SoVote

Dec/2/22 12:21:58 p.m.
Watch

Question No. 876—

Questioner: Anna Roberts

With regard to government statistics on court-imposed sentences for those convicted of crimes which carry a maximum possible sentence of 10 years or more, broken down by type of crime or criminal code violation, and by year in which the sentence was given, since January 1, 2016: (a) how many people were convicted; (b) what is the breakdown by length of sentence, including those sentenced to (i) no incarceration period, (ii) less than a year, (iii) one to two years, (iv) two to five years, (v) five to 10 years, (vi) over 10 years but less than the maximum possible sentence, (vii) over 10 years, but less than the maximum sentence, (viii) the maximum sentence; and (c) if the government breaks its statistics down using a time period other than that listed in (b), what is the breakdown by each of those time periods?

Question No. 878—

Questioner: John Barlow

With regard to the trip by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and her entourage to participate in the G20 Agriculture Ministers’ Meeting, held in Indonesia in September 2022: (a) what was the size of the Canadian delegation; (b) who were the members of the delegation; (c) what was the total travel and hospitality expenditures related to the trip; (d) what is the breakdown of (c) by amounts spent on (i) airfare, (ii) accommodation, (iii) meals and per diems, (iv) hospitality, (v) other expenditures, including land transfers; and (e) what was the minister’s itinerary on the trip?

Question No. 879—

Questioner: Ben Lobb

With regard to the development of applications for smartphones by the government or for the government, since January 1, 2017: (a) what amount has been spent developing applications; (b) what is the list of applications developed; and (c) for each application developed, what are the details, including (i) the amount spent on development, (ii) the date of launch, (iii) the current usage rates, (iv) the monthly download statistics, (v) the list of operating systems for which the application is available, (vi) whether the application is for public or internal usage?

Question No. 881—

Questioner: Cheryl Gallant

With regard to the ArriveCAN application: (a) what are the details of all contracts the government awarded in relation to the development or operation of ArriveCAN, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) amount, (iv) description of goods and services provided; (b) for each contract in (a), was it sole-sourced or awarded through a competitive bidding process; (c) for each contract awarded through a competitive bidding process, how many qualifying bids were received; (d) for each sole-sourced contract, why was it sole-sourced and who made the final decision about which vendor would receive the contract; (e) what measures, if any, were in place to ensure that the government was being charged a fair market value; and (f) does the government plan on recovering any of the amounts that it paid which were higher than fair market value in relation to any of the ArriveCAN contracts, and, if so, what are the details, including which contracts and what amounts it expects to recover?

511 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Dec/2/22 12:22:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, finally, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand at this time, please.

18 words

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie)

Dec/2/22 12:22:06 p.m.
Watch

Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

7 words

Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)

Dec/2/22 12:22:42 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to my colleague's intervention on Bill C-23 today. I have been to his area, to Camrose, having grown up in the Prairies and having family there. I heard about his passion for the area of Neutral Hills, which I actually have never visited, and he spoke about the first nations teepee rings, arrowheads and other cultural objects there. He also expressed concerns about the provisions for law enforcement within Bill C-23 and the enforcement capabilities covered. If the Neutral Hills or areas like it were a national historic sites, would we not want to have appropriate designation for the protections of the objects within it? Would the member be willing to support the much needed measures in Bill C-23 for law enforcement to help protect the treasures found within federally owned national historic sites, protections that currently do not exist?

150 words

All Topics

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)

Dec/2/22 12:23:50 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, I spoke at length to this in my speech, including with many references to the historic sites and monuments across my constituency, but I think the key here is that we need to make sure we get it right. Neutral Hills is a great example. There is agriculture ongoing in that place that actually has a significant connection to the land. In fact, there are some ranches that were established shortly after the disappearance of the buffalo from the plains. As well, there is responsible resource development. With the mechanisms regarding enforcement and the ability for extraordinary powers to be vested in the hands of the Minister of Environment, we have to be able to do it right, because the last thing I think that member and I would want is for the heavy hand of government to displace anything economically or prohibit the collaborative work that needs to be done to ensure the preservation of historic sites, whether that work is done at different levels of government. I did not have the chance to get into the specifics of all the collaboration needed between different levels of government here, but we have to make sure we get it right. I am concerned about wide sweeping powers being vested in the hands of a minister of the Crown without there being appropriate guardrails in place, and I hope the construction of those guardrails would be something the member would support.

242 words

All Topics

Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ)

Dec/2/22 12:25:14 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Battle River—Crowfoot for his speech. I want to come back to the issue of the additional powers over contraventions, limits on the right of passage, searches and seizures that the member talked about. I have a two-part question. First, I want to confirm that he does not necessarily want to do away with the part of Bill C-23 that makes it possible to take such actions, but rather just set parameters on them. If so, can he give me an example of an amendment he would like to see in committee that would set parameters on the minister's sweeping powers?

113 words

Mr. Damien Kurek

Dec/2/22 12:25:52 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, after looking through the bill, I think one of the very clear examples of an appropriate path forward for amendments would be to ensure that there are clear guardrails set. This would ensure that, when it comes to enforcement, there would be appropriate enforcement, which would also be guided by the dynamics that exist within a particular region, working with other levels of government and ensuring that we do not have the ability for activism that may have a negative impact on the local communities. They often rely on the lands, monuments and institutions associated with national historic sites, which is why we have to get it right.

110 words

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Dec/2/22 12:26:42 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, seeking truth is an essential component in ensuring justice for indigenous communities that have suffered because of the Indian residential schools. I would like to hear from my colleague his thoughts on ways he believes the knowledge of elders and the knowledge keepers could be used to conserve indigenous history across the country. Also, maybe he could speak about the important roles of elders, survivors and their families and how they can be incorporated into the Historic Sites and Monuments Board to ensure that the genocide at Indian residential schools is never forgotten.

95 words

All Topics

Mr. Damien Kurek

Dec/2/22 12:27:30 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, I did not have a chance, because of course there is so much that could be discussed on this topic, but when I worked for former Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall and the Saskatchewan Party government, one of the things I had the opportunity to do was work with the Minister of Parks, Culture and Sport to see the cemetery that was associated with the former site of the Regina Indian Industrial School designated. I spoke about it before in this place, but that very powerful process was certainly impactful for me. The preservation of the history of that particular site, and I know there are many others across Canada, ensures we have those real conversations. It also ensures that we use, as in that case, the provincial historic sites registry to keep that history preserved, which ensures those stories are kept alive, so we can have those conversations today and they can be remembered in the future.

159 words

All Topics

Mr. Tako Van Popta (Langley—Aldergrove, CPC)

Dec/2/22 12:28:31 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, in his speech on the national historic sites and monuments act, my colleague from Battle River—Crowfoot made mention of the importance of teaching and celebrating our Canadian history, not burying it or cancelling the less than savoury characters in our history. I think of John A. Macdonald, a very flawed individual, but a man who had a great vision for a Canada coast to coast, and I wonder if my colleague could comment on the importance of teaching Canadian history from a balanced perspective.

88 words

All Topics

Mr. Damien Kurek

Dec/2/22 12:29:10 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Absolutely, Mr. Speaker, we need to have a realistic and holistic conversation about our nation's history. I referenced a number of historical places and monuments across my constituency and a few events, including the story I referenced briefly of the Rocky Mountain Rangers in the book I am currently reading, The Cowboy Cavalry: The Story of the Rocky Mountain Rangers. We have an example here of where the history of Canada is complex. There are the good, the bad and the ugly, as they say. We have to have real conversations about our past. We cannot erase part of it, because that does not help us to learn from those past mistakes. It does no justice to the indigenous peoples who have suffered abuses under our system, and no justice to those, for example Ukrainians, who faced internment during world wars. We have to have a real and honest conversation about Canadian history, and that does not have anything to do with tearing down statues and covering up plaques. To truly acknowledge our history, we have to be taught the whole story. I find it very, very concerning that there are left-leaning activists across our country who, instead of having that holistic and realistic conversation about the history of our country, would rather cover it up and focus on a narrow view of activism as opposed to seeing that the whole perspective is taught. It is absolutely essential, and I hope that when it comes to conversations around Bill C-23 and the whole spectre of what are national historic sites, we truly are able to have that full conversation that is absolutely necessary.

276 words

All Topics

Ms. Monique Pauzé (Repentigny, BQ)

Dec/2/22 12:30:51 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, I would ask for the consent of the House to share my time with the member for Drummond.

20 words

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie)

Dec/2/22 12:31:02 p.m.
Watch

Does the hon. member have the consent of the House to split her time? Some hon. members: Agreed. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie): The hon. member for Repentigny.

30 words

Ms. Monique Pauzé

Dec/2/22 12:31:17 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois will support this bill, which is clearly an opportunity for the government to kick-start its intentions of reconciliation with first nations and to implement some of the specific recommendations made by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Bill C-23 creates three new positions on the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada for first nations, Métis and Inuit representatives, thus improving the integration of indigenous history, heritage values and memory practices into Canada's history and national heritage. Bill C‑23 is also in keeping with Canada's desire to honour its international commitments under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Article 15.1 of that declaration guarantees indigenous peoples “the right to the dignity and diversity of their cultures, traditions, histories and aspirations which shall be appropriately reflected in education and public information”. It also honours article 15.2. The Bloc Québécois has been an early supporter of this UN declaration in terms of providing information and education on first nations traditions and cultures. As a strong advocate of a nation-to-nation relationship between Quebec, Ottawa and the indigenous nations, we are also working with them to strengthen and guarantee their inherent rights. We will continue our work to ensure that the federal government fully implements the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in areas of federal responsibility. Giving indigenous peoples an additional voice in the reconciliation process is fully consistent with our party's position. Three main values guided the framework of Bill C‑23: inclusivity, sustainability and transparency. The board will now have one representative from each of the following: first nations, Inuit and Métis. Indigenous knowledge will now be a source of information to guide the board in its recommendations, along with community, scientific and academic knowledge. The inclusiveness of this proposal can only be commended. The principle of sustainability comes across in the protection and conservation of historic places, including the “mandatory heritage evaluation of buildings that are 50 years of age and administered by federal authorities” and “improved access to information about historic places through a public register that supports decision-making and public interest”. That is set out in the bill. There are deemed persons of historic significance and deemed historic events, as well as deemed historic places and classified buildings. Bill C‑23 would amend a number of acts, including the Parks Canada Agency Act as follows: Paragraphs (l) and (m) of the fourth paragraph of the preamble...are replaced by the following: (l) to maintain ecological integrity as a prerequisite to the use of national parks, Obviously that is very important to us. (l.1) to maintain commemorative integrity and heritage value as a prerequisite to the use of historic places... I will give a very concrete example of the use of an historic place: the Ottawa Hospital's future Civic Campus, which is very near here. There was no shortage of contradictions, when it comes to talking about protecting historic heritage sites with great historic and ecological value that are unquestionably very important to thousands of Ottawans and certainly to indigenous groups in the region. Let me ask a question: Is there a real protection mechanism for places and sites designated as “heritage” or any other combination of related words, such as “deemed”, “historic” or “of historic significance”? Ottawa needs a hospital. There are criteria for choosing an optimal site that respects multiple factors, and the National Capital Commission is seized with proposing federal sites from the catalogue of sites under its management—

632 words

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie)

Dec/2/22 12:35:40 p.m.
Watch

Order. The member for Saint-Jean on a point of order.

11 words

Ms. Christine Normandin

Dec/2/22 12:35:42 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, it is about respect in the House. I can hear someone talking on the phone right now in the government lobby, and it is rather distracting. It makes it hard to follow my colleague's speech. I simply want to raise this so we can continue in an orderly and disciplined manner.

54 words

All Topics

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie)

Dec/2/22 12:36:04 p.m.
Watch

I thank the hon. member for Saint-Jean for this important point of order. I believe they got the message because the noise seems to have stopped. The hon. member for Repentigny may continue her speech.

36 words

Ms. Monique Pauzé

Dec/2/22 12:36:29 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, I was just talking about the National Capital Commission, or NCC. It spent six months working with the current hospital and stakeholders to develop a set of criteria. They evaluated 12 sites and came up with a 53-acre site that included surplus federal buildings at Tunney's Pasture. The City of Ottawa appeared ready to accept this proposal, but instead it did a 180, without an environmental, transportation and health impact study. The City of Ottawa prefers the Central Experimental Farm site, from which it has already appropriated 40 acres, and the pristine nature of the 13 acres appropriated from the beautiful Queen Juliana Park, a memorial site honouring the more than 7,000 Canadian soldiers who lost their lives on the beaches of Normandy during the Second World War. The sudden change of site to the Central Experimental Farm meant that building lots worth $3 billion to $4 billion became available on the site offered by the NCC. The rush of developers and the property taxes promised to the city immediately jump to mind. More than 10,000 people signed a petition to demand the cancellation of construction permits for the hospital and obtain a response from the City of Ottawa, but to no avail. No forest should be cut down to make room for a hospital. Urban green space is essential for people's health and well-being. The NCC rejected the Central Experimental Farm as a site for a new hospital in its 2016 report that was more than 240 pages long. The following year it asked that the farm be left intact. The 2016 report said, and I quote, “there are multiple heritage considerations, including intrusion into the present boundary of the CEF National Historic Site and proximity to the Rideau Canal UNESCO World Heritage Site and several Federal Heritage Buildings.” The hospital apparently claimed needing 28 acres of land and more than 3,500 parking spots, which would require 500 trees to be felled on the Sir John Carling site. In an open letter to the NCC two Ottawa experts said, “Hundreds of trees will need to be cut down. Yes, we counted but we stopped at 500!” During the consultations in 2016 for construction of the new hospital, Parks Canada pointed out that the Historic Sites and Monuments Board had designated the farm as a national historic site and emphasized its place in the cultural landscape. The agency also indicated that this heritage designation is comprehensive and universal. It applies not only to the heritage buildings, but also to the more utilitarian buildings that support them, the ornamental gardens and other landscaped grounds, and the outdoor research fields. The NCC looked into its crystal ball and planned ahead until 2067. It had this to say in a 2017 report: “In 2067, the national institutions will...represent Canada and Canadians to the world, and contribute significantly to the identity, pride and signature of the Capital.... The Central Experimental Farm, established in 1886, is a unique working farm in the heart of an urban region. The Experimental Farm is open to the public throughout the year, along with the adjacent 26-hectare Arboretum.” Here is another quote: “This central asset of the Capital's urban green space network contributes to biodiversity and reinforces the link from the Rideau Canal to the Ottawa River ecosystems.” I have not even touched on the symbolism of Queen Juliana Park, or what the site means to the Anishinabe and Algonquin indigenous people who celebrate many festive activities central to their identity. How is that for reconciliation? Did the sponsor of Bill C‑23 know that communities had asked to be heard by federal authorities on this bill but were never properly received? The Central Experimental Farm was designated as a historic site in 1998, but that designation is meaningless because the government decided to pass the property on to the Ottawa Civic Hospital when it could have shown some integrity and acted in a manner consistent with its own narrative and regulations. Perhaps the government is proposing a weaker, more malleable law with provisions that can be secretly revoked in accordance with the political demands of provincial or municipal governments by using empty words and concepts. How did we get to this point? How is it possible that Canadian Heritage, a proper department responsible for protecting national historic sites, ignored the NCC's recommendation to build the new campus at Tunney's Pasture? That recommendation was based on public consultation and multiple studies. There is no need to ask me whether I support Canadian heritage, because that is not what I am talking about. Here is an example that illustrates the following. It is all well and good for the government to sing the praises of its plan to save biodiversity and green spaces with the much-talked-about goal of protecting 30% by 2030. It is all well and good for government members to talk about reconciliation, sometimes even with a tear in their eye and to introduce bills that are supposed to protect, strengthen, support, integrate, repair and consolidate. However, as we can see from the examples of the Central Experimental Farm and Queen Juliana Park, Canadian Heritage is pandering on this issue. This shows that we must always ask cui bono, or who stands to gain? We are witnessing some fine art, the art of subterfuge and deception.

916 words

All Topics

Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)

Dec/2/22 12:42:29 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, I hear the passion in my colleague's intervention. I have had the chance to visit many historic sites within the province of Quebec, and I heard her say that the Bloc will be supporting this legislation, which would give us much-needed protections. I really would like to commend the member for using the Central Experimental Farm as an example. There has been huge controversy over this and huge impacts related to a national historic site. I would like the member's further thoughts on the mechanisms within Bill C-23 that would help prevent those types of scenarios in the future, to make sure that we do not lose the commemorative integrity of national historic sites, not only in Ottawa or Quebec, but in places across Canada. If the member could expand on how Bill C-23 would help with that, I would greatly appreciate it.

150 words

Ms. Monique Pauzé

Dec/2/22 12:43:25 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-23

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question. I asked him a question this morning after his speech and I will pick up where we left off. Yes, there has been progress. There is going to be a public registry, there are going to be clear guidelines for changes, experts will be consulted and there will even be possible fines. However, when we read Bill C‑23, we wonder if it is enough. When a developer arrives with money, with the possibility of paying millions of dollars in property taxes, what will be left of this? The NCC ended up folding and fell for the madness of the Central Experimental Farm situation. Will Bill C‑23 be strong enough? That is the question we have, but the Bloc Québécois will be voting in favour of this bill.

144 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 140