Finance Committee on May 28th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Hoback.

I did have Ms. McLeod. You're okay? Okay.

I'll go to Mr. Jean, please.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

My understanding is that not only did Ridley Terminals make $34 million last year, it's also been confirmed by the government that it won't be sold to a state-owned enterprise. I think that's a very good point.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

(Clauses 200 to 207 inclusive agreed to)

We have a new clause proposed, 207.1. It's amendment NDP-23.

Mr. Rankin, on that, please.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

I'll speak to that, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

The purpose of this amendment is really quite simple. It would require the minister to table in the House a report specifying how any measure taken under sections 202 and 203 would be of net benefit to Canada, and also what the possible impact of those measures would be on Canadian businesses and communities, including the expected return on investment.

This is in keeping with the theme of many of the NDP amendments today, which is to try to hold the government to a greater degree of accountability—something they used to take seriously.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Rankin.

Is there discussion? We'll go to a vote.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 208 agreed to)

(Clauses 209 to 212 inclusive agreed to)

We have clauses 213 to 224, dealing with division 14, “Transfer of Powers, Duties and Functions to the Minister of Canadian Heritage”. Do you wish to deal with these together or one at a time? Together? Okay.

Is there discussion on these clauses?

Ms. Nash, please.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Our concern with this is that there could be a greater politicization of public celebrations in the national capital region. We've already seen that trend with this government, and we fear both a loss of public input and, as I say, greater politicization.

We've seen in the past.... I am continually reminded by my constituents about this government using public money for advertising, which, in their view, is more partisan than public service. There is a concern this clause could extend that blurring of the line to public celebrations like Canada Day.

There are other provisions here about interfering with the way Canadians study history in the school system and the remaking of the Museum of Civilization. Now, again, the concern is that they will be monopolizing public celebrations. These are, yes, national in the public service, and they should have local community input and not in some way serve partisan interests. That's our concern.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Ms. Nash.

I have Ms. McLeod on this section.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

We recognize that we have a really important anniversary coming up, and that's the 150th of Confederation in 2017. Certainly, the mandate to promote the national capital region will be transferred to Canadian Heritage—a broad national perspective.

I think it's important to recognize that even by the words, “National Capital Commission”, it speaks to a very local look. If you look at most people in western and eastern Canada, those words don't make any sense. The Minister of Canadian Heritage is intimate and instrumental in terms of the celebrations we enjoy across Canada.

I think this is going to be a strongly positive move, and we're really looking forward to having that national perspective as we head into this very important anniversary and celebration.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Ms. McLeod.

I have Mr. Brison and then Monsieur Côté.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Chair, I don't think it's been justified to the committee as to why this change is needed. It's not been indicated to committee that there was any dysfunctionality in the governance structure that previously existed. It's not been indicated to committee that the National Capital Commission at any time did not fulfill its responsibilities in a way consistent with celebrating all regions of the country.

I have to express that I have some concerns with the potential of increasing the politicization of yet another agency. When it comes to celebrating history, last year was the 30th anniversary of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and we heard virtually nothing from the government, from the Department of Heritage, celebrating the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I guess we were all too busy with the fixation on the War of 1812.

I use that as an example, Mr. Chair, to indicate that I'm not absolutely certain that the priorities of the Minister of Heritage, his department, and the government—

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

A point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

A point of order, Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I just want to make sure Mr. Brison knew that I tweeted the anniversary date. I just want to make sure he knew that. As a Conservative, I don't want him to get away with that.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay. We'll take that as a point of information. Thank you.

Mr. Brison, you have the floor.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

That was a “tweet” gesture.

The reality is that I forgot to tweet the War of 1812 celebrations.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

But I use that as an example, Mr. Chair, just to inform the committee and the three Canadians who are listening to this right now that our view is that there has been a politicization of the celebration of Canadian history; it's been through a very political lens with this government. We are more comfortable with the absolute independence of the National Capital Commission in its current operational governance.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Brison.

Monsieur Côté, and then Ms. Glover.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

As you know, this year marked the 250th anniversary of the Treaty of Paris, which is likely the most important agreement after the Treaty of Tordesillas, signed in the 15th century. The Treaty of Paris changed the world order and especially North America. Obviously this was another missed opportunity by the government, owing to its selective memory.

There is cause for serious concern about the future, especially as regards the 150th anniversary celebrations, given that the government will be in total control. There is reason to fear that this is a time of national shame. After the clear failure of the War of 1812 celebrations, the government's track record isn't very good.

Unfortunately, Ms. McLeod did not give any reasons that might justify the Minister of Canadian Heritage's taking back so many powers. He simply could have brought something more to the National Capital Commission. The NCC could have kept its mandate and received assistance, the support of the Minister of Canadian Heritage. Had that been the case, we might have hoped for a much more inclusive celebration, instead of a potentially divisive event. Unfortunately, that is the government's way.

I think I've made my point clear.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I was taught that the Battle of Thermopylae was the most important historical event.

There are no classicists in the room, I guess.

I know, I know. I didn't mean to start anything.

Ms. Glover, please.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have to disagree with Mr. Côté. I think Ms. McLeod actually nailed it when she said that the 150th celebration requires pan-Canadian participation. Of course the National Capital Commission focuses on the national capital, and the heritage minister is a minister of the crown who represents the entire country.

But I do want to thank Mayor Watson, while I have the floor, for his favourable response to this very important change. We look forward to celebrating our history with Mayor Watson and all Canadians.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

(Clauses 213 to 224 inclusive agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Now we have division 15, which deals with clauses 225 and 226, dealing with parliamentary secretaries and ministers. Can I group these two together? No? We'll do them separately.

Ms. Nash, discussion on 225.

(On clause 225)

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

This clause would expand the number of parliamentary secretaries, in our view. We have quite enough, thank you very much. The Conservatives already have one of the biggest cabinets in history, and for a government that pretends at least to care about the public purse, they're now looking to increase the number of parliamentary secretaries with all the related costs. It's completely unnecessary. I don't know if it's because they have a restless backbench and they're looking to hand out more goodies. I'll leave that to others to speculate; I wouldn't want to do that.

It certainly doesn't appear to be in the public interest. We'll be opposing this change.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Ms. Nash.

I will go to Mr. Jean, please.