SoVote

Mr. Warren Steinley (Regina—Lewvan, CPC)

Feb/8/22 6:04:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise once again on this very important constitutional amendment. We have heard a lot of talk from the member for Winnipeg North on the UC motion that was brought forward in December. Once again, I was the member who brought that UC motion forward. We did have some initial conversations, but hearing everyone today putting their opinions and statements on the record about why they want to support this constitutional amendment for Saskatchewan and support that unanimous decision from the legislature, I think, is an important and good process to go through. My friend and colleague from Prince Albert is dead on when he said it is great that the House of Commons can work together like this in collaboration to get things done. I wish the people of Canada would see this more often than what we see during the theatrics of question period. Another thing my friend hit on is what the $350 million has been used for in terms of public services for the people of Saskatchewan. I was an MLA for eight years, and something I would like to put on the record is that probably one of the best initiatives we did was the STARS air ambulance coming to Saskatchewan. It helps everyone across the province from rural Saskatchewan to Regina and Saskatoon, because that helicopter is a lifesaver. When we hear it in the air coming to land, it is a life-saving initiative. We should be very proud, as a province, that we brought that forward. I wonder if my colleague would like to put a few other comments on the record about how, moving forward, we want to thank our colleagues across the chamber for supporting this initiative and making sure we get this done and ensure this also passes on the floor of the Senate sooner rather than later.

315 words

All Topics

Mr. Randy Hoback

Feb/8/22 6:05:54 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Regina—Lewvan for his tenacity in making sure he continued on to get this done and pushed it through. I appreciate that. STARS is a really good example, and again it is another example people do not know about where parties worked together in the background to make something succeed. I remember when STARS's Rod Gantefoer, a retired MLA, approached the Saskatchewan caucus and said they needed new helicopters in Alberta and Saskatchewan. I remember the former member for Malpeque and finance chair Wayne Easter asking if there was any way we could get these guys in front of the finance committee as they did the pre-budget consultations. He moved some mountains and he made it happen, because he knew it was the right thing to do. He got it in front of the finance minister and we got some funding for some helicopters. That is the type of thing Canadians do not hear about, and that is the type of thing they want to hear about. Those are things that are important to Canadians, when parties work together and have the emotional intelligence to put the partisan differences aside and actually get things done for the people of Canada.

210 words

All Topics

Mr. Xavier Barsalou-Duval (Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, BQ)

Feb/8/22 6:07:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I liked my colleague's measured and unifying tone. I find it interesting that we are debating a constitutional matter and that the debate is a rather jovial one. I guess talking about the Constitution is not so bad after all. It is possible. I would like to know whether my colleague would be just as open to the claims Quebec might make at a future time.

69 words

All Topics

Mr. Randy Hoback

Feb/8/22 6:07:34 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the Conservative Party has been open to ideas from Quebec in the past. I think of the example of a nation within a nation. That is an example of the Harper government actually agreeing to see that go forward on behalf of some of the people from Quebec who wanted to see that. There are examples in the past of Conservatives working with people from Quebec, and we will continue to work with people from Quebec. As long as it is in Canada's interests and Quebec's interests, why would we not?

95 words

All Topics

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

Feb/8/22 6:08:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member made reference to benefits, and there have been huge benefits to having CP in Canada. The original idea is one of the things that brought Canada together as a nation. We can talk about examples of this in Moose Jaw or even go to the north end of Winnipeg with the CP yards. Yes, there is a need for this legislation, but let us not forget many of the positive things this corporation has done for us as a nation. I am wondering if the member could comment on that.

94 words

All Topics

Mr. Randy Hoback

Feb/8/22 6:08:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member is right. Again, as a farmer, I have a love-hate relationship with railways. When it is 40 below and they do not run, I am really mad. I will use the example of CP right now. There are cattle producers in southern Alberta who are low on feedstock. CP has stepped up to the plate and I believe has allocated four or five trains of corn to make sure they have enough cattle feed to get their livestock through the winter. CP does do things in the background. I think of Hay West, when we had droughts previously, and CP and CN stepped up and moved bales from Ontario and eastern Canada into western Canada and did not charge anybody a dime. They have been good corporate citizens in the past and they have been part of building our country. There is no question about that. There will be times when we will be mad at CP and CN, which is the nature of railways, but they are a big and important part of who we are. If they were not there, I do not know what this country would look like.

197 words

All Topics

Mr. Terry Duguid (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.)

Feb/8/22 6:09:46 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to participate in the debate on this important issue. In order to truly come to grips with the issue before us, an important question relating to the taxation of the Canadian Pacific Railway, I think it is important to take a moment to reflect on the evolving relationship between Canada and the Canadian Pacific. Canadian Pacific, or CP for short, and this great country share much history, but in addition to our past, we also share a present and a future, for CP is and will continue to be, as we have heard, an important part of the Canadian economy as we continue to grow our economy for the benefit of all Canadians. Let me say, I have my own personal history with Canadian Pacific. My grandfather, an immigrant from Scotland, worked by day in the CP Rail Weston shops in Winnipeg for over 40 years and by night was the icemaker and manager of the CP Rail Curling Club on William Avenue, where I grew up, and which subsequently became the Victoria Curling Club,. The Canadian Pacific Railway originated in the years following Confederation when Canada's leaders saw the need to connect the vast territories that make up what we now know as Canada, as it became Canada's first transcontinental railway. I am certainly aware of the painful colonial history associated with those times, but that is for another speech. Of course, since those early days, CP's network has continued to expand, along with its role and support of the Canadian economy. Through the years, though it was primarily a freight railway, CP was for decades the only practical means of long-distance passenger transport in most regions of Canada. Its passenger services were eliminated shortly after being assumed by Via Rail Canada in 1978. Today, CP operates one of Canada's two national rail networks, owns over 13,000 kilometres of track in Canada in seven provinces of Canada, stretching from Montreal to Vancouver, and in 2019 had over $5.8 billion in revenues in Canada. CP plays a crucial role in the Canadian freight rail network that moved over 324 million tonnes of goods in 2020. It is through this rail network that CP has been able to situate itself as a key pillar of Canada's economy and facilitator of Canada's trade agenda. Whether it is moving bulk commodities like Canadian grain, potash or coal; inputs like lumber, steel or chemicals; or intermodal containers packed with the consumer goods we all take for granted, there is no doubting CP's significance both historically and in the present day. However, it is not just a railway. The employees are hard-working members of communities across this country and CP, itself, makes important contributions to those same communities. Whether it is through its charitable contributions or its annual holiday train, we know that CP's contributions to Canada go beyond simply moving rail traffic. Just recently, following the devastating flooding in British Columbia, we saw the commitment and co-operation of both CP and CN in working to find solutions to support local communities while also working 24-7 to restore rail service and get supply chains moving again in incredibly difficult circumstances. Any relationship is bound to have its ups and downs, let alone one that has lasted over 140 years. Certainly the relationship between the Government of Canada and CP has had its share of difficulties, and we do not always see eye to eye, as a number of speakers have mentioned. That is healthy and indeed necessary. The federal government today has a crucial role to play in regulating Canada's railways to ensure they operate safely and effectively in a manner that respects our communities and our environment while also effectively supporting our economy. This is a significant responsibility and one that our government takes very seriously. As we contemplate the proposed constitutional amendment put forward unanimously by Saskatchewan's legislature, we must not dwell on the past but instead consider what is in the best interests of Canadians moving forward. We are not being asked to debate whether the significant government investments and tax concessions to support the establishment of Canada's first transcontinental railway were necessary and appropriate at the time. Instead, the question before us is whether these considerations are in the public interest now, in the year 2022. Should a railway company with billions of dollars in annual revenues be exempt from certain taxes, even while its competitors and countless other businesses of much more modest means pay such taxes every year? Is it fair to deprive Saskatchewan of essential tax revenue necessary for the provision of services, thereby shifting additional tax burden onto the people of Saskatchewan? Is this what the legislators at the time imagined when they granted those exemptions 140 years ago? Could they ever have imagined that the CP Railway would one day be earning billions of dollars a year in Canada alone, let alone its earnings from its network in the United States? Those are the questions we must all ponder as we determine how to move forward on this important issue. While it is true that the agreement reached in 1880 between Canada and CP included a provision, generally known as clause 16, that exempted CP from certain federal, provincial and municipal taxes along its western main line, the fact is that in 1966 the federal government reached an agreement with CP in which the company would begin paying taxes and agreed to forgo its clause 16 exemption as part of the modernization of transportation legislation. However, the Constitution was not amended to reflect this, in part because it had not been patriated at that time. As such, the tax exemption was never formally terminated and is, in effect, an outdated relic of a past arrangement. Ultimately, as parliamentarians we will collectively decide whether this exemption remains in the public interest, but whatever we decide does not diminish the importance of CP Rail to Canada's past, present and future. It remains an important part of our history, plays a crucial role in Canada's economy and is a valued member of and contributor to communities across this great country.

1051 words

All Topics

Mr. Warren Steinley (Regina—Lewvan, CPC)

Feb/8/22 6:17:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for adding his voice in this chamber and for his support for this motion. I have asked a question of a couple of Liberal members who spoke today, and I am wondering if there are other areas where we can support Saskatchewan with other measures in his file. We know the environment plan put forward by Premier Moe is very similar to those of other provinces, such New Brunswick and P.E.I., and those were accepted by the government. In the spirit of collaboration, I am wondering if the member would be another advocate for Saskatchewan in trying to ensure that Liberals could take a second look at the environmental plan that Premier Moe and the minister of environment for Saskatchewan put forward. Maybe we could move forward together in this new spirit of happiness. They could take another look at it so that we can make sure Saskatchewan is once again being treated fairly by the federal Liberal government.

167 words

All Topics

Mr. Terry Duguid

Feb/8/22 6:18:32 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have been directly involved in environmental co-operation with the Province of Saskatchewan. The hon. member will know that through Western Diversification, now PrairiesCan, we did a water study looking not only at how we could protect the environment and adapt to climate change but also expand the agricultural footprint of Saskatchewan. We know that Saskatchewan is an agricultural powerhouse. The protein industries supercluster that is located there is resulting in three major agricultural facilities plants on the order of $300 million, $400 million, $500 million, including Merit in Winnipeg and Roquette in Portage la Prairie, but I am forgetting the name of the one in Saskatchewan. I think the hon. member will agree that we have had one of the worst droughts in memory and we need to get a handle on water, which can only come through co-operation among federal, provincial and municipal governments.

150 words

All Topics

Mr. Xavier Barsalou-Duval (Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, BQ)

Feb/8/22 6:20:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, what I got out of my colleague's speech was that he thinks it is important for us right now to look ahead, review the legislation from the 1880s that exempted Canadian Pacific from taxes, assess its relevance today and what benefits it might bring to the public, and then amend it as needed. I think this is necessary, absolutely, and I think that everyone in the House agrees. I find it fascinating that we are debating amending a constitutional text that today is putting people at a disadvantage and making them unhappy, leading them to call for an amendment. I want to ask my colleague about another potential constitutional amendment. In 1867, the British North America Act was passed, imposing a constitutional order on Quebec. The same thing happened in 1982, when another constitutional order was imposed on Quebec, an order that Quebec has never supported or endorsed. To this day people in Quebec are calling for change and openness. I would like to know whether my colleague thinks that the existing constitutional framework is satisfactory, compared to the old one, given our present demands and needs. Does he think it has been adequately adapted? If not, how does he plan to address this?

207 words

All Topics

Mr. Terry Duguid

Feb/8/22 6:21:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as a previous speaker mentioned, the Parliament of Canada recognized Quebec as a nation, and we recognize its unique position in Confederation. Just so the hon. member knows, I am learning French later in life. Both my daughters are bilingual. Quebec adds so much to this beautiful nation we all call home. Of course, I think it is the wish of all of us that someday Quebec will sign the Constitution. Hopefully like the member, I look forward to that day.

83 words

All Topics

Ms. Bonita Zarrillo (Port Moody—Coquitlam, NDP)

Feb/8/22 6:22:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for speaking about the importance of the jobs that the CPR brought to this community and to our country. My father-in-law, Rocco Zarrillo, came to Winnipeg in 1966 and worked in the north Winnipeg yards, which I think were called the Weston shops, for almost 30 years. He brought four kids with him and had two more here in Canada. I want to say how wonderful it is that he is still with us here and what a wonderful career he had with CP Rail. I know a lot of families in Canada started and were raised through CP Rail. I just wanted to make that shout-out to my father-in-law.

123 words

All Topics

Mr. Terry Duguid

Feb/8/22 6:23:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, let me echo that shout-out to the member's father-in-law. Perhaps her father-in-law and my grandfather knew each other. I would not be here if it were not for my grandfather and Canadian Pacific, so perhaps we can give a shout-out to CP. When my grandfather was working on the railway, it was, for the most part, Scottish men, at least in our community in the Weston shops. It really is amazing how far CP has come as an employer. Its workforce is dynamic and diverse, and it adds so much to our community of Winnipeg. I know some of the senior executives. They care about our community. Again, as other speakers have said, farmers in particular were not always happy with the railways for what they would charge and for the sometimes slow pace of delivery of our grain, but they really are part and parcel with our community and an important part of it.

164 words

All Topics

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

Feb/8/22 6:24:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in June of last year we talked about another amendment to the Constitution of Canada. It was for the Province of Quebec, after the leader of the Bloc party introduced an opposition day motion. That day, the province of Quebec was highlighted, as well as the beautiful French language and how it has had such a wonderful and positive impact throughout our nation. Today we are highlighting another province, one that I know my colleague and friend is very fond of, the province of Saskatchewan. We have another opposition motion with respect to making a change to the Constitution of Canada. I wonder if he could provide his thoughts on why it is so important, from Ottawa's perspective, to entertain it. If we can listen to how we can help facilitate that to make our country healthier, we should do just that.

145 words

All Topics

Mr. Terry Duguid

Feb/8/22 6:25:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think the Weston shops, if not in the member's riding, might be just outside, but certainly some of his constituents would work there. I really miss Centre Block, because when we look up in Centre Block, we see the coats of arms of all of the provinces and realize what a special place on earth this is. If I am not mistaken, I think the tiger lily is the flower of Saskatchewan. Indeed, I have been to Saskatchewan and the Prairies to see those beautiful flowers and the environments of Saskatchewan in person. I am a prairie boy. I would say to some of the other folks from Saskatchewan who have spoken that we are doing so much together that I do not think we realize how much we do co-operate, such as in the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization, which is producing the vaccines of the future for animals and humans in this country. STARS was also mentioned, which was championed by the Hon. Ralph Goodale, who unfortunately is no longer with us. I mentioned water as well.

184 words

All Topics

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

Feb/8/22 6:27:37 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleagues from Saskatchewan for introducing this motion. On this day, great tidings of joy came to Saskatchewan when our premier announced he was ending the vaccine and mask mandates. By the end of the month, people will no longer have to wear a mask in Saskatchewan. We are thrilled to see these restrictions being lifted in our home province. Freedom is coming back to Saskatchewan, the first province in Canada to put an end to the government's interference and its overreaching into people's lives. We are very excited. This motion is also making people excited, because they see an effective opposition. We may be on the verge of history here. I do not know that any opposition party has ever amended the Constitution of Canada. That is historic. When Saskatchewan sent 14 Conservative members of Parliament, it sent a message that Saskatchewan wants us to fight for its interests against this government's policies, which have so hurt our province. Therefore, I am thrilled and grateful to see that all parties will be supporting this common sense amendment to the Constitution of Canada. Whatever the reasons were for granting a rail company this kind of exemption so many years ago, it is certainly clear that there is no need for it today. It would represent a huge loss to Saskatchewan if this change is not made, so I am very grateful to have support from all parties in the House, which I hope is a sign of something new for the Liberal government. One thing about the Conservatives MPs in Saskatchewan is that we can always be counted on to stand up for Saskatchewan. We are always on our province's side. Let us look at what the current government has done. In the middle of an election campaign, the Prime Minister said he would claw back Saskatchewan's health care transfers. These are transfers that every province gets, yet he singled out Saskatchewan specifically. When our government proposed an environmental plan based very closely on New Brunswick's environmental plan, the Liberal government said no to Saskatchewan, even though it had said yes to other provinces. I see that I am getting the signal that I have to sit down. I want to congratulate my colleagues in Saskatchewan. I am excited for this motion to pass so that we can ensure that Saskatchewan does not lose out on any of its fair share of tax revenue. This is a great moment for our province.

424 words

All Topics

The Speaker

Feb/8/22 6:30:17 p.m.
Watch

It being 6:30 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the business of supply. The question is on the motion. Shall I dispense? Some hon. members: Agreed. Some hon. members: No. [Chair read text of motion to House]

51 words

The Speaker

Feb/8/22 6:36:45 p.m.
Watch

If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request a recorded division or that the motion be adopted on division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair. I see that we will require a recorded division. Pursuant to an order made on Thursday, November 25, 2021, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, February 9, 2022, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

75 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/8/22 6:36:45 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I suspect if you were to canvas the House, you would find unanimous consent to call it 6:45 at this time so we can begin the take-note debate.

32 words

The Speaker

Feb/8/22 6:36:56 p.m.
Watch

Pursuant to an order made on Friday, February 4, 2022, the House shall now resolve itself into committee of the whole to consider Motion No. 6 under government business. I do now leave the chair for the House to go into committee of the whole.

45 words

Resolving into a Committee of the Whole

SoVote

House Hansard - 26