44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 30, 2023 11:00AM
Madam Speaker, I was reminded, during my colleague's speech, of one of my favourite Ronald Reagan quotes, “The nine most [frightening] words in the English language are: I'm from the Government and I'm here to help.” Can the member comment on whether that is as true today of the Liberal government as it was of the Democrats when Mr. Reagan spoke of it?
68 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, when government invents means to interfere in the lives of people, to control what they see and think online, and when government is sitting around wondering about ways in which it can try to solve problems for people, we usually see the expansion of the government doing things which are utterly unhelpful, ultimately. I appreciate the comments by my hon. colleague because I agree with him wholeheartedly. I think the best government is the one that gets out of the way—
84 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 1:35:37 p.m.
- Watch
We have to resume debate.
The hon. member for Huron—Bruce.
12 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to present here today with respect to Bill C-34.
Before I start, I want to recognize a couple of local baseball teams in my riding that won provincial championships. This summer, it was the Kincardine Cardinals 13U baseball team and the Kincardine Cubs senior team. In our region in western Ontario, there is some of the best baseball in the country and maybe in North America, so it is great that both of those teams won and brought titles back to Huron—Bruce.
I would also like to recognize Mary Hughes and John Westerman from Bayfield, who hosted a tremendous event Saturday night. They invited all the volunteer firefighters from Bayfield to attend. It was a random act of generosity, and it was great to be a part of that. I congratulate them and thank all the volunteer firefighters.
When we look at the purpose of the Investment Canada Act and the depth and breadth of the goals of Industry Canada, it is probably very helpful to go to the beginning of some of the ideas and innovation in Canada, which is at the university and college level across this country. However, as some members here today with whom I am on committee would know, we are studying a number of topics at committee, one of which is state-owned interference at the university level. If Canadians read the headlines from a year ago, they would realize that there are some very concerning activities going on in Canadian universities, mainly through the People's Republic of China and some of the universities that focus on its defence.
My point is that if we think of a young person in university today, studying very hard in engineering or something to do with computers, for example, they would finish their degree, maybe get into some research afterwards and work in a few labs. However, they are really working to come up with the next idea that is going to be a game-changer for Canada, and there are all sorts of federal and provincial dollars. There are hundreds of millions, maybe billions of dollars that are allocated through NSERC, CIHR and SSHRC, all in the hope that this will be great for Canada, for innovation and for the next generation of businesses in this country. It is a multi-year, multi-decade, lifetime's worth of investment, on behalf of the Canadian taxpayer through these organizations, in the young people, professors and researchers in our country. Out of all of those years of effort and partnerships with companies and so forth, there are good ideas and there are businesses that are started in this country. However, what is of concern today and going forward is the high cost of protection that is going to be required at Canadian universities that do the research.
At our committee last week, the SSHRC president, Ted Hewitt, announced that there is $125 million, $25 million a year, being allocated to universities to try to sift through all the applications to determine if there are safety risks to the research and whether the research is going to be brought back to the People's Republic of China and could be used against Canada or whether the idea could just basically be stolen. This is just the beginning of the high cost of protection and security in this country, which leads to looking at the Investment Canada Act and the benefit test, and many other items within the act. I will give one example, a little outside what we are looking at with Bill C-34, but in parallel: the recent purchase, within the last year, of Magnet Forensics located in Waterloo. If we look at the education and experience that those individuals have, and likely the grants they applied for with their business, whether through SR&ED, IRAP or any of the other taxpayer-led initiatives that provide ideas and support for these businesses, there is a lot of money that goes into this.
There is a lot of value being given to the Canadian taxpayer, including by the individuals who own the company and the workers who work there. However, the company was sold for $1.8 billion to a private equity company in the States. The threshold for the transaction to be reviewed is $1.9 billion.
Now, I am not saying this is a coincidence. I know there is a different threshold being proposed through this bill for different transactions. However, this one was an American company; obviously, we have a trade deal with the United States, and that was the threshold if purchased by a private equity company.
After all those years of support, all those years at university and everything else that goes into it, including SR&ED and IRAP, it is sold for $1.8 billion. I am happy for the founders. That is a great payday. However, if we think about it, eventually the majority of those jobs are going to head to the United States, and all those years are gone.
We have to ask ourselves this: Is that a net benefit for the Canadian taxpayer, the workers or the country that has provided all those dollars of support? We really have to question it.
I will give another example, and it is a company that I used to work for: Wescast Industries in Wingham, Ontario. At one time, it was the largest exhaust manifold supplier in the world, producing over 10 million manifolds a year. It was bought 11 years ago by Bohong Group, which is financed by the China Development Bank. The founders of the company, the LeVan family, were ready to move on. They needed a buyer. This one came forward.
However, I believe, if we look at it, that this acquisition should have been reviewed. It was much lower than the threshold, but if we look at the knowledge and the value that those jobs provided this country and my region, there is no way that the transaction should have been approved. Everybody in our area, of course, all the guys and gals I used to work with, knew what they were going to do. They were going to take all the ideas, skill and know-how back to their headquarters. Basically, when the bones were picked, they would shut it down and operate solely in China.
That is in fact what has happened over 11 years. That is a shame. It was a great place to work. There were so many people to get to know. There were thousands of employees across southwestern Ontario.
These are examples of where the Investment Canada Act and the net benefit test could do more. Specific to this bill, one great amendment that was accepted by the government was our amendment that set the level to zero for a review, when a company has connections or ties to being state owned. Therefore, everything would be reviewed, and we could look at it. This also lends itself to my belief that it should be more than just the minister. I realize that, in the beginning, it is not. However, at the end, the final decision should be from a cabinet that consists of members from all provinces and, hopefully, some of the territories, to really drill down and decide if it is a net benefit to the country. I think we will find that a lot of these acquisitions are not.
Another great example is one I made a note of. If members remember, a number of years ago, there was Retirement Concepts, which sold 20 or 21 retirement communities to Anbang Insurance. This should never have been approved. It was to nobody's net benefit in British Columbia. There is no way that a Chinese state-run insurance company should have been operating health care in this country.
I think we are coming to a close. I look forward to questions.
1333 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member is talking about decreasing the threshold. This was brought forward to committee, and it ultimately passed.
The government has said in the past that, if there are ways it could improve upon legislation, it is always open to good ideas. This can be compared with the former government, which never allowed amendments unless they were government amendments.
I see this as a positive thing. The question I have for the member is as follows: Given the very nature of Canada as being what most would say is a safe place to invest, because of the environment we are in, whether it is trading agreements or the dependency Canada has, in terms of wanting to expand where it can, could the member provide his thoughts in regard to why it is so important that we update the act?
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is important. Obviously, it has been over a decade since the act was reviewed, so that is great. However, the member sometimes gets mixed up on the trade deals. If we look back at the trade deals that have been approved in the last few years, they were all done by the Conservative Party. We took it right to the one-yard line. With the European trade deal, I know that the finance minister, who was the trade minister at the time, fumbled about 10 times before she got it into the end zone.
The member for Abbotsford, Gerry Ritz and Stephen Harper are really the people who did 99% of the work. Yes, the Liberals bobbled the football into the end zone, and they get the touchdown, but the heavy lifting was done by our government in previous years.
143 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. It sounds like he really studied the bill. When we give speeches in the House, I think it is important that we truly pay attention to the bill's content in order to elevate the debate and have meaningful discussions.
My colleague spoke at length about what he would like us to do to dive deeper into this matter. I would like to know what he would like the government to do when analyzing transactions. I have a specific case in mind. A few years ago, in my riding, Rona was sold. Because the purchase price was so large it exceeded the minimum threshold, the sale was reviewable under the Investment Canada Act. I wanted to know on what basis the Liberal minister at the time authorized the sale. I filed an access to information request, but the answer I got was that no records relevant to my request could be found. We wanted to know which analyses and studies the minister based his decision on. Apparently, he did not base his decision on any documents at all.
I want to ask my colleague whether he believes that due diligence is important when analyzing transactions.
204 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, that is from my neighbour, who sits right behind me. He is a decent fellow; he has not hit me in the back of the head yet, so I appreciate that.
The fines and penalties are increasing. It is so important for businesses to know that Canada is open for business, but if someone is going to do an acquisition, they have to go into the office and disclose what their intentions are with the Canadian business and how they would like to conduct themselves. To answer the member's question, today there is not enough of that done in the beginning. Then we get into these 11th-hour scenarios where it is not good for the business or the government of the day, and the wrong decision is usually made.
133 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am glad my colleague mentioned Anbang. Retirement Concepts is a company operating a retirement centre in my backyard, basically, in Summerland. It was in trouble before Anbang, a Chinese-owned insurance company, got involved; that was approved, as the member said, probably mistakenly. Then, Anbang was taken over by the Chinese government. The NDP put forward an amendment to the bill before us that would trigger a review, with a previously okayed deal, if there was a subsequent takeover by a state-owned enterprise.
Could the member comment on that and why the amendment did not pass through at committee?
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member is not wrong. That deal should never have been approved. There is no way. I remember reading about the deal, and I thought it was bad. This is why it is so important that they come, in the beginning, to the office and disclose. That would give the government and the officials plenty of time, and it should be reviewed at committee, as well. We should give the committees more power.
75 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise to talk on the update to Bill C-34, an act to amend the Investment Canada Act.
When it comes to business investment, it is clear that, after eight years under the Prime Minister and the Liberals, the government is not worth the cost. Since coming into power, business investment per employee in Canada has actually dropped 20%. At the same time, business investment per employee in the U.S. has actually increased 14%. It puts things into perspective in terms of Canada's dropping productivity and, as we go forward, the fear of declining prosperity in our country. What is more shocking is that, in the very final year of the Harper government, Canada's business investment, as a percentage of GDP, was actually higher than that of the U.S. After eight years of the government, we are at about 15% lower.
According to the National Bank of Canada, for the first time ever, business investment is now lower in this country than housing investment is. We can think about all the manufacturing, oil production and everything else. The investment is actually lower than it is in housing.
Manufacturing capital stock is the lowest that we have had since 1988. Two-thirds of our 15 main industries experienced declines in business investments under the government, including wholesale trade, accommodation and food services, utilities, professional services and manufacturing. All these numbers fell prepandemic; this is not because of the pandemic.
The Business Council of B.C. has issued a report on investment in Canada, calling it “Stuck in the slow lane”. What better title is there for what is going on right now with investment in our country than being stuck in the slow lane? The report noted that, out of 38 members in the OECD, Canada is going to have the slowest economic growth over the next decades. We will have the lowest real GDP per capita growth in the OECD going forward. That has been brought up, I think, in previous speeches about Bill C-34 in this House. The report lists several reasons for this, among them, inefficient regulatory approvals. Does anyone remember Bill C-69? Of course, we have seen Bill C-69 ruled against by the Supreme Court. Hopefully, the government will recognize what the Supreme Court has said and eliminate Bill C-69; however, Bill C-69 was only one of many regulatory burdens added by the government that has chased away business investment in this country.
The Business Council of B.C. also noted punitive tax rates as companies grow; lack of relief for energy-intensive, trade-exposed industries under the carbon tax regime; and high internal trade restrictions. Something also noted in this report is that our anemic business investment would be all the worse if it backed Alberta out. Alberta has the highest per capita investment in the entire country. If we back out Alberta, our numbers are even worse. What do we get with the government? Every possible regulatory move, every possible attempt to strangle the growth in Alberta. Therefore, we have one province driving most of the business investment in this country, and the government is trying to destroy it.
There will be some members across the way, such as, perhaps, the member for Winnipeg North, who will get up to ask this: Are there not some things the government has done? Would we not agree that it is good? There are some things the government has done to spur business investment in Canada, such as green-lighting the purchase of ITF Technologies by a China-based company. This was a deal that the Harper Conservatives had kiboshed. The Liberals reversed it and allowed a China-based company to buy out ITF Technologies. ITF has done national security work with National Defence, and the government overrode the ban on a purchase by a China-based company. We should remember that China's national intelligence law of 2017 requires companies to “support, assist and cooperate with state intelligence work”.
I will read that part again. It says Chinese companies “shall support, assist and co-operate with state intelligence work”, and we have the government approving the sale of a technology company that has done work for National Defence. It waived the security review of the Chinese takeover of Vancouver's Norsat, despite Norsat being involved in communication tech for Public Safety Canada, the defence department and the Coast Guard. Norsat had also done work for the Pentagon. The U.S. and our Five Eyes allies asked us not to allow the sale to go through, but it did.
When not allowing the sale of sensitive tech companies, the Liberals are going out of their way to bring Chinese regime companies into our security systems, such as Nuctech, which my colleague from Barrie—Innisfil talked about. Nuctech is called the Huawei of scanners. It is a Chinese-based company partially owned by the Chinese state. It has been fined, charged and convicted around the world over various fraud, regulatory and spying issues, and the government went out of its way to give it a contract to bring its technology into every embassy we have around the country.
The CBSA, which is meant to protect us, for some reason basically jury-rigged the RFP to ensure that only Nuctech, ahead of two Canadian companies, one in Quebec and one in Calgary, got the contract. It wrote in the requirements the exact specifications of a type of scanner, down to exactly how many inches across and how many inches high, and guess what. Only one company in all of the world happened to have a scanner that was 33 inches across and 21 inches high: Nuctech. Oddly enough, PSPC warned the government not to buy it, and the CBSA went ahead anyway.
When this was exposed, the government said it would hire an outside consulting company to do a review. Apparently, McKinsey was not available at the time, so it hired Deloitte, and for a quarter of a million dollars, Deloitte did what had been done at the mighty OGGO. Of course, I cannot make a speech without mentioning the operations and estimates committee. Deloitte exposed the fallacy of buying equipment from Chinese security companies. For a quarter of a million dollars, it came out with a four-page report that basically said Canada should not buy sensitive IT technology from despotic regimes.
I went to the West Edmonton Mall that week with the report and randomly asked kids and adults, strangers, about this, and they all laughed. Not one person said we should buy sensitive technology from despotic regimes.
I appreciate that the government is finally getting around to updating the issue with Bill C-34, but one major change the Conservatives would like to see is taking away the ability of a minister to make the final decision. We would like to see a minister bring it to cabinet so that cabinet is consulted. For an issue as important as our state security, too much power is left with the minister. The minister should be required to bring the purchase of a sensitive company elsewhere. Whether it is a mining company or a tech company, it should not be the role of the minister to decide. We have seen the government repeatedly bring bills to the House that would give ministerial power over such a thing, and we would like to see that change.
There were a couple of other amendments we brought up that were shut down, and I would like the government to reconsider them. One of them would modify the definition of a state-owned enterprise to include any company or entity headquartered in an authoritarian state. This goes back to my previous comment about the Chinese intelligence law that forces those companies to act and assist in concert with that regime.
I will just briefly bring up a couple of other amendments that we would like to see. One is listing specific sectors necessary to preserve our national security rather than a systematic approach. Another is exempting non-Canadian Five Eyes intelligence state-owned enterprises from the security review.
1377 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 2:01:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as Islamic History Month comes to an end, I will be reflecting on it and indeed on history in general. My recent meetings with the Ismaili community at the Aga Khan Museum and Ismaili Centre allowed me to see first-hand the artistic, intellectual and scientific contributions of Islamic civilization throughout history. The celebration I joined with the Dawoodi Bohras community in our area also highlighted the overall human progress this Muslim community has made.
Islamic history is rich and varied, like the histories of all faiths, cultures and peoples. The brilliance and creativity of all beings create this history. At times it is for the common good and at other times it is not, because as humans we are both amazing and flawed.
As we write this next chapter of our history and histories, I pray that we will all join hands and work for the common good. Let us show that we have learned from the past and evolved. As Canadians, we must reach out to one another with understanding and acceptance to ensure that our actions create a chapter that we can all be proud of.
191 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 2:02:06 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a literal life-and-death matter for millions of Canadians: reliable and affordable cellular service.
Recently, a rural Leamington resident had to race several kilometres to get enough cellular signal strength to call the fire department. A Chatham resident's medical alert monitoring calls for his diabetic father keep failing because of no service.
The survival of remote communities, such as Pelee Island, is dependent on reliable service to face the dangers of weather, fire, lake flooding, health services and so much more. After eight years, why does the broken Liberal-NDP government provide rural Ontario with the second-worst and costliest cellular service in the world?
The CRTC needs to immediately review the integrity of Canada's cellular infrastructure and report to the House by the end of February 2024. Instead of dropped signals, Canadians would do better to drop the government since it is not worth the cost.
156 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 2:03:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, a very successful technology entrepreneur, Marc Andreessen, recently published “The Techno-Optimist Manifesto”, which I believe every policy-maker should read. He is the same person who wrote “Why Software is Eating the World” in 2011, in which he foresaw the digital disruption that has since unfolded, underscoring the significance of software in redefining industries and shaping the contemporary business landscape.
In the manifesto he states, “there is no material problem—whether created by nature or by technology—that cannot be solved with more technology.... Our civilization was built on a spirit of discovery, of exploration, of industrialization”. He concludes with this:
We owe the past, and the future.
It is time, once again, to raise the technology flag.
It is time to be Techno-Optimists.
It's time to build.
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 2:04:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Hélène Alarie, the Bloc Québécois member for the riding of Louis-Hébert from 1997 to 2000, passed away last week.
Without ever raising her voice or losing her cheerful demeanour, Hélène was a calm but forceful presence and a trailblazer. In fact, she was the first woman agronomist in Quebec. While the pesticide industry was in its heyday, she promoted a kind of agriculture that was more respectful of the Quebec lands she loved so deeply.
As a member of Parliament, she championed the debate on genetically modified organisms and introduced a bill on mandatory GMO labelling at a time when no one had heard of GMOs before.
As vice-president of the Bloc Québécois from 2001 to 2007, she reminded us about the importance of rural and remote Quebec. After retiring, she took up the cause of the Scottish separatist movement, seeing the obvious parallels with Quebec.
On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, I would like to thank Hélène Alarie and offer our deepest sympathies to her loved ones and to everyone else fortunate enough to have known such a remarkable woman.
211 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 2:05:43 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Châteauguay—Lacolle is celebrating its rich past, its pride in its present and its confidence about its future. The municipalities of Napierville and Saint‑Cyprien are jointly celebrating their 200th anniversary, while Sherrington is celebrating its 175th anniversary.
What we are celebrating is our shared history of courage, solidarity and community spirit. The region's rich farmland, wonderful people and extraordinary history have shaped the country we live in today.
I want to thank everyone who has contributed to building this magnificent region and helping it prosper.
93 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 2:06:32 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have the good fortune of living in one of the most beautiful ridings in Canada, Portneuf—Jacques‑Cartier. The wealth and beauty of its urban and rural areas and its magnificent vacation spots are the envy of many, and the region is known for its dynamic entrepreneurs and devoted residents.
I would like to make special mention of an essential sector that is really part of our DNA: agriculture and livestock farming. Does anyone know where to find the best dairy cow in all of North America? It is in in Portneuf—Jacques‑Cartier, Quebec, Canada, in Cap‑Santé to be precise.
On October 6, the judges of the World Dairy Expo proclaimed Shakira, a Holstein from the famous Ferme Jacobs, as the best cow of 2023. Congratulations to the Jacobs family.
Other award winners included Petitclerc Lambda Anny, who was the first-place yearling heifer. Congratulations also go out to the Petitclerc family from Saint‑Basile.
I thank all of our devoted farmers. They are important to us.
179 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 2:07:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, in these difficult times and as Remembrance Day approaches, I would like to take this opportunity to mark October 28, 1940, and commemorate the incredible sacrifices made by Greece, a long-time ally of Canada, during the Second World War.
Starting on October 28, 1940, with the Greek rejection of Mussolini's ultimatum to occupy Greece with a loud no, or όχι, the entire Greek population fought against overwhelming first Italian, then German and Bulgarian, fascist and Nazi forces. They continued a courageous fight for four terrible years during the brutal occupation, suffering immense losses.
We must never forget Greece's contribution, far out of proportion to its numbers, to achieving our ultimate victory for freedom.
[Member spoke in Greek]
[Translation]
Long live Canada.
128 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 2:08:45 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to share some exciting news.
The Sustainable Finance Forum 2023 will be held this week on Wednesday, November 1 and Thursday, November 2 at the Shaw Centre here in Ottawa. In just a couple of days, we will welcome 500 participants at this year's forum to engage in many constructive conversations over two days. The program consists of 16 sessions showcasing the power of finance in helping to build a more sustainable, just and prosperous economy.
We can leverage our markets and mobilize capital to help solve many of our greatest challenges, from affordable housing to food insecurity to climate change and much more. With many renowned speakers and thought leaders coming together, this year's forum will provide an opportunity for policy-makers, innovators, financial institutions representatives and international experts to come together and explore ways in which we can align our financial system with our values and build the economy of the future.
167 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/30/23 2:09:48 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, after eight long years, Canadians cannot afford any more of these NDP-Liberal fairy tales. The carbon tax, with no way of measuring its effectiveness, according to the commissioner of the environment, is the most expensive, punitive, ineffective and useless virtue signal in the history of Canada.
Last week, the Prime Minister finally admitted that Canadians cannot afford it when he announced that he would remove the carbon tax on home heating for Atlantic Canadians. Beyond the mirage of yet another false promise, in reality, the Prime Minister has committed to fully implement a quadrupled carbon tax in three years, after the next election. The Prime Minister is just not worth the cost. I am from Atlantic Canada, and I thought, what about the rest of the country? They cannot afford it either.
How did the Liberal government respond? It suggested that maybe the west should elect more Liberals. Good luck with that. Perhaps Premier Higgs from New Brunswick said it best when he said, “Just cancel their unaffordable carbon tax altogether.”
Common-sense Conservatives agree and, in every part of the country, Canadians from sea to sea are asking to get off their backs and axe the tax.
203 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
