44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 27, 2023 10:00AM
- Oct/27/23 10:31:07 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is a great question. Quite frankly, it is the reason we came up with the disability credits that we actually introduced in the spring under the new act. With that and the help that those new incentives do give those with disabilities, our expectation is that it will, in fact, deal with the issues and the challenges they may have with respect to their daily lives and the expenses that we all try to keep up with in our daily lives. Of course, the help we are giving is hopefully going to deal with those issues.
99 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to address the House today with respect to Bill C-52, on behalf of the official opposition and on behalf of my constituents in Chilliwack—Hope.
I think we are seeing a trend here with transport legislation from the government. It likes to put things into a press release that make it look like it is doing something, like it is taking action. When, in fact, we get into the details of the bill, no action is actually being taken.
The bill was in response to a disastrous summer 2022 travel season overseen by the Liberal government, when we saw unprecedented cancellations, delays and waits in airports. It was an absolutely catastrophic reopening after the government shut down the industry during the pandemic. In the fall of 2022, the minister brought together a group of airlines, airports and executives in Ottawa because that was apparently going to solve the problem. It reminded me, quite frankly, of the industry minister's calling up the CEOs of Loblaws and other grocery stores to address the affordability crisis. In the end, it did nothing. It did not affect food prices. It did not bring down grocery inflation. It was just a photo op.
The minister of transport gave the idea, assuring Canadians with a photo op he held with airports and airlines in the fall of 2022, that the winter holiday travel season would be different and that the Liberals would come together and solve the problems. We have seen that they had not solved the problems. There were more disastrous delays, cancellations and people sleeping on the floors of hotels because they could not even get into the airports to catch their flights. We saw unprecedented delays in that winter holiday travel season. We held emergency transport committee discussions about that. We called the minister before us and found out that he had not even bothered to pick up the phone to call the airports that were in chaos. He had not called the Vancouver, Toronto or Montreal airports. He had not called Via Rail when it had a massive shutdown that stranded passengers. The minister was missing in action and was called to account for that.
The government, having seen the disastrous summer and winter travel seasons, decided it needed to do something. That something was Bill C-52, which was introduced in the last days of the spring session of Parliament. Once again, we are supposed to take the minister's word for it that this would now solve the problems in the air passenger system. Quite frankly, we have no problem with some of this, but we do have a problem with what is in part 1 of the bill. The government indicates there would be data sharing, there would be visibility on the data, and service standards would be set. It indicates that this would somehow make things better for Canadian passengers.
What the bill does not actually set out is what entities would even be covered by the legislation. The bill would instead give power to the minister and the cabinet to determine which entities would be covered by the regulations. It would all be done by regulation, and there is very little in the bill that is actually defined. We are supposed to trust the minister and government that have presided over numerous travel disasters and numerous travel seasons that have been disrupted and have impacted thousands of Canadian passengers. We are supposed to trust them to get it right, because the bill itself provides a framework but does not provide the details.
There is not even an indication of what data would be captured, but there is also not an indication of what would happen when service standards are not met. It is fine to collect data, to share that data and to have service standards, but if there are no penalties for failing to meet those things, there are no teeth to the bill and passengers would not be better served.
One thing Conservatives have long called for is accountability for all federally regulated entities in the air travel system. Once again, the bill before us, while addressing some concerns, would not be strong enough to ensure that everyone who can impact a passenger's travel experience is held accountable. Airlines are held accountable through our air passenger protection regulations. However, these need to be strengthened, quite frankly, because too often there are cases where things within an airline's control are said by the airlines to be outside their control, and we agree with tightening that up. However, we believe that not only airlines should be held accountable but that entities like CATSA, the security service, also need to be held accountable. When it causes a delay because the security lineups are so long that people miss their flights, it needs to be held accountable.
Nav Canada also needs to be held accountable. When its staffing delays cause airlines to have to throttle down, delay or cancel flights, it is the passengers who are impacted and not compensated, because those issues are outside an airline's control. Another entity that should be held accountable is airports themselves. If their baggage handling systems break down or if they are unable to clear flights in a timely fashion and they cause delays and cancellations, right now they are not held accountable. That is a glaring omission in this bill. We want to see all of these entities included and passengers able to be compensated when those entities cause them cancellations and delays.
We see also that the Canada Border Services Agency, the CBSA, is not part of the legislation. We know that the CBSA's land border service standards are made public and show what its expectations are, but when it comes to airports, that information is not available and would not be captured by this bill. We know that when there were delays at customs halls caused by a lack of CBSA officers, people sat in planes on the tarmac or at gates, unable to deplane because a federally regulated entity, in this case the CBSA, was unable to provide services. Again, that means that passengers who are impacted by that are not able to be compensated because it is not included in the air passenger protection regulations and the CBSA is not held accountable.
We believe that it needs to be explicit that all of these entities would be captured by the bill and that there would be actual repercussions if they fail to deliver for Canadians. Airlines should be held accountable and so should all the other federally regulated entities in the air passenger system.
We have not talked about the Canadian Transportation Agency and whether it should have to share data on its performance, which impacts Canadian passengers. I would argue that it absolutely should be part of this accountability package. Right now, the backlog for the CTA is approaching 60,000 passengers. There are 60,000 people who failed to resolve a complaint with an airline, have gone to the next level and are now being told they have to wait up to 18 months to even have their complaint considered by the CTA. This is unacceptable. The backlog is growing by 3,000 complaints a month, and there is no plan that we have seen to clear this backlog or to hold the CTA accountable for its 18-month processing delays. Canadians who have experienced a delay or cancellation by an airline should not have to experience another 18 months of delay from a government entity to get that matter resolved.
We know that an airline has 30 days to respond to the CTA, and if they do not respond, they get a fine, but the CTA can wait over a year. We have heard of cases where all of the information has been submitted, the airline has responded to the complaint and the CTA is sitting on it for over a year. That is not right for Canadian passengers. This bill should have visibility, data and service standards laid out for the CTA itself.
I did find it a little interesting to hear the parliamentary secretary talk about the climate change policies of the government. I thought perhaps after yesterday's announcement that he might have deleted that section from his speech. The Prime Minister, after having voted numerous times to impose a carbon tax on Atlantic Canadians, on those who use home heating oil, came out yesterday and suddenly reversed his position. This is after his voting record and his actions, which have shown that he has no problem imposing a punishing carbon tax on Atlantic Canadians and those who use home heating oil. Now, just conveniently, for the next three years, until after the next election, he is taking that tax off of Atlantic Canadians.
That is great for Atlantic Canadians and those who use home heating oil, but it does not do anything for those Canadians who use natural gas and are suffering under a carbon tax, which is actually a cleaner burning fuel by 30%. Interestingly enough, choosing to give relief for something he will not even admit causes pain is quite a climbdown for the Prime Minister, but it does not go far enough.
That is why Conservatives would axe the tax for all Canadians, not just those the Prime Minister is concerned with, due to their plummeting support. Again, I think it is quite rich to have a Liberal government talk about how it is going to impose climate change targets or policies on airports when it has just shown that it would flip-flop, swallow itself whole and go against its own votes in the House of Commons when it is politically expedient to do so. We should not be expected to take the government seriously on this issue any longer.
I want to talk a bit about the marine section of the bill. We are currently studying Bill C-33 at committee. We have yet to find a stakeholder who is satisfied with this bill. The witness testimony has been extremely clear that the government did not consult with them, the government did not listen to them and the proposals contained within Bill C-33 on port modernization would actually impose a made-in-Ottawa solution. There is more control from Ottawa and less local control. There was no response to the concerns of those who use and run the ports.
We now have a marine section tacked on to Bill C-52, when the ink was not even dry on Bill C-33, which actually deals with port issues. It is interesting, to say the least, that a government that has a port modernization bill before the transport committee is already amending that bill through another bill in the House of Commons, which proves that the government does not have a plan and that it is not getting this right.
Overall, we have seen that in the approach of the government, and this bill is a hollow shell. All of the major components of the bill would be decided later on in regulation by the minister and cabinet. The bill is something to talk about. It is something to point to, but it actually does not do anything. When it comes to part 1, that would all be left to regulation.
I have feedback from some of the people we hear from, from time to time, such as experts on air passenger rights or aviation management.
John Gradek, a lecturer at McGill University's aviation management program, said, “There’s lots of stuff about data sharing but not much about what or who would be taking action and in what conditions would action be taken”.
Gábor Lukács, the president of Air Passenger Rights, said, “There may be penalties, but even those powers are left to the government to create”, rather than being set out in the legislation from the start.
In its analysis of the bill, McCarthy Tétrault said that the bill contains “vague language, and, most importantly, [gives] significant latitude...to the Minister and Governor in Council to enact wide-sweeping regulations.”
This is a bill that is vague and does not contain specific remedies to the problems that have been plaguing this system for months now. The bill would give way too much power to a minister and a government that have, quite frankly, failed to show leadership in this space for the last number of years. As we have seen with other bills, such as Bill C-33, for the bill we are currently dealing with, the government did not consult with the entities that would be impacted. It did not take their advice into consideration. Once again, it is an Ottawa-knows-best, Liberal-government-knows-best approach that would not serve Canadian passengers well enough.
However, there are some things in the bill that we can support. We have no problem with the accessibility and disability portions of the bill.
The marine stuff, even though it appears to be tacked on, is certainly controversial between port authorities and port users. Many port users are looking for increased accountability, and many port operators are indicating that they already have complex dispute resolution mechanisms that would be impacted by the bill. They anticipate, based on the record of the government, that it has not actually consulted with those entities directly and is just imposing its vision of what it thinks would work best.
We believe the bill is a missed opportunity. There could have been more done to spell out who would be held accountable, how they would be held accountable and that everyone in the air travel space would be held accountable. However, the bill fails to do that. Therefore, we cannot support it.
2329 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 10:49:57 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I find it truly amazing that the member would provide comment when the Prime Minister is being sensitive in response to the needs of Atlantic Canada by giving a break on home heating oil.
The member himself voted for a price on pollution, and told Canadians from coast to coast to coast, along with the entire Conservative caucus, that they would support a price on pollution, but they did a major flip-flop. I think he should swallow that before he tries to throw stones in glass houses.
Does the member not agree that the principle of the legislation is something that the Conservative Party might actually consider supporting and possibly even see go to committee? Does the member have any amendments in mind?
126 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 10:50:44 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is quite rich to hear the parliament secretary, who two days ago would have defended that in the House, and has, in fact, voted on it numerous times.
We proposed a motion to exempt home heating oil from the carbon tax, and that member, and every Atlantic Canadian member, voted against that motion because they told us that these phony rebates would more than compensate for the cost of the carbon tax. The Liberals are now admitting that their carbon tax causes affordability problems in Atlantic Canada.
I have news for that member. The carbon tax causes affordability problems from coast to coast to coast under this leadership. Under the Leader of the Opposition, we would axe the tax from coast to coast to coast, and not just for those select Canadians the Prime Minister is suddenly taking an interest in because of his plummeting poll numbers in that region.
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I gather that my colleague said the Conservatives are going to vote against Bill C‑52, partly because a number of entities were left out of it. He specifically mentioned the Canada Border Services Agency.
I do not think we should necessarily vote against a bill because something is missing from it. We should pass it at second reading instead to send it back to committee, where constructive proposals can be made to improve it. I get the impression that the Conservatives are the ones missing out on a great opportunity here.
I would simply like to know what my colleague wishes to see added to Bill C-52 in regard to the Canada Border Services Agency.
To criticize a bill is one thing, but to make constructive proposals is another. Unfortunately, I did not hear any such proposals in his speech.
146 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would simply say that experience has taught me, and has taught us as Conservatives, that supporting a bad bill at second reading is not a great strategy for improving the bill. The bill is flawed. We saw this with Bill C-33. We said the same thing. I heard the same comments from members of the Bloc and members of the government. They asked, “Why not support it to committee and then make amendments?” What we have heard confirms our position that the bill is fundamentally flawed. There are issues with that bill that cannot be resolved. The government did not consult, and the bill did not address the concerns of port users and port authorities.
We have very recent knowledge of a transport bill, which we were told to just fix in committee. Some bills are fundamentally flawed, and we believe they should be sent back to the drawing board. That said, if stakeholders come forward and propose changes, we will always try to improve bad Liberal bills. However, we believe that sometimes the best thing to do is just vote against them.
189 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 10:53:58 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Chilliwack—Hope for having taken the opportunity to express some of the very legitimate frustration that Canadians are feeling around airlines and airline service right now. I wonder if the member would like to take a moment to express appreciation for the ways in which establishing a virtual Parliament has enabled MPs to meet their commitments in the chamber despite a period of poor air service.
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 10:54:27 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, obviously I am appearing virtually. I wish that I were in the House today with my colleagues. My personal circumstances do not allow for that today.
We do have to look at keeping everyone in that air space and the air passenger space accountable. When there are failures in the system, the entity that has failed the passenger must be held accountable. What is really missing in this bill is that the focus is on airlines, and they should be accountable, but so should all of those other entities I talked about, including CATSA, airports, Nav Canada and CBSA. All of those that have an impact on passengers should be held accountable, and this bill would not allow for that. We think the government should have done better, and we will be voting against this bill.
138 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 10:55:25 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I do appreciate what my colleague has brought to the floor today.
I really appreciated the words “glaring omission”. That is what we are dealing with here with the bills that come forward from the government. So often, there are glaring omissions to those bills.
Explicitly, the member spoke of the accountability of all air passenger services, and then spoke of the Canadian Transportation Agency and its backlog of 60,000 complaints, taking over 18 months, with a growing number of 3,000 more complaints per month.
It sounds a lot to me like what we are facing with Veterans Affairs with the incredible backlogs, which the government seems to have in its scenario because it does not govern well. Everything seems broken. I wonder if the member could speak to the reality of that and why this bill should not be on the floor at all.
151 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 10:56:15 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it adds insult to injury when a passenger has experienced a significant delay or a flight cancellation and has tried to get it resolved with the airline, for the airline to say no, that it does not meet the criteria and that it does not believe the passenger is entitled to compensation. Then, when the passenger disagrees, they file a complaint with the agency of the government that is supposed to adjudicate these things independently. The passenger not only has the insult of having slept on the floor of an airport. They now have to wait 18 months to even have their complaint heard by the agency that is supposed to be there to protect them.
That system is also broken. The government has not resourced it well enough. It has not held it accountable enough.
I did not get into this in my speech, but the latest information that we have shows that the government has given bonuses to senior executives. All of them have received maximum bonuses for the last two years. We do not have the data for this year yet, but rather than holding them accountable, the government pays them bonuses for their inability to serve Canadian passengers. That is not right. This bill does not address the failures of the CTA, which is another reason we should not support it.
227 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 10:57:41 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member says the Conservative Party does not support the legislation, and within the legislation there are all sorts of things for communities, such as the noise committees that would be obligatory for airport authorities. Some of the airport authorities already have them in place. The bill would ensure that communities have a voice when it comes to airport authorities.
Does the Conservative Party oppose all aspects of the legislation, or do its members feel there are some parts they could support in some fashion? Could he maybe list one or two examples?
95 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 10:58:24 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have no problem with part 2 of the legislation, which would increase transparency and visibility for Canadians with disabilities and would provide a response to the Auditor General's report. I said that quite clearly.
With the noise complaints, it is interesting to see the different approaches and contradictions within the bill itself. The noise complaint portion of the bill includes what constitutes proper notice of meeting and what constitutes quorum. It is very prescriptive. The government has decided that it knows how that should be meted out, but for the parts of the bill that deal with passenger protection and that sort of thing, it is all left to regulation. The government should make up its mind. I think that part is very prescriptive. It would impose a very strong standard on airports, and unlike other portions of the bill, it would not leave it to regulation. I am unclear on why that portion was so prescriptive and other portions are left entirely to the minister and cabinet.
172 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 10:59:57 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am rising to honour an outstanding individual from my riding, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour's Leo MacKenzie. Leo spent the past 40 years working with the non-profit Regional Residential Services Society in support of adults with intellectual disabilities, and he spent the last 14 years helping his friends on Hilton Drive live their best lives while supporting the amazing work of Better Together Nova Scotia.
Leo has always ensured that the people he supports are active members of our community. He has always listened to their ideas and helped make them a reality. Leo has empowered and inspired so many through his positive attitude and his eagerness to give back to his community. Leo has changed so many lives for the better and we owe him our gratitude.
I ask that all members join me in congratulating Leo MacKenzie on his retirement. I thank Leo for everything.
151 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 11:00:46 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Shilan Mirzaei is a prominent Iranian human rights activist who has been wrongfully arrested for her defence of Iranian refugees in Turkey and her strong voice for human rights. Worse still, her arrest was made at the request of the terrorist regime in Iran. Mirzaei is now being held in a deportation centre in Turkey. She faces deportation to Iran and a certain death sentence.
Turkish President Erdogan has been deporting innocent Iranians and Kurds fleeing the regime in Tehran. Erdogan has defended Hamas publicly and bombed Kurdish civilians in Rojava.
Canada must get tough with Tehran. Delegitimize the regime. List the IRGC as a terrorist group. Get justice for the victims of PS752.
The NDP-Liberal government must call on Turkish President Erdogan to do the right thing by immediately ending this unjust detention, and release Shilan Mirzaei.
Jin, jiyan, azadi. Zan, zendegi, azadi.
147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I rise in the House today to offer congratulations to the National Trust for Canada on its 50th anniversary conference. Taking place in Ottawa right now at the Château Laurier, this year's conference theme is “Transforming Heritage”. The conference has brought together over 700 heritage professionals, advocates and industry leaders from across the country and is being held in partnership with the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals and the Indigenous Heritage Circle.
The National Trust for Canada is the leading national charity dedicated to the conservation and use of Canada's historic places. Since its inception in 1973, the organization has powered a movement dedicated to preserving and revitalizing heritage buildings, landscapes and communities for the benefit of people and the planet.
I want to give a special thanks to Natalie Bull and Chris Wiebe from the National Trust. Their dedication to heritage shows through their hard work. They mobilized support for Bill C-23, which is key legislation for the protection of Canada's national heritage. From conference attendees, I call on members of this House for the swift passage of Bill C-23.
Congratulations to the National Trust on its 50th anniversary.
201 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 11:02:49 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the humanitarian crisis unfolding in the Middle East is not occurring in isolation. It is significantly impacting Canadians here at home. Students, refugees, teachers, doctors and even children are witnessing a severe surge in Islamophobia, anti-Palestinian racism and anti-Semitism.
Visible Muslim women who wear the hijab, especially Black Muslim women, currently fear for their safety, particularly when speaking out against injustice. They are losing jobs and scholarships and are facing threats on campuses and in workplaces. In my riding of Edmonton Griesbach alone, we bore witness to a racially motivated attack and verbal abuse against an innocent teacher at Queen Elizabeth High School.
This dehumanization of people is unparalleled, and we cannot remain silent during these difficult times. When I was growing up, my elders instilled in me the moral obligation to speak out when witnessing such atrocities. I implore all Canadians to stand in solidarity with Muslim and Jewish voices right across our country.
159 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 11:04:02 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, November 1 marks the beginning of our first national Lebanese Heritage Month in Canada.
I am proud to mark this special occasion alongside my friends, my constituents and all Canadians.
I encourage my colleagues to take this weekend to connect with their local Lebanese community.
I encourage people to find events near them and carve out some time to attend.
In my corner of the country, our community is organizing so much: tonight's Keskun wine tasting, an independence day flag raising, the annual Lebanese Film Festival, the Watani Lubnan party and more.
Our local Lebanese organizations, the consulates and the embassy are all working hard to make this inaugural year memorable. I want to thank them, as well as my own church, where today our congregation is coming together in prayer for peace in the Middle East.
We Lebanese-Canadians are proud of our heritage.
Happy Lebanese Heritage Month.
152 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, today I stand to highlight the recent passage of Bill S-12, which amends the Criminal Code, the Sex Offender Information Registration Act and the International Transfer of Offenders Act. This bill received royal assent yesterday.
I want to express my gratitude to all parties and the Senate for its support and dedicated efforts in acknowledging the significance of this legislation and in ensuring the safety of Canadians today and in the future. More importantly, I want to underscore the efforts and work of survivors of sexual assault in sharing their stories to inform this legislation. This includes representatives from My Voice, My Choice, whose tireless efforts led to these important changes to the publication ban regime.
More specifically, I give a sincere thanks to Morrell Andrews, who is a testament to what can be achieved when we stand up and advocate for what we believe is right. I thank Morrell. Congratulations.
154 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 11:06:12 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay respects to the 18 people tragically killed by a gunman in Lewiston, Maine. Our deepest condolences go to those impacted by this terrible crime. I hope leaders in the state and country will do everything possible for them to finally address gun violence.
Like many Mi'kmaq people, I have family in the state of Maine. My mother grew up there, and as a teenager I spent many years working in the blueberry fields and factories in Maine. I also got to know the people of Lewiston during the four years that one of my best friends played hockey there. It is a kind and caring community that has been left stunned by this tragedy. I mourn with them the loss of lives and, as a Nova Scotian, can empathize with the disbelief that something this tragic can happen in their home.
Canadians care about the people of Maine. We are praying for them. They will get through this, and we will be thinking about them during these difficult times.
God bless them all.
181 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/27/23 11:07:15 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is with gratitude that I want to thank all responders and volunteers who have helped, and continue to save lives and protect, Kelowna—Lake Country and region in B.C. during wildfires.
We heard of four brave B.C. woodland firefighters who lost their lives. They served us by fighting fires in my community. My deepest condolences go to their friends and families and to those of all firefighters who have lost their lives. I thank all at the central Okanagan emergency operations centre, emergency shelter and emergency support services.
There is great loss that will affect many for a long time as most lost structures are homes. My heart goes out to all those affected. Residents were calm and overwhelmingly compassionate, opening their homes and hearts. I thank all cultural groups, worship centres, businesses, community organizations, not-for-profits and charities for doing what they could to help those in need.
It is important to continue supporting these organizations as they serve our communities and to check on the mental wellness of those around us.
180 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
