish a national mandatory training standard as mandated by standard 16 and implemented by all provinces through federal legislation or regulation. The second is to mandate that each province and territory be obliged to ensure that their training complies with this standard. The third is that each province and territory be obligated to oversee and enforce the universal standard for all commercial truck drivers using the roads.
Mr. Speaker, the last petition is from folks across the Waterloo region who call for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in the Middle East, which would include the release of all hostages and political prisoners. They call for an embargo on the provision of munitions and weaponry to Israel. They call for continued funding for UNRWA and for recognizing the Israeli blockade and continued attacks on innocent civilians in Gaza. The petitioners call on the House to work toward Palestinian statehood, for an end to the occupation of Palestinian land and for the House to call for the support of the work of the ICJ and the International Criminal Court.
Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions to table.
The first petition I am tabling states that brain cancer, in 2023, affected 3,200 Canadians and claimed the lives of 2,500. Vorasidenib is a life-extending medication currently only available in the United States. It remains inaccessible to Canadians. The petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to improve access to brain cancer treatments by empowering Health Canada to expedite the use of patient and laboratory in vitro data to expand access to drugs for brain cancer treatment where clinical trials are not feasible and develop a regulatory model that would permit the approval of brain cancer treatment medications that can extend patients' lives.
The second petition is with respect to pulmonary arterial hypertension, which is a rare, life-threatening condition. Recent results from the STELLAR clinical trials offer new hope for patients, and the petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to urge Health Canada to approve sotatercept, a significant milestone in the treatment option for PAH, without further delay.
The third petition is on the same topic of pulmonary arterial hypertension. The petition talks about patients needing timely access to new therapies. Therefore, the petitioners are calling on the federal government to allocate funding now to the provinces so that new treatments can be made available quickly to Canadians living with this rare disease and that the federal government have a holistic approach to rare diseases that includes early detection and prevention, timely and equitable access to evidence-based care, enhanced community support, and the promotion of innovative research.
Mr. Speaker, petitioners in my riding want to remind the government that it pledged $5 billion in the 2021 fall economic statement to help British Columbia recover from unprecedented disasters. To date, only 40% of that funding has been delivered.
On behalf of petitioners, I will remind the House that the port of Vancouver was cut off from the rest of Canada. Every major road connecting British Columbia to the rest of Canada was cut off. There were hundreds of thousands of acres of burnt forests.
The petitioners are calling upon the government to deliver the funds that were promised in the fall economic statement to help British Columbia properly recover.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition in opposition to the Liberals' capital gains tax hike. The petitioners note that this capital gains tax hike would strain health care resources, limit access to affordable housing options, exacerbate financial challenges for farmers and compromise retirement savings for Canadians.
Accordingly, the petitioners call on the Minister of Finance to scrap this punitive tax hike on doctors, home builders, small businesses, farmers and the retirement savings of Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to present a petition on behalf of thousands of Canadians who call on the government to stop its divisive anti-energy, anti-private sector, top-down Bill C-50 just-transition agenda, which would cause fuel and power shortages, and even more energy poverty, while hurting Canada's standard of living.
The NDP-Liberal's so-called just transition would hike the cost of living in urban and rural Canada. It would kill 170,000 Canadian oil and gas jobs, displace 450,000 direct and indirect jobs and threaten the jobs of 2.7 million Canadians across all provinces in energy, manufacturing, construction, transportation and agriculture. It would especially harm remote, rural, indigenous and resource-based communities, provinces and regions; blue-collar and lower-income workers; and indigenous and diverse Canadians, who will face higher job disruptions and more challenges finding new opportunities because they work in Canada's oil and gas sector at a much higher rate than in other sectors.
The NDP-Liberal agenda to phase out Canadian oil and gas compromises Canadian energy and national security. Therefore, Canadians across seven provinces and two territories call on the government to stop its unjust transition and to value private sector-led energy transformation through technology, not taxes, instead of through government-centred plans and subsidies, to bring home Canadian energy jobs, technology and investment, which would benefit all Canadians in every city, town and region.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity to present a petition on behalf of Katarina Gavrilyuk, formerly of Kyiv, Ukraine, and now residing in St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador. Nearly 1,000 people have signed her petition. The petition calls on the Prime Minister to live up to the promise he made on January 10, 2023, to deliver the national advanced surface-to-air missile system to Ukraine.
I have never met this individual. I reached out and asked why she sought me out to present her petition. Ms. Gavrilyuk sent me a message, saying, “Firstly, your party has been a steadfast supporter of Ukraine, consistently advocating for sanctions against Russia and delivering crucial military aid. This strong stance aligns perfectly with our goals at Assistance Ukraine.”
I am very happy to be able to help Assistance Ukraine and present Ms. Gavrilyuk's petition.
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to present a petition on behalf of constituents. I rise for the 43rd time on behalf of the people of Swan River, Manitoba, to present a petition on the rising rate of crime.
The community of Swan River is overwhelmed with alarming levels of crime because of the Liberal government's soft-on-crime laws, such as Bill C-5 and Bill C-75. Jail has become a revolving door for repeat offenders, as Bill C-75 allows violent offenders to be in jail in the morning and then back on the street the same day. Bill C-5 allows criminals to serve their sentences from home.
The people of Swan River are calling for jail, not bail, for repeat violent offenders. The people of Swan River demand that the Liberal government repeal its soft-on-crime policies, which directly threaten their livelihoods and their community. I support the good people of Swan River.
Mr. Speaker, I have one petition to table today. It is on behalf of residents who are upset with Parks Canada's decision to abandon the replacement of the Boundary Road swing bridge, which had been in place since 1902.
The Boundary Road swing bridge provides an essential route of transportation that residents of Bolsover use on a regular basis. It is also more efficient for first responders and is better for the environment. Parks Canada once promised to replace the bridge; it took the bridge out and has now abandoned the project.
The petitioners are requesting that the government immediately reinstate the heritage asset listing for the Boundary Road swing bridge and resume the repair of this bridge immediately.
Mr. Speaker, please forgive me. Before my petition, I just have to say, “Go Oilers”. Now I will turn to my petition.
The petitioners are very concerned for the habitat of the threatened marbled murrelets. These are birds that are covered by the Migratory Birds Convention Act. To summarize the petition, the petitioners call on the government to immediately protect all the critical old-growth habitat of this rare bird.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition signed by over 100 persons, calling for the elimination of the Liberal carbon tax on home heating.
When the Liberals provided the carbon tax relief to Canadians living in areas where their polling numbers were dropping, they showed their true colours. It is clear that the Liberals believed in two types of Canadians: some who get rewarded for voting for them and others who must pay for the Liberals' costly policies.
The reality is the carbon tax is impacting all Canadians, contributing to higher prices and making life less affordable for everyone; not just on home heating, but in other ways as well. In Westman, with the cost of food soaring, Samaritan House food bank organizers saw almost a 50% increase in the number of hampers they gave out, reaching a total of 36,000.
Skyrocketing fuel costs are making it more difficult for those who live long distances from a grocery store or medical services.
Finally, I have presented several petitions representing hundreds of Westman residents who are fed up with the high cost of living. It is time to axe the tax so Westman residents can afford to buy food, fuel up and heat their homes.
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I wonder if there would be unanimous consent for me to present the first 10 of my petitions today.
Some hon. members: No.
Mr. Speaker, the first petition is in support of a very simple moral proposition, which is that it is always wrong to kill a child. Petitioners are presenting this in the context of proposals for extending euthanasia to infants. Petitioners are strongly opposed to that petition. They call on the House to reject any proposal, recognizing that it is always wrong to will the death of a child.
Freedom of Political Expression
Mr. Speaker, the next petition is in support of Bill C-257, a bill that would protect freedom of expression in Canada by adding political belief and activity as prohibited grounds of discrimination to the Canadian Human Rights Act.
Mr. Speaker, the next petition that I am tabling is in support of a private member's bill I have put forward on getting weapons to Ukraine. It calls on the government to immediately follow through on long-delayed promises regarding military support for Ukraine and to send any surplus military equipment to Ukraine on an urgent basis.
Mr. Speaker, my final petition notes that, after eight years, it is clear that the Prime Minister is not worth the cost, the crime or the corruption. The failed Prime Minister and his failed NDP-Liberal government have increased the cost of everything and failed to take responsibility for their failures. Crime, chaos, drugs and disorder are filling our streets due to the failed policy of the Prime Minister.
Petitioners call on the government to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. That is the petition. Let us bring it home.
Questions on the Order Paper
Mr. Speaker, the following questions on the Order Paper will be answered today: Questions Nos. 2651, 2652, 2654, 2658 to 2670, 2672, 2675, 2683, 2685 to 2687, 2690 to 2692, and 2697.
[Text]
With regard to Health Canada (HC) and the initial Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA product and approval process thereof: (a) did HC ask Pfizer to conduct genotoxicity studies to rule out insertional mutagenesis with DNA contamination; (b) if the answer to (a) is negative, why not; (c) what are the dangers with respect to insertional mutagenesis; (d) in the context of the mRNA vaccine, what is the purpose of the lipid nanoparticle (LNP) delivery system; (e) in the context of the mRNA vaccine manufacturing process, (i) what is the purpose of the SV40 enhancer-promoter-ori sequence, (ii) does it include a 72 base pair Nuclear Targeting Sequences (NTS), (iii) if the answer to (ii) is affirmative, what is the purpose of an NTS; (f) with regard to the plasmid map used in the production of the modified mRNA, (i) on what date did the manufacturer provide the map to HC, (ii) what gene annotation was provided; (g) in relation to (f), did the map contain an SV40 promoter-enhancer sequence and a reverse open reading frame; (h) if no plasmid map was received, why did HC not ask for one; (i) according to the response to Order Paper question Q-2266, “There are strict limits and controls for the presence of these residual fragments to ensure that there is no effect on the safety or effectiveness of the vaccine,” as part of the residual DNA testing and measurement, (i) what quantity of DNA fragments and SV40 enhancer-promoter fragments per dose were found in the Pfizer product, (ii) who provided the data to HC, (iii) when was this data provided to HC, (iv) is HC aware that the EMA reported a very large variance with respect to the residual DNA levels in the bulk mRNA and that the SV40 enhancer in the promotor sequence is 72 base pairs, (v) if the answers to (i) and (iv) are affirmative, what was HC’s appraisal of this information, (vi) what analytical techniques did the manufacturer rely upon to quantify the amount of RNA and the amount of DNA, (vii) do these quantities meet the “strict limits and controls for the presence of these residual fragments” and what are those limits; (j) as part of HC’s requirements for lot release testing, has HC independently confirmed the quantity of residual DNA and SV40 sequences in the Pfizer-BioNTech product; (k) if the answer to (j) is affirmative, (i) which laboratory and chief scientist provided this independent testing, (ii) what were the amounts recorded, (iii) were these different than those amounts provided by the manufacturer; (l) if the answer to (j) is negative, why was independent testing not completed; (m) is HC aware that Pfizer deliberately removed the SV40 enhancer sequence when reporting the annotated plasmid; and (n) according to HC's response to Order Paper question Q-2266, “The SV40 promoter enhancer sequence… is inactive, has no functional role, and was measured to be consistently below the limit," (i) who provided HC with this assessment, (ii) is there evidence that the SV40 promoter binds to the P53 tumor suppressor gene and affects DNA repair mechanisms, (iii) if the answer to (ii) is affirmative, what are the risks to the health of Canadians as a result?
Mr. Yasir Naqvi (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the health and safety of Canadians is Health Canada’s top priority, and the department exercises stringent regulatory oversight over vaccines.
Before the initial approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, the department completed a rigorous scientific review of the product’s safety, efficacy and quality, including details on manufacturing processes and information on adverse events following immunization. An authorization was only issued once Health Canada confirmed the benefits of the vaccine outweighed the risks of its use. The summary basis of decision can be found at this link: https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/summary-basis-decision-detailTwo.html?linkID=SBD00510.
During the review of the information submitted by the manufacturer, Health Canada became aware of the potential presence of residual DNA in the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine preparation. However, the content of the residual DNA was below 10 nanograms/dose. The content of residual DNA was lower than the recommended limits established by the World Health Organization, WHO, in consultation with subject matter experts. Accordingly, the department did not request genotoxicity studies, as the residual DNA was considered a low risk.
Furthermore, the department reviews the manufacturing data for each vaccine lot that is released for use in Canada to ensure they meet their established specifications, including those for residual DNA. The amounts of residual DNA in Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine lots were reported to Health Canada, as well as to our international partner agencies: e.g., EMA and U.S. FDA. Both Health Canada and our international partners consider the test methods used by Pfizer-BioNTech for detecting that residual DNA to be scientifically sound and appropriate for their intended use. As well, the results from the residual DNA tests were consistent among different vaccine lots sold both in Canada and elsewhere and were also consistent with other manufacturing data provided in support of the release of each product lot.
With regard to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccine manufacturing process, an SV40 enhancer-promoter region was present in the DNA plasmid template, but has no functional role and is not upstream of any SV40 gene, and the DNA template is digested and filtered to remove from the mRNA vaccine. Health Canada cannot speculate on any intentions by Pfizer-BioNTech in regard to whether they removed the SV40 sequence when reporting the annotated plasmid. Please note that information requested on gene sequences, gene annotation and gene/plasmid map, received on November 16, 2020, as well as analytical techniques used by the manufacturer, are proprietary to Pfizer-BioNTech. However, Health Canada’s scientists reviewed this, and all of the other submitted information, and considered it within the risk assessment for their product. Any residual DNA fragments are considered as inactive, and an internal assessment of submissions by Pfizer-BioNTech found that they were consistently reported below the limit recommended by WHO.
Lastly, the lipid nanoparticle, LNP, component of the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine preparation served as a delivery vehicle for the mRNA. Cells cannot efficiently internalize the mRNA in the absence of the LNP.
With regard to Health Canada’s standards for safety and efficacy for the COVID-19 vaccines: (a) have any COVID-19 vaccines met the requirements of Section C.08.001(2) of the Food and Drug Regulations (2)(g) and (2)(h) for safety and efficacy; (b) has any COVID-19 designated drug or vaccine, approved under Section C.08.001(2.1) of the Food and Drug Regulations, subsequently met the standard for safety and efficacy as delineated in subsection (2)(g) and (2)(h) of Section C.08.001(2); (c) if the answer to (b) is negative, why not; (d) if a COVID-19 designated vaccine has not met (2)(g) and (2)(h) of C.08.001(2), which requires the sponsor to establish safety and efficacy, can the use of the terms “safe and effective” be applied to these vaccines; (e) if the answer to (d) is affirmative, what is the rationale; (f) with regard to the portal on the approval of COVID-19 vaccines for Comirnaty and available information for COMIRNATY - Submission control number 252736 on the Government of Canada's website, is the information for 2.7.1 Summary of Biopharmaceutic Studies and Associated Analytical Methods available to the public under the transparency initiatives; (g) if the answer to (f) is negative, why not; (h) as the mRNA vaccines represent a new manufacturing platform, do they meet the requirements of Section C.04.015 of the Food and Drug Regulations; (i) if the answer to (h) is negative, why not; (j) have the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines been assigned to Group 2 Lot Evaluation Group as part of the Lot Release Program; and (k) if the answer to (j) is negative, why not?
Mr. Yasir Naqvi (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the health and safety of Canadians are Health Canada’s top priorities, and the department exercises stringent regulatory oversight over vaccines. Before any of the COVID-19 vaccines were approved in Canada, the department conducted rigorous scientific review of the extensive data regarding the vaccines’ safety, efficacy and quality, including results of pre-clinical and clinical studies, details on manufacturing processes, and information on adverse events following immunization. An authorization was only issued when the benefits of any of the COVID-19 vaccines outweighed the risks of their use, thereby allowing the use of “safe and effective” in describing the authorized vaccine preparations.
The COVID-19 vaccines and treatments portal, https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/, contains the summary basis of decision for each of the authorized COVID-19 vaccines. Please note that biopharmaceutic studies and associated analytical methods are proprietary and cannot be disclosed. All COVID-19 vaccines authorized by Health Canada under the interim order met the requirements of section C.08.001(2) of the food and drug regulations (2)(g) and (2)(h) for safety and efficacy. Terms and conditions were imposed upon the authorization with respect to quality, clinical, labelling, and risk management plan requirements. This process has allowed Health Canada to assess information submitted by the manufacturer as it became available during the product life cycle to ensure that the benefits of the vaccines continued to outweigh the risks. Additional safety and effectiveness data generated post-approval continue to support Health Canada's original decision.
Lastly, the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines authorized by Health Canada met the requirements of section C.04.015 of the food and drug regulations. However, the lot evaluation group assigned to mRNA vaccines, as part of the lot release program and protocols of testing submitted by the manufacturers, is proprietary and cannot be disclosed.
With regard to the Dairy Innovation and Investment Fund: (a) how many applications did the program receive; (b) how many of those applications were accepted; (c) how much of the total program funding was allotted to applicants; and (d) how much funding has been released to date, broken down by province?
Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, with regard to the Canadian Dairy Commission, in response to part (a), to date, 18 applications have been received.
In response to part (b), all applications are under review/pending completion of the assessment process.
In response to part (c), the assessment process is ongoing and no funds have been approved.
In response to part (d), the assessment process is ongoing and no funds have been approved.
With regard to the 2024 budget documents: what are the expenditures incurred to date related to the documents, in total and broken down by (i) consulting costs, (ii) publishing costs, (iii) printing costs, (iv) design costs, including graphic design, (v) writing costs, (vi) marketing costs, (vii) any other costs not reflected in the previous categories?
Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the total expenditures incurred to produce the 2024 budget documents amount to $390,094.02. Please find a detailed breakdown below.
In response to part (i), the consulting costs were $0.00.
In response to part (ii), the publishing costs were $0.00.
In response to part (iii), the printing costs were $269,858.61.
In response to part (iv), the design costs were $180.00.
In response to part (v), the writing costs were $0.00.
In response to part (vi), the marketing costs were $0.00.
In response to part (vii), any other costs, the translation costs were $120,055.41.
With regard to Section 5.25 of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development's report entitled "Agriculture and Climate Change Mitigation - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada": how does the government plan to meet its 3.5 Mt CO2 eq fertilizer emission reduction target despite the shortfall stated by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development in the aforementioned report?
Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, as part of its domestic and international greenhouse gas reporting requirements, Canada must prepare and publish emissions projections on an annual basis. AAFC works with Environment and Climate Change Canada to develop the emissions projections for the agriculture sector, which includes the projected impact of any new, current, or planned programming. Through the agricultural climate solutions – on-farm climate action fund, the sustainable Canadian agricultural partnership, and the $34.1 million proposed in budget 2023 to support the adoption of nitrogen management practices, AAFC has most recently estimated a 1.44 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, Mt CO2e, reduction in fertilizer emissions per year by 2030.
Although the 1.44 Mt CO2e estimate does not currently account for the projected impact of the agricultural climate solutions – living labs and agricultural clean technology program, both programs support the research, development, and adoption of practices and technologies that can reduce fertilizer emissions. In addition, some federally funded programs under the sustainable Canadian agricultural partnership, such as AgriScience and AgriInnovate, can support fertilizer-related projects along the innovation continuum. Because Canada’s emissions projections are updated annually, the estimated reduction in fertilizer emissions from all of AAFC’s current programming may be included as more research and data become available.
The 1.44 Mt CO2e estimate also does not account for industry-led or provincially led initiatives that may directly or indirectly reduce fertilizer emissions, including Fertilizer Canada’s 4R designation and certification, Farm Credit Canada’s 4R sustainability incentive program, and the Government of Ontario’s fertilizer accelerating solutions & technology challenge.
With regard to Section 5.24 of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development's report entitled "Agriculture and Climate Change Mitigation - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada": to achieve the fertilizer emission reduction targets, what voluntary agreements have been made between Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and with fertilizer manufacturers, agricultural stakeholders, provinces, and farmers?
Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, AAFC officials are actively engaging with national and regional commodity associations, industry organizations, and academia on the development of a strategic approach for reaching the target through the fertilizer emissions reduction working group under the sustainable agriculture strategy advisory committee. The working group is focused on identifying opportunities to increase the voluntary adoption of beneficial management practices, address data and measurement issues, recognize innovative solutions, and expand outreach and extension activities.
The ongoing development and implementation of the sustainable agriculture strategy also presents additional opportunities for developing and strengthening partnerships and collaboration with the sector to address key agri-environmental issues, including fertilizer emissions.
With regard to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada since January 2024: what is Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada's progress on developing a strategy to guide its climate change mitigation programs and activities?
Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, AAFC is currently in the process of drafting the sustainable agriculture strategy, SAS. Climate change mitigation is one of the five priority areas covered by the SAS. The other four include adaptation, biodiversity, water, and soil health. The SAS will set a shared direction for collective action to improve environmental performance in the sector over the long term in order to advance the sustainability, competitiveness, and vitality of the agriculture sector.
Since January 2024, AAFC has been meeting monthly with the SAS advisory committee to receive input and advice on various components of the strategy, and AAFC has been developing components of a draft strategy document. Ongoing engagement has continued with representatives from across the agriculture sector, including producers, commodity organizations, non-governmental organizations, provincial and territorial partners, indigenous peoples, and others.
The strategy will include broad goals and measurable outcomes, with clear indicators to measure progress across the five priority areas. The SAS is expected to be released in 2024.
With regard to Exhibit 5.1 of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development's report entitled "Agriculture and Climate Change Mitigation - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada": (a) what was the methodology in determining the emissions of crop production; (b) what data gathering techniques were utilized; and (c) what were the earliest and latest data points that were used?
Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, in response to part (a), figure 5.1 reports emissions from the national inventory report of greenhouse gas sources and sinks in Canada. Cropland emissions are determined using an internationally accepted method, which has been modified to reflect Canadian soils, climate, crops and management practices. It is further adapted based on empirical data collected from research studies across Canada. Included in the emissions from cropland are direct and indirect nitrous oxide from synthetic fertilizers, organic fertilizers, crop residue decomposition, cultivation of organic soils, mineralization of soil organic carbon, conservation tillage, irrigation and manure on pasture and rangeland. Additionally, the method estimates nitrous oxide and methane emissions from field burning of agricultural residues as well as carbon dioxide emissions from liming and urea fertilizer application.
In response to part (b), the national inventory report primarily uses survey data provided by Statistics Canada from the census of agriculture, as well as other annual surveys that describe the distribution, yield and acreage of crops across Canada, as well as data from the Statistics Canada fertilizer shipments survey that describes the amount of fertilizer sold. Additionally, the inventory uses surveys on fertilizer use and expert opinion to inform the method.
In response to part (c), figure 5.1 describes the emissions as of 2021. The national inventory tracks annual emissions, starting in 1990. The latest data point now available is 2022, released in early May.
With regard to Exhibit 5.1 of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development's report entitled "Agriculture and Climate Change Mitigation - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada": (a) what was the methodology in determining the emissions of animal production; (b) what data gathering techniques were used; (c) what were the earliest and latest data points that were used; (d) can the data be broken down by animal and by sector (e.g. beef, dairy, poultry); and (e) were meat processing facilities included in this data?
Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, in response to part (a), figure 5.1 reports emissions from the national inventory report of greenhouse gas sources and sinks in Canada. Livestock emissions are determined using a standard Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, methodology and consist primarily of methane emissions from livestock production and manure management. The method tracks enteric methane emissions from livestock, mainly ruminants such as cattle and other ruminants, as well as methane and nitrous oxide emissions from manure management. This method is based on an internationally accepted standard, which has been modified to reflect Canadian climate, livestock types and management practices. It is further adapted based on empirical data collected from studies across Canada.
In response to part (b), data for the modeling comes primarily from the Statistics Canada census of agriculture, as well as the biennial livestock survey from Statistics Canada, which describes the population, age and gender distribution of livestock types. Additional data on livestock productivity and manure management practices come from Statistics Canada surveys, as well as from expert opinion surveys.
In response to part (c), figure 5.1 describes the emissions as of 2021. The national inventory tracks annual emissions, starting in 1990. The latest data point now available is 2022, released in early May.
In response to part (d), the data can be broken down by livestock group. Livestock groups include dairy, beef, sheep, swine and other minor animal categories for enteric methane as well as manure management emissions of methane and nitrous oxide.
In response to part (e), no, the information is for farms only. Emissions from processing facilities would be included in the industry sector.
With regard to Bill S-14, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act, the Canada National Marine Conservation Areas Act, the Rouge National Urban Park Act, and the National Parks of Canada Fishing Regulations: did any government department or agency do any consultations related to the proposed measures in the bill, and, if so, (i) who were the groups and people that were consulted, (ii) how much money was spent on the consultation process, (iii) what were the results or recommendations of the consultations, (iv) when were the consultations conducted, (v) how were the consultations conducted?
Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, in response to parts (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) and (v), with respect to the protected areas addressed in Bill S-14, an act to amend the Canada National Parks Act, the Canada National Marine Conservation Areas Act, the Rouge National Urban Park Act, and the national parks of Canada fishing regulations, extensive consultation and engagement on the intent to expand or complete the establishment of each of these protected areas has taken place.
Within Bill S-14, there are planned expansions for seven national parks and one national park reserve and the creation of two new national parks. Much of this land is already under the control and administration of Parks Canada, and in some cases for over 20 years. As such, the consultation and engagement has been varied and dependent upon the circumstances, has been supported by local ongoing working relationships and has occurred over an extended period of time.
Specifically, regarding the creation of new protected areas, Parks Canada begins consultation and engagement with provincial and territorial governments and indigenous governments and organizations at the feasibility stage where a potential protected area site is initially selected. This consultation and engagement is critical and carries on throughout the establishment process. Consultation processes with partners, key stakeholders, provincial and territorial governments, indigenous peoples, and representatives of communities located in or near the national parks and national marine conservation areas occurred in many communities and took many forms. This includes face-to-face meetings, correspondence, community newsletters, public open houses, community participation in the development of park management plans, and other fora.
Canada has a legal duty to consult and accommodate, where appropriate, when it contemplates a project that may adversely impact upon the section 35 rights of indigenous peoples and takes these responsibilities very seriously. In fact, in a number of cases, protected areas that will be established or expanded within modern treaty areas are a requirement of land claim agreements or other agreements with modern treaty and self-government partners.
Concerning the detailed aspects of the question, Parks Canada undertook an assessment to determine the amount of information that would fall within the scope of the question. The information requested is not systematically tracked in a centralized database. In some cases, Parks Canada has had administration and control of the lands for 20years or more and the lands have been managed as though they were part of the park during this period and consultation and engagement has occurred via formal and informal means throughout the time period. Parks Canada has concluded that producing and validating a comprehensive response to the question would require a manual collection of information that is not possible in the time allotted and could lead to the disclosure of incomplete and misleading information.
With regard to Health Canada's (HC) review into the presence of SV40 and other DNA elements in the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine: (a) what were HC’s concerns regarding "SV40 enhancer-promoter sequence and other non-essential sequences in Pfizer's plasmid for their COVID-19 vaccines" as noted in email correspondences between HC, European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the Food and Drug Administration officials in August 2023 prior to an ad-hoc Cluster meeting held on August 24, 2023; (b) what did HC ask of Pfizer to mitigate the concerns in (a), and what was Pfizer's response; (c) did HC's experts review Kevin McKernan's et al. study entitled “Sequencing of bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA Vaccines reveals Nanogram to Microgram Quantities of Expression Vector dsDNA per Dose”; (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, (i) what were HC's summary conclusions, (ii) how did HC respond to those conclusions; (e) is HC still of the position that "there is no peer-reviewed scientific literature suggesting that the SV40 promoter-enhancer itself or the other non-functional elements pose a risk to human health"; (f) if the answer to (e) is negative, what key peer-reviewed scientific literature did HC consider noteworthy; (g) is HC aware of the ability of the SV40 promoter-enhancer to bind to P53 as demonstrated by Drayman et al.; (h) if the answer to (g) is affirmative, (i) was the risk communicated to Pfizer, (ii) what was Pfizer's response; (i) if the answer to (g) is negative, will HC perform a risk analysis to human health; (j) is HC aware of the ability of the SV40 enhancer to act as a nuclear targeting sequence as demonstrated by Dean DA, Dean BS, Muller S, Smith LC. in their study entitled “Sequence Requirements for Plasmid Nuclear Import”; (k) if the answer to (j) is affirmative, was the risk communicated to Pfizer and a response requested; (I) if the answer to (j) is negative, will HC perform an independent risk analysis to human health; (m) if Pfizer's vaccine did not contain unsafe or unexpected plasmid sequences, such as SV40 promoter-enhancer, then why, on August 29, 2023, did Michael Wall state in an email to Tong Wu, "Health Canada will continue to work with international regulatory partners to achieve harmonisation regarding removal of these sequence elements from the plasmid for future strain changes"; (n) what are the "sequence elements" to which Michael Wall was referring; (o) regarding an email, on October 12, 2023, from an EMA colleague to Dr. Dean Smith at HC, which stated "We are going to discuss the matter of SV40 with Pfizer-BioNtech as well as these alleged high level of DNA in vaccines coming from these external parties. Have you taken any action? What would be your perspective?", (i) what action was taken or will be taken to address the "alleged high level of DNA" referenced in the email, (ii) has any action been taken to date, and, if so, what; (p) has HC informed (i) the Public Health Agency of Canada, (ii) Dr. Howard Njoo, (iii) Dr. Theresa Tam, (iv) Dr. Supriya Sharma, (v) the National Advisory Committee on Immunization, (vi) any or all of the provincial or territorial Chief Medical Officers, of the presence of the SV40 enhancer-promoter and DNA fragments; (q) if the answers to (p)(i) to (p)(vi) are affirmative, what were their individual responses; (r) if the answers to (p)(i) to (p)(vi) are negative, why or why not; (s) what risk assessment did HC perform to determine that SV40 promoter-enhancer is safe in an mRNA vaccine within the unique LNP delivery system; (t) what other Canadian vaccines contain SV40 promoter-enhancer sequence; and (u) what is HC's policy about SV40 promoter-enhancer being in any vaccine product?
Mr. Yasir Naqvi (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the health and safety of Canadians are Health Canada’s top priority, and before the initial authorization of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, COMIRNATY, the department completed a rigorous scientific review of the product’s safety, efficacy and quality. Following authorization, Health Canada remained active in discussions with international partners in assessing the quality, safety and efficacy of all COVID 19 vaccines.
Health Canada also collaborates with international partners; the Public Health Agency of Canada, PHAC; the National Advisory Committee on Immunization, NACI; and provincial/territorial public health authorities in monitoring the safety of vaccines authorized for use in Canada. The risk-based decisions made by Health Canada on the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are based on sound scientific evidence and are also in line with those of other countries, international guidelines, sound regulatory principles, and good regulatory practices.
Health Canada is aware of concerns surrounding SV40. In July 2023, through clarification requests, Health Canada evaluated the presence of the SV40 promoter-enhancer sequence in the plasmid used to prepare the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, COMIRNATY, as well as in residual DNA as a manufacturing impurity in the final vaccine product. Clarification requests are routinely issued during submission review to seek clarifications on various aspects of the file. Health Canada submitted a clarification request to Pfizer seeking additional information related to the SV40 sequences. Pfizer provided a reply to address all of Health Canada’s questions. Please note that communications between Health Canada and manufacturers related to the manufacturing and control of a vaccine are considered confidential business information that cannot be disclosed.
As previously indicated, the presence of a fragment of the SV40 sequence is not the same as the presence of the whole virus itself. The SV40 promoter-enhancer sequence fragment is inactive and has no functional role. The presence of the SV40 promoter-enhancer sequence in the COVID-19 vaccines is considered as low risk, as the levels of this residual DNA fragment are consistent with international regulators and are below the WHO recommended limit of 10 ng/dose.
To date, over three billion doses of COMIRNATY have been administered worldwide, including over 69 million doses in Canada: https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-administration/. No safety signals related to the residual SV40 DNA fragment have been detected. When new safety issues are confirmed by the department, Health Canada takes action, which may include communicating new risks to Canadians and health care professionals or changing the recommended use of the product.
With regard to the government's appointment of Catherine Blewett to be Secretary of the Treasury Board, effective February 6, 2024: (a) since February 6, 2024, broken down by month, how many days did the Secretary work in person at the Treasury Board Secretariat's main office at 90 Elgin Street in Ottawa; and (b) is the Secretary exempt from the government's requirement that employees are to work in the office for at least two days per week?
Mr. Anthony Housefather (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the direction on prescribed presence in the workplace applies to all public servants, including deputy heads. In addition to setting a minimum number of days in the office, currently 2-3 days/week or 40-60% of an employee’s schedule, the direction allows for certain exemptions in exceptional cases, for example for medical reasons. Ms. Blewett has been under medical care since March 11, 2024. Her presence at TBS’ office is as follows: February 6 to 29, 13 days; March, 7 days; April, 0 days; May 1 to 2, 0 days.
With regard to Exhibit 5.8 of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development's report entitled "Agriculture and Climate Change Mitigation-Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada" and the performance targets related to climate change mitigation in place for the Agricultural Clean Technology program: (a) what were the 193 new technologies adopted based on 141 performance reports; (b) what did the performance reports say about the adoption of these technologies; and (c) what were the 352 approved projects based on 141 performance reports?
Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, in response to part (a), rhe 193 new technologies adopted were to replace or upgrade the existing technology on farm or in the food-processing facility with technology that showed promise to generate measurable emission reductions categories under the program’s three priority areas.
The area of green energy and energy efficiency covers improvements that enable better management of energy-intensive agricultural processes, such as more energy-efficient technology for grain drying and grain handling; more energy-efficient facility heating systems; replacing fossil fuels or fossil fuel-derived energy with renewable energy such as solar electricity or biomass fuel.
The area of precision agriculture covers technology that contributes to more precise, and therefore reduced, input use, such as variable rate application technologies and GPS, auto-steering, guidance systems that optimize fertilizer and seed placement, reducing inputs and the number of passes in the field; subsurface or injection technologies that reduce fertilizer and water inputs and soil disturbance; - precision feed technologies that optimize livestock digestion and reduce methane production; precision harvesting equipment that reduces fossil fuel inputs.
The area of bioeconomy solutions covers using agricultural waste and by-products to generate energy or create bioproducts, such as anaerobic digesters and manure or compost management technologies.
The following is a breakdown of the 193 adopted clean technologies that were included in the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development’s report: 39% in grain drying and handling; 21% in precision agriculture; 18% in solar adoption; 5% in biomass heating; and 17% in “other”, which includes a combination of the various technologies outlined above.
In response to part (b), at an aggregate level, the performance reports provided information confirming that the clean technologies were being adopted as planned and are achieving the projects’ anticipated greenhouse gases emissions reduction results. In addition, the reports provide information on efficiencies gained and results achieved at a granular level. They also detail a number of challenges and unforeseen circumstances that affected the adoption and use of these technologies. For example, supply chain issues, labour shortages, and other COVID-related challenges contributed to delays in adoption for some producers. Furthermore, unforeseen circumstances such as unseasonably wet or dry conditions were also noted in a number of performance reports. This led to some results falling short of targets, and some exceeding them.
In response to part (c), please see “Database: Agricultural Clean Technology Program projects” at Canada.ca for a cumulative listing of all projects approved and announced as of March 7, 2024, under the agricultural clean technology program, adoption stream and research and innovation stream.
Note that the number of approved projects was 352 as of January 2024, when this program information was provided for the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development’s report.
With regard to Health Canada's (HC) signing of the contract with Pfizer on October 26, 2020, and the subsequent release of the Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 vaccine to the Canadian public: (a) was HC aware of a presentation made to the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee on October 22, 2020, where Dr. Steve Anderson at the US Food and Drug Administration's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, presented "Plans for Monitoring COVID-19 Vaccine Safety and Effectiveness"; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, did HC review the presentation deck, specifically slide #16, which identified a working list of 22 "possible adverse event outcomes", including acute myocardial infarction, stroke, myocarditis, pericarditis and death; (c) if the answer to (a) is negative, at what point did HC become aware of this presentation material or these serious adverse events of special interest; (d) once HC was in possession of this information, where and when did HC publish this list of 22 "possible adverse event outcomes" for the purpose of informing (i) the general public, (ii) medical physicians and hospitals, (iii) the media; (e) how did HC plan to independently and actively monitor these 22 "possible adverse event outcomes"; (f) did the initial Pfizer monograph posted on HC's website on December 9, 2020, and the ones posted thereafter identify any of these 22 "possible adverse event outcomes"; (g) when Pfizer vaccines were first being administered in early 2021, did HC require the sponsor to include a package insert in each mRNA vaccine vial containing a fully printed monograph of the product's ingredients and side effects including the identified 22 "possible adverse event outcomes" for both the consumer and the health professional to ensure full, informed consent; (h) if the answer to (g) is negative, (i) why was this not required, (ii) how was full, informed consent achieved at the time of vaccination; (i) did HC plan to actively monitor and publish the 1,291 "serious adverse events (SAEs) of special interest" which were contained in the Appendix of Pfizer's report of April 30, 2021, entitled "5.3.6 CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS OF POST-AUTHORIZATION ADVERSE EVENT REPORTS OF PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) RECEIVED THROUGH 28-FEB-2021" to ensure medical awareness of these potential SAEs; (j) if the answer to (i) is affirmative, (i) how were the SAEs monitored, (ii) what information was gathered; and (k) if the answer to (i) is negative, why are the 1,291 SAEs of special interest being monitored by the US Food and Drug Administration and not by HC?
Mr. Yasir Naqvi (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, Health Canada’s mandate is to help Canadians maintain and improve their health. The health and safety of Canadians is Health Canada’s top priority, and the department exercises stringent regulatory oversight over health products, including vaccines. Health Canada received Pfizer’s submission seeking authorization to its Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine on October 9, 2020, available at https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/news/2020/12/health-canada-authorizes-first-covid-19-vaccine0.html. The department is not a signing authority of purchasing contracts for health products, including COVID-19 vaccines.
Before a vaccine is approved in Canada, the Department conducts a rigorous scientific review of its safety, efficacy and quality. Submissions typically contain extensive data regarding the vaccine's safety, efficacy and quality, including results of pre-clinical and clinical studies, details on manufacturing processes, and information on adverse events following immunization, or AEFI. An authorization is only issued when benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks of its use.
Following authorization, Canada has a robust and well-established vaccine safety surveillance system involving Health Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada, or PHAC, provinces and territories, and vaccine manufacturers. Health Canada continues to monitor the safety profile of health products once they are on the Canadian market, to help ensure that the benefits of the product continue to outweigh the risks. The safety profile of these products is monitored by reviewing safety information submitted by manufacturers as well as considering safety information from international regulators. When new safety issues are confirmed by the Department, Health Canada takes action, which may include communicating new risks to Canadians and healthcare professionals or changing the recommended use of the product.
In response to (a) to (e), Health Canada is aware of the referred presentation regarding FDA “Plans for Monitoring COVID-19 Vaccine Safety and Effectiveness”, which occurred at the Vaccines and Related Biologic Products Advisory Committee, or VRBPAC, held on October 22, 2020, including the slide #16 of the 22 “possible adverse event outcomes.” Since the authorization of the first COVID-19 vaccines in Canada on December 9, 2020, Health Canada has been monitoring possible adverse events including these 22 “possible adverse event outcomes.”
In addition, Health Canada and the PHAC have been actively monitoring and reviewing AEFI reports. All AEFI reports submitted by provincial and territorial public health authorities and federal departments are captured in the Canadian Adverse Events Following Immunization Surveillance System, or CAEFISS, which is managed by PHAC. In addition, the Canada Vigilance Program, or CVP, managed by Health Canada, receives AEFI reports from manufacturers, Canadian hospitals, healthcare professionals and consumers. Information about AEFIs reported in Canada, including some of the 22 “possible adverse event outcomes” is published on the Government of Canada’s website. It is important to note that these reports do not necessarily imply that a relationship between the adverse event and the vaccine has been established. However, they are an important information source supporting ongoing safety monitoring. Additional information is also available on the following public websites: COVID-19 Vaccine safety and side effects, at https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/diseases/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/vaccines/safety-side-effects.html#a5; Vaccine safety and possible side effects, at https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/vaccination-children/safety-concerns-side-effects.html; Health Product InfoWatch, at https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/medeffect-canada/health-product-infowatch/published-newsletters.html#a1; Pfizer-BioNTech Comirnaty COVID-19 Vaccine, at https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/covid19-industry/drugs-vaccines-treatments/vaccines/pfizer-biontech.html; and Regulatory Decision Summary of Pfizer-BioNTech Comirnaty COVID-19 Vaccine, at https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/regulatory-decision-summary-detailTwo.html?linkID=RDS00730.
In response to (f) to (i), as part of the regulatory requirements, a product monograph is publicly released at the time of a vaccine’s authorization. The product monograph is developed and managed by the manufacturer. The content, wordings, and format are carefully reviewed by Health Canada to ensure that it is prepared in accordance with the Product monograph guidance documents and notices, found at Canada.ca. Updates of the product monograph are summarized in the Post-Authorization Activity Table (PAAT) at https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/paat-SBD00510-comirnaty-en.html for Comirnaty.
A product monograph is a factual, scientific document on the drug product that, devoid of promotional material, describes the properties, claims, indications, and conditions of use for the drug, and that contains any other information that may be required for optimal, safe, and effective use of the drug. It is used to inform physicians, pharmacists, dentists, nurses, other healthcare professionals, and patients about the appropriate use of the product.
A package insert is also required at the time of a vaccine’s authorization. As noted above for the Canadian Product Monograph, at the time of authorization, the safety information included in package inserts was based on the available safety data from clinical trials. Furthermore, Health Canada is responsible for ensuring that the product monograph and package inserts are updated over time to adequately reflect the risks associated with the vaccines that are authorized in Canada. Health Canada-approved information is used by the appropriate bodies (e.g., provincial and local public health authorities, etc.) to guide recommendations, vaccine use, as well as information provided to vaccine recipients.
In response to (j) to (k), the referred report of 1,291 "serious adverse events (SAEs) of special interest" which were contained in Pfizer's report of April 30, 2021, entitled "5.3.6 CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS OF POST-AUTHORIZATION ADVERSE EVENT REPORTS OF PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) RECEIVED THROUGH 28-FEB-2021", was prepared by the manufacturer, Pfizer, for the US FDA. Health Canada reviewed safety reports submitted by the manufacturer including data from the referred report. The information reviewed did not identify new safety concerns and was consistent with the known safety profile of COMIRNATY. Outcomes of Health Canada’s safety reviews for COMIRNATY, as well as subsequent reviews, are available online at the Post Authorization Activity Table for COMIRNATY at https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/post-authorization-activity-table.html?linkID=SBD00510.
To date, the benefits of these vaccines continue to outweigh their known risks.
With regard to the post-market surveillance used by Health Canada (HC) to monitor for safety concerns regarding the novel COVID-19 vaccine products: (a) have HC, the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), Statistics Canada or any other federal agency or entity, department, or third-party agency used databases such as the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, the Ontario Health Data Platform or any other databases that collect realtime data to determine an individual's date of medical diagnoses, including death; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what are the anonymized individual results for the following new onset diagnoses, from December 1, 2020, to the present date, cross referenced with the date of receipt of COVID- 19 vaccine, the age by 5-year increments, the gender, and the province or territory of residence, (i) cerebral infraction, (ii) cerebral hemorrhage, (iii) sudden infant death syndrome, (iv) seizure, (v) acute myocarditis, (vi) pericarditis, (vii) transverse myelitis, (viii) miscarriage, (ix) Bell's palsy, (x) pancreatic cancer, (xi) esophageal cancer, (xii) anaphylaxis, (xiii) myocardial infraction, (xiv) breast cancer, (xv) pulmonary embolism, (xvi) deep vein thrombosis, (xvii) thrombocytopenia, (xviii) pulmonary hypertension (xix) lymphoma, (xx) ruptured aortic aneurysm, (xxi) cellulitis, (xxii) Guillain Barre syndrome, (xxiii) stillbirth, (xxiv) encephalopathy due to vaccination, (xxv) encephalopathy, (xxvi) sudden death, (xxvii) preeclampsia, (xxviii) premature birth, (xxix) multiple sclerosis, (xxx) hysterectomy, (xxxi) vasculitis; (c) what are the quarterly incidence rates of the diagnoses in (b) categorized by (i) age with 5-year increments, (ii) gender, (iii) province or territory of residence from January 1, 2014, to November 30, 2020; (d) if the answer to (a) is negative, what are the quarterly incidence rates of the diagnosis in (b) from December 1, 2020, to the present day, categorized by (i) age with 5-year increments, (ii) gender, (iii) province or territory of residence; (e) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, has this data been used to compare rates of medical diagnosis between never COVID-19 vaccinated individuals and others based on the number of COVID-19 injections received; (f) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, has this data been used to determine the length of time between receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine and the medical diagnosis or death, and, if so, what are the ranges of time; (g) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, will the raw data be released to independent researchers; (h) if the answer to (a) is negative, will the government make the raw anonymized data public; (i) if the answer to (a) is negative, what plans are either in place or planned to complete such an analysis in order to validate adverse event reporting systems that may be outdated for the COVID-19 vaccine products; (j) have there been any communications from or between HC, the PHAC, Statistics Canada, or any other federal agencies or their representatives about the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, the Ontario Health Data Platform, or any other similar database sources that capture receipt of COVID-19 vaccine(s) or booster(s) and clinical outcomes to monitor for safety signals; (k) if the answer to (j) is affirmative, which government agencies or out-sourced third parties were involved, and, for each, (i) what are the communications, (ii) who directed these communications, (iii) what were the dates of these communications, (iv) what was included in these communications, (v) what were the conclusions of these communications?
Mr. Yasir Naqvi (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a) to (g), the Public Health Agency of Canada, or PHAC, does not have access to provincial or territorial databases like the Ontario Health Data Platform that provide an individual-level information such as medical diagnoses or date of deaths. Similarly, PHAC does not have access to databases managed by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences.
Canada has a robust and well-established surveillance system to monitor for safety concerns for COVID-19 vaccines authorized in Canada, which involves monitoring by Health Canada, PHAC, provinces and territories, and vaccine manufacturers. Health Canada continues to monitor the safety profile of health products once they are on the Canadian market, to help ensure that the benefits of the product continue to outweigh the risks. The safety profile of these products is monitored by reviewing safety information submitted by manufacturers as well as considering safety information from international regulators and from adverse events following immunization, or AEFI, reports from healthcare professionals and consumers. When new safety issues are confirmed, Health Canada takes action, which may include communicating new risks to Canadians and healthcare professionals or changing the recommended use of the product.
In addition, Health Canada and the PHAC have been actively monitoring and reviewing AEFI reports. All AEFI reports submitted by provincial and territorial public health authorities and federal departments are captured in the Canadian Adverse Events Following Immunization Surveillance System, or CAEFISS, which is managed by PHAC. In addition, the Canada Vigilance Program, or CVP, managed by Health Canada, receives AEFI reports from manufacturers, Canadian hospitals, healthcare professionals and consumers. Information about AEFIs reported in Canada, including the reporting rates, is published on the Government of Canada’s website. In addition, the anonymized reports received from the CVP of Health Canada, including suspect AEFIs reported directly to the CVP, are available at https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/medeffect-canada/adverse-reaction-database.html. It is important to note that these reports do not necessarily imply that a relationship between the adverse event and the vaccine has been established. However, they are an important information source supporting ongoing safety monitoring.
Building on the existing robust pharmacovigilance system, Health Canada introduced strategies to enhance regulatory surveillance measures for COVID-19 vaccines. For example, terms and conditions in the document “Guidance for market authorization requirements for COVID-19 vaccines”, found at canada.ca, have been imposed on manufacturers to quickly request and gather critical safety and effectiveness information in order to mitigate risks during the product lifecycle. These enhanced regulatory surveillance measures enabled Health Canada to request additional risk monitoring activities and post-market studies, namely post-authorization studies on safety and effectiveness. These measures also provided tools for Health Canada to detect and evaluate emerging safety information on the benefit-risk balance of COVID-19 vaccines. As noted before, should there be new safety issues, Health Canada will take appropriate action(s).
With regard to (h), PHAC does not possess or have access to datasets with this type of information.
With regard to (i), Health Canada and PHAC have a robust vaccine safety surveillance system in place that engages healthcare professionals, vaccine manufacturers, and provincial and territorial health authorities. PHAC receives and reviews AEFI reports from provinces and territories, as submitted by health care providers through CAEFISS). The information provided by CAEFISS is complemented by the Canada Vigilance Program, Health Canada’s post-market surveillance program that collects and assesses reports of suspected adverse events to health products marketed in Canada. Manufacturers are required to report serious adverse events to Health Canada as the national regulatory authority, as well as submit regular summaries of global safety information. AEFI reports are monitored continuously by PHAC and Health Canada. Any new or unusual adverse events, or changes in trends or severity of specific events would trigger an investigation, including an in-depth medical review and risk assessment. As safety issues are investigated, Health Canada will take appropriate action as needed.
With regard to (j), PHAC is aware of provincial and territorial databases that include information about vaccinations and clinical outcomes following vaccination, among many other topics. However, PHAC receives AEFI reports from all provincial and territorial governments. For the purposes of adverse events following immunizations, provincial and territorial governments make the determination of the appropriate data sources for clinical and vaccination data necessary to generate and validate those reports that are submitted to PHAC for the purposes of surveillance.
Part (k) is not applicable.
With respect to Health Canada's (HC) review into the presence of SV40 and other DNA elements in the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine: (a) in July 2023, what was the basis for an Issue Analysis Summary (IAS) for the SV40 promoter agreed to by Drs Co Pham, Tong Wu and Michael Wall; (b) in July 2023, what was the rationale for HC to submit #1 Clarifax request to Pfizer and (i) what was the outcome of this request, (ii) did the response from the sponsor to #1 Quality Clarifax address all of HC's questions and concerns, and, if negative, what was missing, (iii) did Pfizer provide a complete justification for the SV40 sequences, (iv) did Pfizer provide an updated fully annotated table of functional elements of the plasmid, (v) did Pfizer include non-functional elements of the plasmid in the annotated table specifically addressing any unexpected open reading frames and other sequence elements, (vi) if the answer to (iii), (iv) and (v) is affirmative, what were the results, (vii) if the answer to (iii), (iv) and (v) is negative, what was HC's response; (c) with respect to the quantitative assay used to measure the residual DNA in order to confirm the presence of the SV40 promoter-enhancer, did HC confirm with Pfizer (i) the amplicon size used, (ii) the appropriateness of the primers used; (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, what was Pfizer's response; (e) if the answer to (c) is negative, has HC independently verified the total amounts of residual DNA, the appropriateness of the primers, and the amplicon size used by Pfizer to measure the residual DNA in the XBB.1.5 vials; (f) with respect to Pfizer's response in #1, #2 and #3 Quality Clarifaxes, did Pfizer provide the requested information on the fragment size analysis by December 1, 2023; (g) if the answer to (f) is affirmative, what were the results; (h) if the answer to (f) is negative, what was HC's response; (i) concerning the residual plasmid DNA in the drug substance, (i) did Pfizer provide the requested information on the characterization of residual circular DNA plasmid by December 1, 2023, (ii) did Pfizer provide the requested information on the risk of replication in bacterial cells by December 1, 2023, (iii) did HC at any time request information on the risk of replication in mammalian cells; (j) if the answer to (i)(i), (i)(ii) and (i)(iii) is affirmative, what were the results; (k) if the answer to (i)(i), (i)(ii), and (i)(iii) is negative, what was HC's response; (I) did HC request that Pfizer repeat the analyses for fragment size distribution and residual DNA for any of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines (i.e., original or bivalent); (m) if the answer to (l) is affirmative, what were the findings; (n) if the answer to (l) is negative, why not; (o) did HC independently verify the quantity of residual DNA, the size distribution and the presence of SV40 sequences in the XBB.1.5. vaccine, or any other COVID-19 vaccine submitted by Pfizer for review; (p) at any time, did Pfizer ever suggest that the regulatory sequence elements in question were functional with respect to the manufacturing process, and, if so, what was the function; (q) at any time, did Plizer ever suggest that regulatory sequence elements in question were functional following inoculation into humans; and (r) if the answer to (p) is affirmative, what and when did Pfizer inform HC?
Mr. Yasir Naqvi (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, in response to (a) to (r), the health and safety of Canadians are Health Canada’s top priority. The department exercises stringent regulatory oversight over vaccines, and conducts a rigorous scientific review of their safety, efficacy and quality prior to authorization. In July 2023, Health Canada evaluated the presence of the SV40 promoter/enhancer sequence in the plasmid used to prepare the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, or COMIRNATY, as well as in residual DNA as a manufacturing impurity in the final vaccine product. Clarification requests are routinely issued during submission review to seek clarifications on various aspects of the file. Health Canada submitted a clarification request to Pfizer seeking additional information related to the SV40 sequences. Pfizer provided a reply to address all of Health Canada’s questions. Please note that communications between Health Canada and manufacturers related to the manufacturing and control of a vaccine are considered confidential business information that cannot be disclosed.
The residual plasmid DNA levels measured by the manufacturer, using approved validated methods, were provided to Health Canada and was consistently below the limit of 10 nanograms per human dose. In addition, all COMIRNATY commercial vaccine batches, released in Canada, complied with the quality requirements approved by Health Canada, including the requirements for residual DNA. An Issue Analysis Summary, or IAS, was initially considered to document the process but was later deemed to be unnecessary as the residual DNA content in the final product was consistently below the limit of 10 nanograms per human dose, which is in line with the World Health Organization’s recommendation concerning residual DNA in biological drugs.
The presence of residual plasmid DNA in the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is considered a manufacturing impurity and does not change the safety assessment of these vaccines by Health Canada.
With respect to Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP): (a) how many claims have been filed to the program from December 8, 2020, to present day, broken down by age group; (b) how many of those claims have been approved, broken down by age group; (c) of the approved claims, what have been the diagnoses and their frequencies, broken down by age group, date approved, and the corresponding COVID-19 vaccines that were administered; (d) of the approved claims, what are the percentages of Canadians who received (i) the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, (ii) the J&J COVID-19 vaccine, (iii) any COVID-19 vaccine produced by Pfizer-BioNTech, (iv) any COVID-19 vaccine produced by Moderna, (v) a combination of COVID-19 vaccines; (e) how many persons have received compensation to date through the VISP; (f) what is the total compensation to date given to vaccine-injured Canadians; (g) what is the age of the youngest person who received funding support approval through the VISP, and their associated diagnosis; (h) for all death claims, (i) what is the total number of death claims that have been filed to VISP, (ii) of the total, what have been the underlying causes of death, aside from the vaccine and their frequencies, (iii) how many filed death claims have been approved by the VISP and their corresponding diagnosis and vaccine status; (i) did the VISP require autopsies prior to approving a death claim; (j) if the answer to (i) is affirmative, what immunohistochemistry requirements does the VISP specify for these autopsies; (k) when denied, how many persons have appealed their claim and how many have been successful; (l) regarding the determination of causality of the adverse event in relation to a COVID-19 vaccine, (i) what is the standard criteria, (ii) does the Medical Review Board take into consideration the Bradford Hill criteria; (m) what are the professional qualifications of each member on the Medical Review Board; and (n) who are the professionals on the Medical Review Board?
Mr. Yasir Naqvi (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the Pan-Canadian Vaccine Injury Support Program, or VISP, provides financial support to people in Canada in the rare event that they experience a serious and permanent injury as a result of receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine, administered in Canada, on or after December 8, 2020. The program also provides death benefits and support for funeral expenses in the rare case of a death as a result of receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine.
The Pan-Canadian VISP was launched on June 1, 2021, and is being administered independently by OXARO, formerly known as Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton Consulting Inc., with funding from the Public Health Agency of Canada, or PHAC. This program is available for people who were vaccinated in all provinces except Quebec. PHAC is not involved in individual cases, including in the determination of decisions regarding causality or compensation.
As the independent administrator, OXARO operates at arm’s length from PHAC and oversees all aspects of claims intake and assessment. OXARO is responsible for providing periodic public reporting on program statistics. Public reporting began on December 1, 2021, and data on the pan-Canadian VISP is updated twice a year. Latest public reporting can be found at https://vaccineinjurysupport.ca/en/program-statistics. The latest reporting shows the program statistics as of December 1, 2023. The next update will be available in June 2024.
The province of Quebec continues to administer its longstanding Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, or VICP, for people vaccinated in that province, with federal funding. Information on Quebec’s VICP, including program statistics as of March 31, 2023, can be found at https://www.quebec.ca/en/health/advice-and-prevention/vaccination/vaccine-injury-compensation-program#c3895.
In response to questions (a), (b), (e), (f), and (k), as of OXARO’s last public report on December 1, 2023, OXARO had received 2233 claims; approved 138 claims by Medical Review Board; received 102 claims of appeals; approved 6 appeals; and paid $11.236 million in financial support to eligible claimants.
As of Quebec’s last public report on March 1, 2023, since 1988, Quebec had received 410 claims; approved 56 claims; received 92 claims of appeals; approved 9 appeals; and paid $9.397 million in financial support to eligible claimants.
These program statistics, including the claims received, claims approved and appeals, can also be found on the OXARO website. Information on Quebec’s Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, for those vaccinated in Quebec, can be found on the Quebec provincial website.
In response to questions and sub-questions (a) broken down by age group, (b) broken down by age group, (c) what have been the diagnoses and their frequencies, broken down by age group, date approved, and the corresponding COVID-19 vaccines that were administered, (d), (g), (h), (i) and (j), the implementation model used by the Government of Canada, a contribution agreement subject to the Policy on Transfer Payments, means that OXARO’s work occurs independently and at arm’s length from PHAC. As a result, PHAC does not request nor receive any information regarding individual claims received by OXARO nor data related to demographics, types of vaccines, or the nature of vaccine injuries.
In response to questions (l), (m) and (n),with regards to the physicians conducting the medical board reviews and assessment process followed, OXARO has advised PHAC that they ensure the medical experts hold both a valid license with their respective College of Physicians and a valid Canadian Medical Protective Association membership across Canada. Depending on the nature of the injury, the team of medical experts assembled to review a claim can include specialists, such as cardiologists and neurologists. This is done to provide a comprehensive analysis of each claim. Medical review boards use a causality assessment process developed by OXARO that is based on accepted industry practices and the World Health Organization’s guidance on the causality assessment of an adverse event following immunization.
With regard to the government’s announcement on August 12, 2021 to invest $1.44 billion into Telesat’s advanced low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellation, Telesat Lightspeed: (a) what are the details of government purchases or sales of Telesat equity or shares since the announcement, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) total price or amount, (iii) type of transaction (bought or sold), (iv) number of shares or percentage of equity, (v) share price, if applicable; and (b) what is the government’s current equity stake in Telesat in terms of value, percentage of equity, and number of shares?
Hon. François-Philippe Champagne (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the terms of the 2021 agreement-in-principle were never finalized and have since been superseded. As such, the government has not disbursed any funds or received any equity for Telesat’s Lightspeed Low Earth Orbit satellite project.
Since then, both Telesat’s and the Government’s plans have been updated. The government remains in discussions with Telesat regarding a potential investment in the project.
With regard to the recently announced emissions cap on Canada's oil and gas sector: (a) what assessments has the Government of Canada made regarding the economic impact on Gross Domestic Product and Export amounts, by dollar, for Canada; (b) has the government analyzed and reviewed the potential impact to Canadian firms that export energy products, and, if so, what are the details; (c) has the government considered the potential economic fallout in terms of job losses across the energy sector, at the provincial and territorial level, and, if so, what were the findings; (d) prior to the announcement of the emissions cap, did the government engage in any public relations or briefings with non-government organizations (NGO), the United Nations, and any sub-directorates of the United Nations at the ministerial level, and, if so, what was the nature of those discussions and the result of those discussions; (e) did the government procure any NGO or outside-of-government entities or actors to raise the subject within the Canadian media sphere, and, if so, who was involved and how much money was spent on these endeavors; and (f) what are the financial and contractual details of all memorandums and briefing notes, scope documents and economic impact analysis about the emissions cap that were sent to, or received by, the Minister of Export Promotion, International Trade and Economic Development, the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, and the Minister of Finance, as well as any relevant ministerial offices and other involved ministers, deputy ministers, assistant deputy ministers regarding the emissions cap policy file, from 2016 to 2024?
Hon. Steven MacKinnon (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has committed to cap and reduce greenhouse gas, or GHG, emissions from the oil and gas sector at a pace and scale necessary to contribute to Canada’s 2030 climate goals, to achieve net-zero GHG emissions by 2050, and in a way that allows the sector to compete in the emerging net-zero global economy. As the country’s largest source of GHG emissions and the only major source that continues to grow, decarbonizing the oil and gas sector is critical to achieving Canada’s emission targets. The sector is also an economic powerhouse, proven innovator, and source of good jobs. The emissions cap will help decarbonize oil and gas production to make Canada a highly efficient producer supplying global demand and ensure the sector is on a path to net-zero by 2050. The emissions cap is an integral piece of the Government of Canada’s roadmap to support the decarbonization of oil and gas production.
On July 18, 2022, the government published a discussion paper outlining two regulatory options to cap GHG emissions from the oil and gas sector: a new national GHG emissions cap-and-trade system, and modifications to existing carbon pricing systems. The discussion document sought feedback on the two options, and generated a significant response. Environment and Climate Change Canada, or ECCC, received over 150 submissions from provinces and territories, indigenous organizations, industry, environmental non-governmental organizations, and academics, as well as over 25,000 comments from members of the public. Feedback on the discussion paper has informed the government’s approach on this important policy.
In addition to the formal comment period, the Government of Canada has held a significant number of information webinars and bilateral meetings with various partners and interested parties. Information gathered and feedback received during this engagement has been taken into consideration in the design of the proposed regulatory approach.
On December 7, 2023, the Government of Canada published a regulatory framework to cap and cut emissions in the oil and gas sector for a 60-day public comment period. The government received 107 formal written submissions from provinces and territories, indigenous organizations, industry, environmental non-governmental organizations, and academics, as well as over 35,000 comments from members of the public. Feedback on the regulatory framework is being used to inform the development of proposed regulations.
The Government of Canada plans to publish proposed regulations in 2024 in Part I of the Canada Gazette for a 60-day public comment period. The impacts of the policy will be assessed as part of the regulatory process and published in the regulatory impacts analysis statement that accompanies the proposed regulations. Formal written comments will also be sought on the proposal at that time. Publication of the final regulations is targeted for 2025, with the first reporting obligations starting as early as 2026 and full system requirements phased in between 2026 and 2030.
The Government of Canada has not procured any non-government organizations or outside-of-government entities or actors to raise the subject within the Canadian media sphere. The government has not put in place any contracts to support analysis related to the oil and gas emissions cap.
With regard to the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) hybrid workforce model for the federal public service: (a) has the TBS ever sought the opinion of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada regarding the concern for and risk of privacy and data breaches of sensitive and confidential information of Canadian citizens that may be caused with malicious intent such as a cyberattack, accident, or negligence, and, if so, when was the opinion sought and what was the opinion; and (b) is the TBS aware of any privacy and data breaches that have occurred with federal workers operating off-site since March 16, 2020, as a result of working from home on unsecured networks, devices, software, or hardware, and, if so, what are the details of each breach including for each the (i) date, (ii) department or agency involved, (iii) summary of what occurred, (iv) number of individuals whose information was impacted, (v) type of information breached, (vi) length of time until the breach was resolved, (vii) details on if and how those whose information was breached were notified, (viii) date on which the Privacy Commissioner was notified, if applicable?
Mr. Anthony Housefather (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), in the context of the hybrid work model for the federal public service, the Information and Privacy Policy Division of the Treasury Board Secretariat, or TBS, engaged the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, or OPC, on Access to Information and Privacy Implementation Notice 2020-01: Guidance on delays resulting from measures to mitigate the impact of novel Coronavirus, or COVID-19, on federal workplaces, in March 2020; and the implementation of departmental verification processes that support the irection on prescribed presence in the workplace, in February 2023.
TBS did not consult the OPC specifically on the concern for and risk of privacy and data breaches of sensitive and confidential information of Canadian citizens that may be caused with malicious intent such as a cyberattack, accident, or negligence.
With regard to (b), Appendix A to the TBS Policy on Privacy Protection provides for the following definitions:
Privacy breach means the improper or unauthorized access to, creation, collection, use, disclosure, retention, or disposal of personal information.
Material privacy breach means a privacy breach that could reasonably be expected to create a real risk of significant harm to an individual. Significant harm includes bodily harm, humiliation, damage to reputation or relationships, loss of employment, business or professional opportunities, financial loss, identity theft, negative effects on the credit record and damage to or loss of property.
As per section 4.2.8 of the Policy, heads of government institutions or their delegates are responsible for reporting material privacy breaches to TBS and to the OPC after making efforts to contain, assess and mitigate the breach. Consequently, as per sections 5.2.6 and 5.3.4 of the policy, respectively, TBS and the Privacy Commissioner of Canada are responsible for receiving and reviewing material privacy breach reports.
While TBS centrally tracks certain details related to material privacy breach reports submitted by federal institutions subject to the Privacy Act, it does not track the employee’s work location at the time of the breach. TBS does not centrally track or otherwise receive any details related to non-material privacy reaches.
With regard to the Known Traveller Digital Identity (KTDI) project announced by the government in January 2018 and the successor pilot on Digital Travel Credentials (DTCs): (a) what is the current status of both projects; (b) why was the decision made to not resume the KTDI; (c) how was the data, including personal data, that was obtained through the KTDI used; (d) was the data, including personal data, that was obtained through the KTDI retained, and, if so, by whom, including the country, territory, organization, and company details, including (i) which types of data were retained, (ii) where is the data stored; (e) what is the nature of the government's involvement, including its agencies, in the new DTC project; (f) what is the World Economic Forum’s involvement in the new project, if any; (g) who are the project partners; (h) what is the end date of the DTC project; (i) how many Canadian travellers opted into the project to date; (j) for travellers who have been participating in the project, what type of data was shared with (i) the government, (ii) third parties; (k) what third parties received the data in (j)(ii); (l) what specific technologies is the government testing, and what are the parameters around that testing; (m) what (i) benefits of, (ii) problems with, the technologies have been identified to date; and (n) what are the total government expenditures related to the KTDI and DTC projects since 2018, broken down by type of expenditure?
Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Minister of Transport, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, in regard to (a), Transport Canada, or TC, officially ended its participation in the Known Traveler Digital Identity, or KTDI, project in April 2023. The KTDI Project never launched.
The Digital Travel Credentials, or DTC, pilot project launched on January 7, 2024, and ended on March 31, 2024.
In regard to (b), the KTDI project was delayed indefinitely due to the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. In April 2023, TC and the Kingdom of the Netherlands notified the World Economic Forum that they had officially ended their participation due to resource constraints, travel restrictions and competing priorities.
In regard to (c), as the KTDI project was never officially launched, no data was obtained.
In regard to (d), as the KTDI project was never launched, no data of any type was retained or stored.
In regard to (e), TC facilitated the DTC pilot project with KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, or KLM, and the Kingdom of the Netherlands by assisting KLM in receiving a ministerial exemption order from Public Safety Canada for sections 4 and 4.1 of the Secure Air Travel Regulations to allow their use of facial recognition technology in a live pilot to verify the identity of participating passengers at the boarding gate for flights destined to the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
A condition of the ministerial exemption was for KLM to ensure that all passenger participation in the DTC pilot project be voluntary.
In regard to (f), the World Economic Forum was not involved in any capacity with KLM’s DTC pilot project.
In regard to (g), the DTC pilot project partners were KLM, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and the Montreal-Trudeau International Airport where the live pilot was hosted in Canada for departing flights.
In regard to (h), the DTC pilot project concluded on March 31, 2024.
In regard to (i), as TC did not collect any data from the DTC pilot project, the total number or citizenship of the passengers who volunteered for the pilot is unknown.
In regard to (j) (i) and (ii), no data from the DTC pilot project has been shared with TC, and no data was shared with Canadian third parties, such as the Montreal-Trudeau International Airport.
In regard to (k), no third parties received data.
In regard to (l), TC did not conduct testing as the DTC pilot project was industry-run by KLM in partnership with the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
In regard to (m), as the DTC pilot project was run by KLM, its results, including (i) benefits of, and (ii) problems with the technology, are commercially proprietary. Further information may be available from KLM and the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
In regard to (n), during the length of TC’s participation in the KTDI project, TC’s expenditures totalled $399,938 on salaries and $238,627 on other operating costs.
There are no government expenditures by TC in relation to the DTC pilot project run by KLM and the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
With regard to government information on weather modification activities in Canada since 2015: (a) what weather modification activities is the government aware have taken place, including, but not limited to, cloud seeding or modification, hail suppression, fog dissipation, precipitation modification, lightning modification, hurricane seeding; (b) what are the (i) start and end dates of the activities in (a), (ii) stated objectives, (iii) geographic areas affected; (c) what techniques, chemicals and equipment are involved in each of the known weather modification activities; (d) is the government aware of any unlawful or disputed weather modification activities in Canada, and, if so, what are the details including the dates and summaries of each activity; (e) what, if any, government support or funding is provided to any of the activities in (a); (f) which government departments or agencies are involved in activities in (e), and what are the program objectives and research areas; (g) which, if any, international entities are involved in any of the activities; and (h) what outcomes and impacts have been observed by these activities and the methods and chemicals employed, including impacts on the environment, storm severity, and any other impacts?
Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), since 1996, only one company has reported undertaking weather modification activities in Canada, Weather Modification Inc., which operates a hail suppression program in Alberta.
With regard to (b), annual operations happen between June 1 and September 15 each year. The objective of the cloud seeding operations is to reduce hail damage caused by thunderstorms in central and southern Alberta.
With regard to (c)(i), according to the 2023 Atlantic High-Skilled Program, or AHSP, notice of intent, clouds are seeded either from the base or from the top. Cloud base seeding involves releasing silver iodide, or AgI, particles at the base of updraft areas near the cloud base, which then get transported up to the clouds through the updraft winds. Cloud top seeding, conducted between the levels of -5 and -10 degrees Celsius, involves dropping flares into the cloud which release AgI and will penetrate the edges of single convective cells meeting the seed criteria. Factors that determine cloud top or cloud base seeding are storm structure, visibility, cloud base height, or time available to reach seeding altitude.
With regard to (c) (ii), AgI is used as the primary seeding agent.
With regard to (c) (iii), according to the 2020 and 2021 AHSP Notices of Intent, five aircraft are used every season to execute on the operations, which are tagged as Hailstop 1 to Hailstop 5. Between 2015 and 2020, the fleet included three Beechcraft King Air C90 prop-jet aircraft and two Cessna C340 aircraft, and since 2021 the fleet consists simply of five Beechcraft King Air C90 prop-jet aircraft. The operational equipment also consists of one C-band Doppler weather radar, 250 kilowatt peak power, with 1.65 degree beam width, located at the Olds-Didsbury airport, 15.3 metres tower-mounted, including a radome, as per the 2020 and 2021 AHSP Notice of Intent.
With regard to (d), to date, Environment and Climate Change Canada, or ECCC, is not aware of any weather modification activities in Canada that would violate the Weather Modification Information Act, other Acts administered by ECCC.
With regard to (e), ECCC does not provide any funding in support of this activity.
With regard to (f), there are no government agencies responsible for the activities in part (e) at the federal level.
With regard to (g), Weather Modification International works under contract to conduct cloud seeding operations on behalf of the Alberta Severe Weather Management Society, or ASWMS. They are an American organization based in Fargo, North Dakota, as per the 2023 AHSP Notice of Intent.
With regard to (h), the emissions produced by AgI, as a seeding agent, are considered to have negligible environmental or human health impacts according to a screening assessment done by ECCC and Health Canada.
With regard to Canada’s participation in the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland, from January 15 to 19, 2024: (a) how many individuals were part of Canada’s delegation; (b) who were the members of the delegation, including, for each, their (i) name, (ii) title, (iii) role; (c) what are the details of all meetings held in Davos involving the Deputy Prime Minister, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) names and titles of the attendees, (iii) purpose of the meeting, (iv) agenda items, (v) summary of what occurred at the meeting, including any agreements made; (d) what are the details of all meetings held in Davos involving members of the Canadian delegation other than the Deputy Prime Minister, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) names and titles of the attendees, (iii) purpose of the meeting, (iv) agenda items, (v) summary of what occurred at the meeting, including anything that was agreed to; (e) what are the details, including the summary of terms, of any agreements entered into during the forum; (f) what are the details of all follow-up action taken by the government as a result of what happened at the forum; (g) what are the details of all memoranda or briefing notes prepared to support Canada’s delegation to the forum, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) sender, (iii) recipient, (iv) title, (v) subject matter, (vi) summary of contents, (vii) file number; and (h) what was the total cost to the taxpayer, broken down by category of expense?
Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the Department of Finance response to parts (a) through (h) is as follows:
The World Economic Forum Annual Meeting was held in Davos, Switzerland, from January 15 to 19, 2024. As the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, I attended from January 16 to January 19, 2024, to advance Canadian economic interests.
I held meetings with business leaders and other participants, including members of the Ukrainian delegation; a variety of business leaders about opportunities for Canada; and foreign government leaders and elected representatives.
I also participated in a panel entitled “No Recovery without Trade and Investment". Participants included Brian Moynihan, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Bank of America; Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Director-General of the World Trade Organization; and Valdis Dombrovskis, European Commissioner for Trade.
Regarding the Department of Finance response to part (h): please note that travel expenditures for senior level departmental officers or employees, Ministers, ministerial advisors and ministerial staff are proactively disclosed on Open.Canada.ca (https://search.open.canada.ca/travel/).
With regard to the Canada Infrastructure Bank's (CIB) investment in the Avenue Living residential retrofits: (a) what is the summary of the terms of the project agreement with Avenue Living; (b) which properties are undergoing retrofits financed by the CIB; (c) at which properties is the CIB aware of significant rent increases since the financial close of the agreement; (d) how much of the investment has been disbursed to date and how has that financing been disbursed; (e) what is the current status of each of the retrofit projects at Avenue Living properties; (f) what measures did the CIB take when the investment agreement was made to ensure the investment would not be used as a rationale to increase rent; (g) if the answer to (f) is none, why were no measures taken; (h) what, if any, changes to the agreement will the CIB make in light of the rent increases at some properties; and (i) what changes is the CIB implementing to ensure its financing of retrofits do not result in rent increases at rental properties?
Mr. Chris Bittle (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, with regard to the investment of the Canada Infrastructure Bank, or CIB, in the Avenue Living residential retrofits, with regard to (a), the CIB’s investment is structured as two corporate loans, together the “CIB credit facility”, to two Avenue Living entities, together, “Avenue Living”, that wholly own the properties being considered for decarbonization retrofits, each a “project”. Drawdowns under the CIB credit facility are made available to Avenue Living pursuant to a four-year availability period up to a maximum amount of 80% of total eligible project costs net of grants, not to exceed $130 million in aggregate. The aggregate amount drawn will convert to a fully amortizing term loan which at the earliest of the completion of the final project; or one year following the end of the availability period. The CIB’s investment must be fully repaid within 24 years of financial close.
With regard to (b), Avenue Living has not used the CIB credit facility to finance retrofits of any properties as of May 3, 2024. Avenue Living has identified a preliminary list of approximately 95 properties that it intends to retrofit with CIB financing. The proposed portfolio consists of approximately 240 buildings, all of which are bound by specific eligibility criteria, including a required minimum decarbonization threshold. In accordance with the provisions of the CIB credit facility, Avenue Living can add, remove or replace properties in the preliminary list throughout the availability period, subject to meeting the defined eligibility criteria and satisfying the minimum decarbonization threshold, always subject to the term of the availability period and the maximum aggregate CIB investment amount.
With regard to (c), the CIB is not privy to any information related to specific properties and rent increases. Furthermore, Avenue Living has not used the CIB credit facility to finance retrofits of any properties as of May 3, 2024.
With regard to (d), no disbursements under the CIB credit facility have been made to Avenue Living as of May 3, 2024.
With regard to (e), all projects are at various stages of early development as of May 3, 2024, with certain properties further along and nearing eligibility criteria and conditions for disbursements under the CIB credit facility.
With regard to (f), the core mandate of the CIB’s Building Retrofits Initiative, or BRI, is to reduce investment barriers to modernize and improve the energy efficiency of existing buildings to drive significant reduction in carbon emissions, which additionally will improve the living conditions for tenants through co-benefits. In the case of Avenue Living, each project is subject to meeting specific minimum decarbonization targets and the potential CIB investment was assessed on that basis. The CIB credit facility was agreed on terms that made those reductions economically feasible. Also, Avenue Living is bound under the CIB credit facility by requirements to comply with applicable law, including any applicable landlord-tenant laws, regulations and policies in effect at the time in the relevant jurisdictions. The goal for Avenue Living is to achieve a greenhouse gas, or GHG, remissions reduction of over 49% across the portfolio of retrofitted projects, while maintaining a required minimum annual GHG reduction threshold of at least 30% for each building.
With regard to (g), while an indirect benefit of the CIB credit facility is to lower the economic burden on Avenue Living and its tenants that benefit from retrofits, the core mandate of the CIB’s BRI is to support existing property owners in reducing investment barriers to modernize and improve the energy efficiency of existing buildings, which dictates the specific provisions included in any given credit agreement.
With regard to (h), CIB understands that affordability is a critical issue for Canadians, which is why going forward we are ensuring residential building upgrades financed by CIB will not be used as a rationale to increase rent. Avenue Living and the CIB continue to discuss this matter.
With regard to (i), for all subsequent CIB investments under the BRI that finance retrofitting of multi-unit residential buildings, the loan agreements will include provisions that limit a borrower’s ability to increase rents or impose additional utility burdens on existing tenants as a result of the CIB’s investment in the decarbonization retrofits.
With regard to Canada Revenu Agency registered charities: (a) which charities that had Israeli nationals as agents or intermediaries had their status revoked due to a failed audit between 2017 and 2023; (b) which charities that had Israeli nationals as agents or intermediaries failed audits between 2017 and 2023 and did not have their status revoked; (c) what are the internal rules, regulations, and protocols around revocation of charity status with regard to both domestic and international recipients; and (d) what are the CRA’s risk assessment tools, and the risk matrix surrounding charities with international intermediaries?
Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of National Revenue, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, with respect to my colleague’s question, what follows is the response from the Canada Revenue Agency, or CRA, as of May 3, 2024, that is, the date of question.
With regard to (a) and (b), the CRA does not collect information on the nationality of a registered charity’s agents or intermediaries.
With regard to (c), in order to be registered as a charity, an organization must be constituted exclusively for charitable purposes and devote all of its resources to activities that further those purposes. Charitable purposes fall into one or more of the following categories: the relief of poverty; the advancement of education; the advancement of religion; and other purposes beneficial to the community.
The Income Tax Act allows a registered charity to operate in the following ways: carrying on its own charitable activities through its staff and volunteers; or an intermediary, where a charity must exercise direction and control over its own resources; making qualifying disbursements through gifts to qualified donees; or grants to grantees, or non-qualified donees, where a charity must meet accountability requirements.
A registered charity’s purposes must also provide a tangible benefit to the public as a whole, or a significant section of it. In addition, purposes and activities that are illegal in Canada or contrary to Canadian public policy are prohibited, including support for terrorist and military activities.
Also, registered charities must keep adequate books and records to allow the CRA to verify donations made to the charity, to ensure the proper use of charitable resources, and that the charity's purposes and activities continue to be charitable.
As is always the case, in order to determine if a particular activity furthers a charitable purpose and meets all other registration requirements under the Income Tax Act, the CRA would need to consider all the relevant facts on a case-by-case basis. If the CRA identifies non-compliance as a result of an audit, it uses a risk-based approach where possible. By taking this approach, the CRA generally gives a charity the opportunity to correct non-compliance through education or a compliance agreement; while other interventions, such as sanctions or revocations, are reserved for cases where a charity has engaged in more serious acts of non-compliance. The facts of the charity’s case will determine which compliance approach the CRA will take.
The CRA makes its decisions around the audit of registered charities involved with “domestic and international recipients” based on the Income Tax Act and common law requirements for registered charities. The application of these requirements is applied regardless of the country in which a charity may operate, and/or the nationality of any agents and intermediaries they may choose to engage.
With regard to (d), sensitive information about the CRA’s internal processes, such as its risk assessment strategies, audit techniques, and file selection reasons, as well as any other information that a member of the public would otherwise be ineligible from accessing, cannot be disclosed. Given that this type of information could be used to undermine and potentially jeopardize the CRA's compliance efforts, the CRA does not disclose that type of information to external parties under any circumstance, even where authorization on specific taxpayer files is obtained.
With regard to defence procurement contracts since 2015: what have been the industrial and technological benefits, broken down by province and territory?
Hon. François-Philippe Champagne (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, or ISED, publishes an Industrial and Technological Benefits, or ITB, Annual Report in an effort to be transparent about the results and status of the ITB Policy. The most recent ITB Annual Report, in 2023, highlights, at a national level, the impact of ITB obligations active in 2022, which presents a point in time snapshot using the latest available data. The report provides information on obligations over the 15-year time period from 2017 to 2033. This timeframe is used for the annual report to reflect the achievement period of ITB obligations by prime contractors, which can last a number of years. The report was updated in fall 2023 and is published annually to provide information on leveraging current and planned military procurements. The 2022 Annual Report presents data beginning 2016; the 2021 Annual Report presents data beginning 2015.
The 2023 ITB Annual Report, specifically page 5, which shows a breakdown by region of ITB activity in Canada. This includes figures broken out across the regions of Western Canada, Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada, and shows activity broken down by sector, such as aerospace, marine, information technology and land-based something, space and “other industries”. As an example, the ITB business activity in Quebec over the reporting period is focused on aerospace, 68%, followed by information technology and land-based something, 20%, marine, 8%, space, 2% and other industries, 2%. For the purposes of reporting and given the need to aggregate data values, projects in the territories are captured under Western Canada.
Foundation data for the overall eport is based on ITB credits and commitments of ITB obligations active in 2022, over the 2017-2033 15-year period, as found specified on each slide. Page 4 provides information on the annual average economic impact of the ITB Policy based on ITB transactions credited over the 2017-2021 period from ITB obligations active in 2022. Economic impact estimates are reported at the national level and cannot be broken down at the regional level; economic impact methodologies principles are presented on page 12.
In addition to the ITB Annual Report, ISED also publishes a report on contractor progress each year to demonstrate contractors’ progress in fulfilling their ITB obligations. The report on contractor progress provides information broken down by project and by contractor. This information includes the amount of obligation, completed, in progress and not identified.Report on Contractor Progress
In processing parliamentary returns, the government applies the Privacy Act and the principles set out in the Access to Information Act, and certain information has been withheld on the grounds that it is third party information.
[English]
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Mr. Speaker, if the government's responses to Questions Nos. 2653, 2655 to 2657, 2671, 2673, 2674, 2676 to 2682, 2684, 2688, 2689, 2693 to 2696, 2698, and 2699, could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled in an electronic format immediately.
The Speaker: Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
[Text]
With regard to Report 5 (2024) of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to the Parliament of Canada: (a) how much has the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food spent in the past five years on developing a climate change mitigation strategy; (b) how many employees were or are assigned to work on the strategy; and (c) how was the money spent, broken down by initiative?
(Return tabled)
With regard to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and the temporary public policy creating permanent resident pathways for Hong Kong residents since 2021, broken down by year: (a) how many individuals of Hong Kong origin have immigrated to Canada under the permanent residency program, broken down by (i) economic class migration, (ii) the family reunification program, (iii) the refugees and protected persons class, (iv) the "humanitarian and other" class, broken down by individualized stream; (b) how many individuals of Hong Kong origin have applied for permanent residency on "humanitarian and compassionate grounds" separately from the temporary public policy permanent residency pathways since 2021; (c) with regard to the temporary public policy, what is the breakdown of the application numbers since 2021 for (i) Stream A, (ii) Stream B, broken down by PR category; (d) of the figures in (c), how many applications were (i) approved, (ii) rejected, (iii) under review; (e) of the rejections in (d), what are the categorized reasons for rejecting the application, broken down by number; (f) of the cases under review and rejections in (c), what is the breakdown of the applications by (i) individual applications, (ii) family applications; and (g) of the approvals in (c), how many were tied to existing departmental quotas for the temporary public policy or the department's annual planned admission range per IRCC's annual report for permanent residency admissions under (i) economic class migration, (ii) the family reunification program, (iii) the refugees and protected persons class, (iv) the "humanitarian and other" class?
(Return tabled)
With regard to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and the open work permit pathway under a temporary public policy for Hong Kong residents: (a) what is the number of applications received by individuals of Hong Kong origin with "HKPPTR" inputted for the job title since the program was instituted in 2021; (b) of the applications in (a), how many were (i) accepted, (ii) rejected, (iii) under review; (c) of the rejections in (b), what is the breakdown of rejections by the location of the IRCC office or processing center; and (d) how many applications were rejected based on the lack of labour market impact assessment?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB): (a) what is the total number of adjudicators at the Refugee Protection Division; (b) of the adjudicators in (a), how many have postsecondary degrees, broken down by (i) office, (ii) type of degree; (c) of the adjudicators in (a), how many have previous tribunal experience; (d) of the adjudicators with prior tribunal experience, (i) what office do they work in, (ii) how many years of experience do they have, (iii) what year were they hired; (e) of the adjudicators in (a), how many have prior public service experience; (f) for each adjudicator with prior public service experience, (i) what office do they work in, (ii) how many years of experience do they have, (iii) what year were they hired; and (g) what was the essential qualification criteria required to be an adjudicator at the IRB in (i) 2011, (ii) 2012, (iii) 2015, (iv) 2020, (v) August 2021, (vi) November 2021, (vii) 2023?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the arrangements and travel costs for all government press briefings and pre-budget announcements in the lead-up to the tabling of the federal budget and to highlight the measures to be contained in the budget: what were the expenses and costs incurred from March 4, 2024, to April 16, 2024, the day of the budget speech, broken down by type of announcement, by date, by location and by the ministers, parliamentary secretaries and political staff present?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the COVID-19 Therapeutics Task Force (TTF) who oversaw submissions for grant funding from Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED)’s Strategic Innovation Fund: (a) in total, how many projects were considered for funding; (b) with respect to the projects which were funded, (i) how many received funding, (ii) how much funding was allocated per project, (iii) which drugs were being investigated per each approved project, (iv) what was the total amount of funding granted for the approved projects; (c) with regard to the projects which were not approved for funding, what recommendations were made to them; (d) with regard to the therapeutics which were recommended for purchase, (i) what were these therapeutics, (ii) were these therapeutics purchased, (iii) what was the implementation plan, (iv) if there was no plan, why not; (e) were the drugs Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine considered by the TFF; (f) if the answer to (e) is affirmative, what were their recommendations and how did they arrive at them; (g) who were the members of the TTF; (h) were any of the members pharmacists, pharmacologists, or toxicologists; (i) what were the members' conflicts of interest; (j) did any of the members withdraw from the task force prior to its conclusion; (k) if the answer to (j) is affirmative, who left early and why; (l) regarding the document entitled “HEALTH CANADA/ PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY OF CANADA MEMORANDUM TO THE MINISTER OF HEALTH, Meeting with the COVID-19 Therapeutics Task Force” dated February 24, 2021, and signed by the President of the Public Health Agency of Canada and the Deputy Minister of Health, which reads that “At the previous meeting TTF members expressed concern that their mandate was ending. TTF members were specifically concerned about what they felt was insufficient attention to therapeutics, failures of implementation, and the need to be forward looking for surveillance of upcoming therapeutic opportunities. It is expected that TTF members will raise these concerns to you”, (i) what concerns were raised to the signee, (ii) what documents were provided with respect to expressing those concerns; and (m) when and why was the TTF mandate ended?
(Return tabled)
With regard to federal housing investments in Edmonton, since February 1, 2006, broken down by year: (a) how much federal funding was provided to support the construction of nonprofit or community housing and how many units were developed; (b) how much federal funding was provided to support the construction of cooperative housing and how many units were developed; and (c) how much federal funding was provided to support the construction of purpose-built rental housing and how many units were developed?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the Court Challenges Program: (a) how much money has been delivered through the program in each of the last five years; (b) who has received money through the program, and how much was received; and (c) if the government refuses to answer (b) citing solicitor-client privilege, what is the government's rationale given that it is neither the solicitor nor the client in many of the related court cases?
(Return tabled)
With regard to federal infrastructure funding, since January 1, 2016, broken down by year: (a) how much money has been distributed for infrastructure projects under the (i) Rural Transit Solutions Fund, (ii) Zero Emission Transit Fund, (iii) Active Transportation Fund, (iv) Green and Inclusive Community Buildings Program, (v) Natural Infrastructure Fund, (vi) Canada Healthy Communities Initiative; (b) what are the details of all projects in (a), including, for each, (i) the project description, (ii) the date of the funding announcement, (iii) the amount of funding originally announced, (iv) the amount of funding distributed to date, (v) the date the funding was transferred to the recipient, (vi) the recipient of the funding, (vii) the current status of the project, (viii) the project location, (ix) whether the location of the project is a Census Metropolitan Area or Census Agglomeration, (x) the original projected completion date for the project, (xi) the actual completion date for the project, if applicable, (xii) the current projected completion date for the project, (xiii) the reason for the project delay, if applicable; and (c) what are the details of any infrastructure funding which was announced, but for which the related project was later cancelled, including, for each, the (i) project name and description, (ii) project location, (iii) amount of funding originally announced, (iv) amount of funding transferred to the recipient, (v) date of the cancellation, (vi) reason for the cancellation?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the Disability Tax Credit (DTC), broken down by fiscal year from 2015-16 to 2023-24: (a) what is the total number of people that applied to claim the DTC, broken down by basic activities of daily living (BADL); (b) what is the total number and percentage of approved DTC claims, broken down by BADL; (c) what is value of DTC claims broken down by BADL; (d) what is the number and percentage of new applications processed and accepted, broken down by BADL, and how many of those approved (i) had eligibility for the DTC for five years or more, (ii) expired after a certain number of years; (e) what is the number and percentage of new applications processed and rejected, broken down by BADL; (f) what was, or is, the total budget for all OTC-related operations; (g) what was, or is, the total employee count for all OTC-related operations, and what is the number of medical practitioners working on the DTC; (h) how many days, on average, did the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) take to assign a DTC application for review from the time of filing by the applicant; (i) how many days, on average, did the CRA take to mail (electronic or otherwise) a notice of determination related to a DTC application; (j) how many letters or correspondences did CRA send to the relevant medical practitioners asking for more information related to DTC applications received; (k) how many DTC applicants that were rejected or denied (i) requested a review of their application, (ii) challenged the CRA's decision by filing an income tax objection, (iii) moved beyond the CRA to an appeal filed to the Tax Court of Canada; (I) how long does the CRA take to review an application as noted in (k), (i) how many of those reviews resulted in an application being accepted; and (m) does the CRA have a dedicated telephone or TTY line for DTC applications, and (i) if so, how many calls has it received, (ii) if not, why not?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the Select Luxury Items Tax (luxury tax) that came into effect on September 1, 2022: (a) what is the number of (i) aircrafts, (ii) vehicles, (iii) vessels, that were reported under the luxury tax, broken down by province and territory; (b) how many applications, registrations, forms, returns, and other documentation does the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) have associated with the luxury tax, including those seeking exemptions, for taxpayers, including the full title of each piece of documentation; (c) what has been the total cost to the CRA to implement and administer the luxury tax to date; (d) what are the total amounts submitted to the CRA by taxpayers to date under (i) Part D, (ii) Part E, (iii) Part F, of Form B500; and (e) what are the total amounts submitted to the CRA by taxpayers to date under (i) Part D, (ii) Part E, (iii) Part F, of Form B501?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the Climate Action Incentive Fund (CAIF), broken down by province and year: how much money was returned through the CAIF’s Municipalities, Universities, Schools and Hospitals Retrofit stream, broken down by (i) municipality, (ii) university, (iii) school, (iv) hospital?
(Return tabled)
With regard to federal infrastructure funding under the Investing in Canada Plan, since January 1, 2016, broken down by year: (a) how much money has been announced for projects located in (i) Census Metropolitan Areas (CMAs), (ii) Census Agglomerations (CAs), (iii) areas outside of CMAs or CAs; (b) how much money has been distributed for projects located in (i) CMAs, (ii) CAs, (iii) areas outside of CMAs or CAs; (c) what are the details of each project in (a) and (b), including the (i) name of the CMA the project is located in, if applicable, (ii) name of the CA the project is located in, if applicable, (iii) name of the region the project is located in, if applicable, (iv) project description, (v) amount of funding originally announced, (vi) amount of funding distributed to date, (vii) date the funding was transferred to the recipient, (viii) recipient of the funding, (ix) current status of the project, (x) original projected completion date for the project, (xi) actual completion date for the project, if applicable, (xii) current projected completion date for the project, (xiii) reason for the project delay, if applicable; and (d) of the funding announced for projects in (a), were any projects later cancelled, and, if so, what are the details of each, including the (i) name of the CMA the project is located in, if applicable, (ii) name of the CA the project is located in, if applicable, (iii) name of the region the project is located in, if applicable, (iv) project description, (v) amount of funding originally announced, (vi) amount of funding transferred to the recipient, (vii) date of the cancellation, (viii) reason for the cancellation?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the M-KOPA project that received financing through the Development Finance Institute Canada (FinDev Canada), a Canadian Crown corporation that is a subsidiary of Export Development Canada (EDC): (a) what assessments has EDC made to ensure that M-KOPA is properly accounting for all expenditures of taxpayer funds provided by the Government of Canada; (b) has the government reviewed and analyzed any of the expenditures by M-KOPA through FinDev Canada and EDC, and, if so, what are the details of all written, electronic and other documents pertaining to M-KOPA and funds provided to this organization; (c) has any auditing been done of M-KOPA or of FinDev Canada in relation to M-KOPA, and, if so, what were the findings; (d) what was the timeline for the approval of investments made by the Government of Canada, through EDC to FinDev Canada then to M-KOPA; and (e) what are the details of all memorandums and briefing notes about M-KOPA, all financial and contractual details including all memorandums and briefing notes and scope documents and economic impact analysis as well as all other financial documents related to M-KOPA that were sent or received by EDC, FinDev Canada, or any relevant ministerial offices and ministers, deputy ministers, assistant deputy ministers, the Minister of Finance, the Prime Minister and the Office of the Prime Minister, the Privy Council Office, and any other outstanding documentation that discusses the provision of funding or potential funding and screening of M-KOPA from 2016 to 2024?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency and write-offs of accounts receivable, broken down by fiscal year from 2015-16 to 2023-24: (a) what was the total amount of write-offs; (b) how many (i) individual taxpayers, (ii) corporations, had amounts written-off; (c) what was the average amount written-off for (i) individual taxpayers, (ii) corporations; (d) what was the dollar amount of the single largest write-off, broken down by the (i) Financial Administration Act, (ii) Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, (iii) Income Tax Act, (iv) Excise Tax Act; and (e) what was the dollar amount of the single largest write-off for (i) an individual taxpayer, (ii) a corporation?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the Universal Broadband fund, broken down by year and province or territory: how much money did the fund disperse and how much money went to (i) Rogers, (ii) BCE, (iii) Telus, or its subsidiaries?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the electoral district of Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, broken down by fiscal year since 2005-06: what are the details of all federal infrastructure investments, including direct transfers to municipalities, regional district associations or First Nations, national parks, highways, etc.?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the government response to Order Paper Question Q-2422 regarding the awarding of non-competitive contracts, for Export Development Canada and for Public Services and Procurement Canada, broken down by year, from 2016 to the present: for each contract, what is the (i) recipient’s total amount of the contract, (ii) reason, if any, for awarding the contract, (iii) name of the organization that received the contract?
(Return tabled)
With regard to spending on consultants by the government, broken down by year since 2018, and by department or agency: what was the total spending on external consultants (professional and special services) that are not an employee of a Crown corporation, agent of the Crown, or another department of the Government of Canada?
(Return tabled)
With regard to individuals who were made to repay or whose COVID-era benefits such as the Canada Emergency Response Benefit, the Canada Emergency Student Benefit, the Canada Recovery Benefit, the Canada Recovery Caregiving Benefit, the Canada Recovery Sickness Benefit or the Canada Worker Lockdown Benefit were clawed back by the Canada Revenue Agency: (a) how many of these individuals, broken down by province and territory, and by income level, were (i) the only parent of a one-parent family, (ii) Indigenous, broken down by First Nations people, status and non-status, Metis and Inuit, (iii) people living below the poverty line, (iv) people on disability, (v) individuals aged 65 or older; (b) how much money was repaid or clawed back, broken down by individuals who were (i) the only parent of a one-parent family, (ii) Indigenous, broken down by First Nations people, status and non-status, Metis and Inuit, (iii) people living below the poverty line, (iv) people on disability, (v) aged 65 or older; and (c) what is the total number of Canadians and the total amount which was repaid or clawed back?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the government’s military spending since 2015: what are the annual amounts of investments and purchases of goods and services, broken down by province and territory?
(Return tabled)
With regard to federal funding and loans to Canada’s grocery sector, since January 1, 2006: how much federal funding has been provided to Loblaw Companies Limited and its subsidiaries, (i) No Frills, (ii) Real Canadian Superstore, (iii) Shoppers Drug Mart, (iv) Pharmaprix, (v) Provigo, (vi) Atlantic Superstore, (vii) Independent, (viii) T&T, broken down by company, year and type of funding?
(Return tabled)
With regard to the introduction of the new icon launched on May 3, 2024, by the Canadian Army: (a) when did the planning of this new icon begin; (b) how long did it take to design this icon; (c) what are the details of all contracts related to the design of the icon, including (i) what outside contractors were involved, (ii) how much each contractor was paid, (iii) whether any related contracts were sole sourced, and, if so, which ones, (iv) how long the contractor took to complete this work, (v) when this work was completed; (d) how much did it cost overall to design this icon; (e) how many staff, if any, were involved in the design of this icon; (f) which members of the Department of National Defence were involved in the approval of this icon; (g) who gave the final approval to utilize this icon; (h) what costs, if any, were associated with the promotion of this icon once the work was completed, in total and broken down by type of cost; (i) what are the costs (i) incurred to date, (ii) projected to be incurred, to initiate the use of the new icon, including, but not limited to, the placement on advertisements, uniforms, stationary, broken down by category; (j) who approved the (i) communications plan, (ii) tweets, related to the release of the new icon; (k) what are the details of all contracts related to communicating the launch of this icon, including (i) what outside contractors were involved, (ii) how much each of these contractors were paid, (iii) whether any related contracts were sole-sourced, and, if so, which ones, (iv) how long it took them to complete this work, (v) when this work was completed; (l) what are the details of all contracts signed related to the promotion of this icon, including (i) what outside contractors were involved, (ii) how much each of these contractors has been, or will be paid, (iii) whether any related contracts were sole-sourced, and, if so, which ones, (iv) how long it took them to complete this work, (v) when this work was completed, (vi) whether any advertising was purchased, and, if so, how much and on which platforms; (m) what are the details of all contracts related to the surveys, focus testing, public opinion testing, or any other research about the new icon, including (i) what outside contractors were involved, (ii) how much each of these contractors were paid, (iii) whether any related contracts were sole-sourced, and, if so, which ones, (iv) how long it took them to complete this work, (v) when this work was completed; (n) how many staff, if any, were involved in the surveys, focus testing, public opinion testing, or any other research about the new icon; and (o) for each focus group or public opinion research that was conducted, (i) what questions were asked, (ii) what topics were analyzed, (iii) what were the results?
(Return tabled)
[English]
Motions for Papers
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all notices of motions for the production of papers also be allowed to stand.
The Speaker: Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
Colleagues, let me wish you all a really great time back in your ridings.
[Translation]
I hope that you will spend time with your families, your loved ones, and your people back home. I look forward to seeing you again in the fall.
It being 6:01 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, the House stands adjourned until Monday, September 16, at 11 a.m. pursuant to Standing Orders 28(2) and 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 6:01 p.m.)
Publication Explorer
Publication Explorer