House of Commons Hansard #75 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was fcc.

Topics

Council For Canadian Unity
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Stéphane Dion Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC

It should take advantage of this weekend to change its name, to include secessionist or independentist instead of Quebecois. We are already sovereign. We are part of a democracy based on the sovereignty of its citizens.

Council For Canadian Unity
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Bloc

Yvan Loubier Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Mr. Speaker, we will not change our name, we will change our country. This is what is important to us.

The Council for Canadian Unity, which spends millions of dollars without being accountable to anyone, now has an Internet site where the tone is very clear. The CCU continues to spread despicable propaganda.

Is the tone used on the anonymous site of the Council for Canadian Unity, a tone that promotes confrontation between the federalist friends and the sovereignist enemies, not strangely similar to the federal government's secret communication strategy that was exposed by the Bloc Quebecois last Friday?

Council For Canadian Unity
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Saint-Laurent—Cartierville
Québec

Liberal

Stéphane Dion President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs

Mr. Speaker, it will be very gratifying to hear the Bloc Quebecois member use a different tone and avoid terms such as enemies and others we hear yelled out in the House every day.

So, if he wants to lead by example, I will be very pleased. I personally have no enemies. However, some of my fellow citizens want Quebec out of Canada. It would be nice if separatist leaders said so clearly, like the member just did. They no longer want to be part of Canada. They want to have an independent country.

Let them say so clearly, instead of coming up with complicated formulas about a European type of confederation, something that does not fool anyone.

Council For Canadian Unity
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Bloc

Yvan Loubier Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Mr. Speaker, the minister should take a look at the Internet site, he should read the study that we exposed last week. The separatist enemies, this is the tone used by federalists, not by us.

I am asking the minister how many such anonymous propaganda initiatives are being taken by the Council for Canadian Unity against Quebec, with the sponsor remaining anonymous?

Is this not a good illustration of what the secret communication strategy identified as the marketing war against Quebec?

Council For Canadian Unity
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Saint-Laurent—Cartierville
Québec

Liberal

Stéphane Dion President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs

Mr. Speaker, what a sudden shift. We are not talking about a war against Quebec. Who is at war against Quebec? We have a disagreement. The member wishes for Quebec no longer to be a part of Canada. He would like to be a Quebecer without being a Canadian. No one is attacking Quebec.

However there is a semantic shift here. It is not the government, it is the CCU. It is not the government, it is a study made by an academic.

Why always malign the adversary? If the member were so sure about what he is saying, he would tone down his remarks.

The Environment
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

NDP

Joe Comartin Windsor—St. Clair, ON

Mr. Speaker, all week the government has been patting itself on the back and claiming that it is environmentally friendly and a good ecomanager.

In fact it is the poorest funded department in the government. There is evidence all across the country, whether it is Walkerton, North Battleford, the smog crisis in Ontario or the disgrace of the Sydney tar ponds, that it has failed Canadians. When will the government put its money where its mouth is and do something about protecting the environment?

The Environment
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Victoria
B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, we have a contradiction here. On the one hand, he does not like the statements that are made, where we specify one by one the very large number of things that are being undertaken by the government on the environmental front. On the other hand he does not like it—

The Environment
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh.

The Environment
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

David Anderson Victoria, BC

I am sorry, there seems to be some disorder down there in the splitting ranks of the NDP. One of their major political splits seems to be occurring at this time.

They cannot have it both ways. They cannot on the one hand complain when we list what we do and on the other hand complain we have not done anything.

The Environment
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

NDP

Joe Comartin Windsor—St. Clair, ON

Mr. Speaker, in fact they have not done very much. The Mulroney government 10 years ago was spending more money than they are right now, both in actual terms and in percentage terms.

Again, when will they make the commitment to protect the environment and really put their money where their mouths are?

The Environment
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Victoria
B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, members of the NDP are once again bragging about the $42 billion deficit of the Conservative government, the one that we had to inherit and do something about.

They never pay any attention to the fact that it is quite easy to spend more money if we ignore that the taxpayer has to produce it and that if we continue to run deficits ultimately the country will go broke and there will be no environmental programs whatsoever. That is their approach.

I only suggest that the hon. member listen to the many statements that come up day after day from myself and other members of the government and which list what we are doing on the environment.

The Economy
Oral Question Period

June 8th, 2001 / 11:30 a.m.

Progressive Conservative

Scott Brison Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, real incomes in Canada are 30% lower than those of Americans because of a growing productivity gap. The HRDC-Industry Canada white paper on productivity will reportedly focus on government spending initiatives alone to reverse this trend.

Will the Prime Minister expand the terms of reference for the white paper to include tax reform, which all leading economists and business leaders agree is absolutely necessary to improving productivity?

The Economy
Oral Question Period

11:30 a.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Deputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has been missing in action somewhere, because we have taken those kinds of steps with $100 billion in tax cuts, the biggest in history, over five years, average tax cuts for Canadians at 27% and much higher for families with children. We are already moving in this area. We are ahead of the curve.

Where has my hon. friend been the last couple of years?

The Economy
Oral Question Period

11:30 a.m.

Progressive Conservative

Scott Brison Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, Thomas d'Aquino, head of the BCNI, has said:

How can you have a paper on innovation without anything on taxes? You can't. It's a contradiction in terms.

Yet the ministers of HRDC and industry, the big spenders of the Liberal cabinet, believe they can improve productivity with big spending alone.

Why is the finance minister being shut out of a productivity plan that desperately needs leadership on tax reform? Is the Liberal leadership race more important than improving productivity for all Canadians?

The Economy
Oral Question Period

11:30 a.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Deputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, this may come as a surprise to the Conservative Party, but we are able to work together as a team. That is what we are doing. We will all have our input into the development of this paper.

In fact I would even be willing to take my hon. friend's comments as a representation, no matter how poorly informed or founded they may be.