SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 253 - Nov/22/23

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

Nov/22/23 7:28:53 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, President Zelenskyy came to Canada back in September and signed the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement. The extreme right element of the Conservative Party of Canada decided to vote against the trade agreement. Now we have Conservative members scratching, looking and searching for whatever they can come up with to try to justify their behaviour in voting against an agreement that sends a very powerful message to Russia and supports the people of Ukraine and Canada. The member cannot get around the fact that the far right in the Conservative Party is now in control of what is taking place in the office of the leader of the Conservative Party. Does the member have any remorse for voting against the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement?

125 words

Mr. Kyle Seeback

Nov/22/23 7:29:55 p.m.
Watch

I absolutely do not, Madam Speaker. I will not stand here and vote for something that would export the worst, most harmful policy that the current Liberal government has come up with in decades. It is creating the misery that is in Canada. However, what this member and Liberals should all be ashamed of is that they granted the export waiver that is allowing Russia to pump more oil. The member has the audacity to say that we have given Vladimir Putin a win by exercising our right as the opposition to oppose a bad trade deal, when the Liberals granted the waiver that increases Russian blood money. They are disgraceful.

111 words

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Nov/22/23 7:30:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, this is another sad chapter of the Conservatives' betrayal of Ukraine. Yesterday was the Day of Dignity and Freedom, the 10-year anniversary of Ukrainian people uniting to defend their right to freedom and democracy. Conservatives chose that day to betray Ukrainian Canadians, to betray the consensus that we had in the House on Ukraine and to vote against the principle of even having a trade agreement with Ukraine. Today, we have a report that talks about Canada's taking a strong stand on war crimes. This is important for Canadians across this country and the million and a half Canadians of Ukrainian origin to be aware of: The Conservatives have just moved an amendment that would kill the whole report. It would delete all the recommendations and what is fundamentally important. This is another betrayal of Ukraine. How can the member live with this double betrayal in two consecutive days?

153 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Nov/22/23 7:32:01 p.m.
Watch

Again, there are some members thinking out loud, and it is not their turn to do that. I would ask them to hold off. The hon. member for Dufferin—Caledon.

31 words

Mr. Kyle Seeback

Nov/22/23 7:32:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I fundamentally disagree with what the member says this motion would do. It would not do any of the things he suggests. Voting against a bad trade deal is our right. Conservatives negotiated the original free trade agreement, which is currently in effect. It will remain in effect, regardless of how we voted on this particular trade agreement. We know that the NDP and the Liberals are ideologically obsessed with the carbon tax. They want to export that misery all across the globe. It was not enough to make Canadians miserable; they want to export it all over the world. We will not stand for it. We voted against it on that basis.

115 words

Negotiated

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

Nov/22/23 7:32:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his excellent work. Could he remind the House of what happened at the international trade committee yesterday? It was not just Liberals; it was also the NDP. They voted together to oppose Conservative efforts to expand the bill and get more weapons to Ukraine. Ukraine needs weapons and not a carbon tax. Liberals and New Democrats voted against expanding the trade deal to include weapons.

72 words

Mr. Kyle Seeback

Nov/22/23 7:33:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the hypocrisy is stunning. The Liberals granted a turbine to fund Putin's war machine and voted against munitions. The NDP is just merrily along for the ride. The NDP members on the committee voted against expanding the trade agreement to include critical munitions exports. How dare he say that we betrayed Ukraine. They did it.

58 words

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Nov/22/23 7:34:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, given the hypocrisy of what we have heard from the Conservatives tonight, I am pleased to rise to defend the recommendations made by the foreign affairs committee, which the Conservatives are trying to gut. More importantly, I want to come back to the importance of adopting concurrence on the report rather than seeing it gutted, as we are seeing, by the Conservatives. In a procedural sleight of hand, they are trying to destroy all of the recommendations that form part of a consensus we have had since Putin invaded Ukraine. We have seen the appalling civilian casualties. We have seen the evidence of war crimes and sexual abuse. We have seen the appalling bombings of hospitals, schools and apartment buildings. We have all seen that. It is fair to say there was initially a consensus, and it is reflected in the report the Conservatives are now trying to gut, trying to destroy. It was reflected as well in President Zelenskyy's comments to us parliamentarians. He asked, on behalf of the people of Ukraine, to adopt the Canada-Ukraine trade deal. This resonated across Canada and should have resonated with Conservative members given that a million and a half Canadians are of Ukrainian origin and they believe strongly in Canada supporting Ukraine. Yesterday was no simple day. It was the 10th anniversary of the Day of Dignity and Freedom for Ukrainian people. It is important symbolism, a profound symbolic act of Canada standing in support of Ukraine. Ukrainians could not celebrate that day because they are trying to defend their villages, farms and homes. What we saw yesterday, on the Day of Dignity and Freedom, was the entire Conservative caucus, not just the leader, the member for Carleton, whose extremist views we know about, rising one after the other to betray Ukraine, to betray the commitment that all Canadians feel they have to Ukraine. President Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian Canadian Congress and the Ukrainian ambassador to Canada asked us, as an act of solidarity and support for the Ukrainian people, to adopt the trade agreement, and every single member in this House except Conservatives rose as one to stand in solidarity with the Ukrainian people. Every single member of the Conservative caucus betrayed the consensus we have had since the beginning of the horrific invasion and horrific violence that has been engendered toward the Ukrainian people. Conservatives decided to choose the Day of Dignity and Freedom to betray Ukrainian Canadians and betray Ukraine. I continue to believe that this vote lives in infamy. The member for Carleton has an obsession with the federal price on carbon, which does not even apply in my province of British Columbia, in Quebec or in the Northwest Territories, and demands that the federal price on carbon be part of a carbon election. What does that mean for my province or our second-largest province, the Quebec nation? What does that mean for the Northwest Territories and other jurisdictions where the federal price on carbon does not even apply? He has never even asked that question, but his obsession with the price on carbon and his obsession with the denial of climate change I find to be profoundly disturbing. This is a step further. This is taking the extremism of the Republican Party in the United States, which is rejecting supports for Ukraine and refusing to stand with the Ukrainian people as we speak, and manifesting it here in this chamber. Canadians were all witness to it yesterday, on a symbolic day of such importance. The Day of Dignity and Freedom is the day the Conservative MPs chose to betray Ukraine. That was the day the entire Conservative caucus turned its back on Ukraine. The Day of Dignity and Freedom was hard fought by Ukrainians, to establish their democracy, to fight back against this totalitarian, authoritarian dictator Putin who has ravaged the country. That was the day Conservatives chose to side, not with the Ukrainian people but, with the extremists that we see in the Republican Party. I find that profoundly disturbing. Not a single Conservative MP rose to stand with Ukraine. How could they go back to their constituents with this weird extremist obsession of their new leader, the member for Carleton, with the price on carbon and denying climate change? How could they go back and say that their obsession with the price on carbon was what led them to betray Ukraine? Today, we have a report from the foreign affairs committee. This is part of the consensus that Canadians saw, in a very positive light, since the invasion of Ukraine, since the horrific violence brought against the people of Ukraine. There was an all-party consensus that lasted up until the Day of Dignity and Freedom, when Conservatives betrayed and turned their back on the people of Ukraine, breaking that consensus. Then tonight, we have another example. We have a report that has come forward with the consensus of all parties, that speaks to Canada taking a leading role against the crimes against humanity, the war crimes, the violations of international human rights, the gender-based and sexual violence, with Canada play a leading role in that prosecution. Conservatives said no, that they were going to gut the report, and were—

881 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Nov/22/23 7:41:10 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member's time is up. I do want to remind members who are having conversations in the House that they may want to take them outside. It is a little loud. It being 7:41 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion are deemed put and recorded divisions deemed requested. Therefore, pursuant to Standing Order 66, the divisions stand deferred until Wednesday, November 29, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

85 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

Nov/22/23 7:42:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am here to speak on the arrive scam. However, in a brief coda to the previous debate, the NDP House leader was talking about the importance of supporting Ukraine, trying to wrap himself in blue and yellow. It is important to tell the House that the NDP has consistently opposed giving Ukraine the weapons it needs. In fact, I will quote from the member for Edmonton Strathcona, the NDP foreign affairs critic, who said, last February at committee: Some people in this committee and some members of our Parliament have been calling on the government to provide lethal weapons to Ukraine. I have some concerns about that, obviously. Do you believe there are risks—

118 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Nov/22/23 7:42:46 p.m.
Watch

Is the hon. member speaking on ArriveCAN? It has to be on the ArriveCAN app. I want to remind the member that the subject before the House is on the late show question that he submitted.

36 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis

Nov/22/23 7:43:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I was simply reading a quote, which I think is on the record, that showed the NDP speaking out against giving lethal weapons to Ukraine. Ukraine needs weapons. I will speak now about the arrive scam app, which is a grotesque scandal that I think many Canadians are seized with. It is actually more like a family of scandals; it is a number of different scandals that are interrelated. The government spent $54 million developing an app, which is far in excess of what it had spent on apps before. It spent $54 million developing a glitchy app that did not work and that sent many Canadians into quarantine who should not have been in quarantine. In the process, the government hired not a major company or a company with IT expertise. Rather, it hired GC Strategies, a company of two people working out of their basement and who did no IT work. They simply subcontracted all of the actual work. That would be like the Speaker's hiring me to paint her fence for $100, my then hiring the member for Winnipeg North to paint the fence for $20, and my pocketing $80. He did all the work, and the Speaker was sort of fine with that arrangement. That is what happened consistently. I think Canadians have a grave problem with why the two-person company that did nothing got all the work. The RCMP is now investigating the contractors. Meanwhile, there is an admission that fraudulent resumes were submitted to the Government of Canada by GC Strategies, and there are senior public servants accusing each other of lying about who is responsible for the choice to hire GC Strategies. We need an answer from the government on this, because we have tried to ask senior public servants, and they have accused each other. They have said, “It wasn't me; he chose GC” and “No, someone else chose GC Strategies.” One can understand why nobody wants to take credit for the decision, given the fact that a company with no IT experience and that did no work was hired. The government needs to explain, because it was a decision made by the Government of Canada. In the midst of these structural problems about contracting, fraudulent resumes and public servants accusing each other of lying, will the government finally tell us who is responsible for choosing GC Strategies for ArriveCAN?

407 words

Mr. Charles Sousa (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement, Lib.)

Nov/22/23 7:45:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as previously indicated in the House, we take these allegations seriously. As the member is aware, a matter is under investigation by the RCMP, and we have full confidence in our national law enforcement agency. Let us be clear that the RCMP commissioner stated on October 23 of this year that “contrary to public reporting, the RCMP is not investigating the ArriveCAN matter. The confusion may arise from the fact that we are investigating a file based on allegations brought by Botler AI”.We trust that the RCMP will pursue the investigation with integrity, and that, should the RCMP find any wrongdoing in the matter, it will pursue any charges as appropriate. Additionally, the CBSA has launched its own internal audit, even though GC Strategies and Botler AI did not have a contract with the government. Notwithstanding that, it is important for the CBSA to review its contracting and provide more rigour in the procurement process, in part by increasing oversight of the granting of contracts and of those who hold contracting authority. In the meantime, the CBSA has suspended some of its existing contracts until the agency gets further clarity on the facts. Although the allegations and investigations are not specific to ArriveCAN, we recognize they may also yield findings relevant to that procurement. Members may know that the CBSA and the Public Health Agency of Canada have also been engaged with the Office of the Auditor General on a performance audit of ArriveCAN. We await the Auditor General's findings and recommendations. Once again, we will respond to all findings and ensure that any acts of wrongdoing have consequences.

275 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis

Nov/22/23 7:47:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that great fog of a non-response obviously gets nowhere close to the question I asked. I will repeat it. We have the arrive scam scandal: $54 million that was spent on an app that should have cost much, much less. Money was spent through a company that did no IT work and subcontracted all of the actual work. We need to know who is responsible. Who made the choice to hire GC Strategies? There are senior public servants, Cameron MacDonald and Minh Doan, accusing each other of lying about who is responsible. Somebody has to be responsible. The government made the decision to give the money to GC Strategies for the arrive scam app. It is a simple question: Who was responsible for the decision to hire GC Strategies for the ArriveCAN app? Finally, to the parliamentary secretary, who was the person responsible for hiring GC Strategies?

150 words

Mr. Charles Sousa

Nov/22/23 7:49:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the government takes these allegations seriously. We will act on any investigation and audit findings to ensure that controls, oversight— An hon. member: Oh, oh!

28 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Nov/22/23 7:49:09 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member had an opportunity to ask his question. I would ask him to please offer that respect back to the member. It was very quiet when he was making his statement. Please allow the parliamentary secretary to answer. The hon. parliamentary secretary.

44 words

Mr. Charles Sousa

Nov/22/23 7:49:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as I said, we will act on all the findings and ensure that controls, oversight and stewardship over contracting are strengthened. The CBSA and the RCMP are investigating certain allegations, and they will act appropriately on those findings. Ahead of that, the CBSA had already launched its own internal audit of contracting, and it has increased its oversight on the granting of contracts. The agency has also directed all employees with contracting authority to retake procurement training and certification. Furthermore, the CBSA has suspended some contracts until the facts are clear. Once again, we take all allegations seriously, and we will act on the findings and on the facts to provide Canadians with proper services and value for money.

121 words

Mr. Michael Kram (Regina—Wascana, CPC)

Nov/22/23 7:50:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity this evening to follow up on a question that I asked in question period on October 20 regarding the Liberal government’s opposition to liquefied natural gas exports to Europe. For context, shortly after Vladimir Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the leaders of western European countries started to take steps to end their dependence on oil and gas imports from Russia. This makes a great deal of sense, because buying oil and gas from Russia means funding Vladimir Putin’s war machine against Ukraine. What exactly did the leaders of Europe do? In August of last year, Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany visited Canada looking to buy more oil and gas from this country. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister told him that there has never been a strong business case for Canadian oil and gas exports to Europe. What did the German chancellor do next? He flew to the Middle East to see if the dictators of the United Arab Emirates and Qatar felt that there was a strong business case for oil and gas exports to Europe. Those Middle Eastern dictators were happy to sign a multi-year memorandum of understanding that will guarantee steady oil and gas exports to Germany for years to come. The story does not end there. Last month, France, the Netherlands and Italy all signed separate agreements to import LNG from Qatar for the next 27 years. This raises a question: Why is Canada not exporting LNG to Europe? According to a report released by the Fraser Institute shortly after Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine last year, “Unfortunately, despite being the world’s fifth-largest producer of natural gas, Canada has missed the opportunity to expand our supply of LNG to overseas markets due to a lack of export infrastructure, largely due to regulatory barriers and environmental activism.” In fact, Canada does not have a single operational LNG export facility, and only one is under construction. This is the Coastal GasLink project in British Columbia. That brings us to my question in question period last month, when I asked if the Liberal government still believes that there is no business case for Canadian LNG exports. What was the government's response? It was, “Mr. Speaker, it is really shameful that the Conservative Party would use this humanitarian situation to peddle conspiracy theories.” There are some things I would really like to know. What conspiracy theories was the Liberal minister referring to? Were last year’s German LNG deals with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates all conspiracy theories? When Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited Canada last year, was he part of the conspiracy? What about the three agreements that Qatar signed last month with France, the Netherlands and Italy? Are they in on the conspiracy as well? What about the 6,000 people who worked on the construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline? Does the Liberal minister think that they are part of the conspiracy too?

514 words

Mr. Marc Serré (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources and to the Minister of Official Languages, Lib.)

Nov/22/23 7:54:07 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Madam Speaker, companies and countries around the world are making decisions to ensure that they are able to access and deliver energy that is reliable, clean and affordable. That is true in Canada and around the world. Russia's invasion of Ukraine included significant impacts on global energy markets and supply chains. That is why the European Union signalled that it is looking to secure sustainable sources of energy, stating that it is clean energy that will play the largest role in their long-term energy security. We must be skating where the puck is going. The Conservatives may deny climate change, but they have to at least acknowledge that is not the case for our partners and allies in Europe. We know that energy security and climate action go hand in hand. When it comes to supporting Canadian projects to provide energy to our allies, I can confirm to the member across the way that our government has a better record than the Conservatives do on every level. To give members an example, we have approved, as the member mentioned, the Cedar LNG project in B.C., led by the Haisla Nation. It is a small-scale floating facility and marine export terminal. Beyond LNG, there are many increasingly important resources of low-carbon fuel that we are working actively on. One of the top 10 hydrogen-producing countries is Canada, which has emerged as a leader in developing new hydrogen and fuel cell technologies. Allow me to add that Atlantic Canada will be a significant driver of that as well. The Canada-Germany hydrogen alliance will also export hydrogen to Germany as early as 2025. Just last week, we announced the financing of major hydrogen projects in Nova Scotia using wind power. Once the Conservatives stop their shameful opposition to Bill C‑49, we can begin to build offshore wind farms in Newfoundland and Labrador and in Nova Scotia. That means thousands of jobs, a lot of clean energy for the power grid and emissions-free hydrogen production for export. While the Conservatives denigrate our economic future, we are taking measures to build the future. On top of this, I will briefly mention our efforts to bring clean nuclear energy and biofuels to our allies. There are growing opportunities for Canada's CANDU technology. Earlier this year, the minister of energy joined the Romanian minister to announce a $3-billion loan to Romania, which will be best spent on building two new CANDU reactors in Romania. All of this money will be spent on Canadian companies and good jobs for the clean sector. We will be powering Romania at no cost to the taxpayer. This will help Romania phase out coal and provide clean power to countries that are looking to move away from Russia. On biofuels, we continue to invest this year in Canadian innovation to support our allies' energy needs. In May, we announced $86 million to save and retool the Come By Chance refinery in Newfoundland and Labrador, so that the former oil refinery can lead the region in sustainable biofuel production. Canada will continue to be a reliable and steady global supplier of clean energy.

532 words

Mr. Michael Kram

Nov/22/23 7:57:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in the Liberal parliamentary secretary's original response from last month, he said, “It is really shameful that the Conservative Party would use this humanitarian situation to peddle conspiracy theories.” I find the use of the word “shameful” to be very interesting. What exactly is it that the Liberals find to be shameful? Do the Liberals think that it was shameful for German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to go to the Middle East to buy oil and gas after the Prime Minister gave him the cold shoulder? Is it shameful for other European countries to buy LNG from Qatar, given the Prime Minister's statements? Do the Liberals think that the 6,000 people who worked on the Coastal GasLink LNG project should be ashamed for providing clean, ethical Canadian energy to the world?

139 words