Debates of May 17th, 2006

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the House of Commons passed a Bloc Québécois motion that calls on the government to publish, by October 15, 2006, a plan for complying with the Kyoto protocol. As leader of a minority government elected with only 36% of the vote, the Prime Minister has a duty to implement the will of the House.

Does the Prime Minister not agree that he has a duty to respect the decisions of the House?

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, as I just said, it is easy for an opposition party that will never be in power to say that it is easy to vote for very complex matters without a plan.

This government intends to develop a plan and take concrete action.

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, my mandate is just as legitimate as his.

I was referring to the comments the Prime Minister made on May 11, 2005, when he said, “The government is duty bound to respect the decisions made by the House of Commons”.

Am I to understand that it was easy for him to say whatever he wanted when he was on this side of the House, to say whatever he wanted during the election campaign and to do the opposite today?

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, polls indicate that the Kyoto protocol is popular. I notice today that the Bloc Québécois is indicating—just today—after four years, a change in position. It is opposed to our action in Afghanistan because polls indicate that our presence there is not popular.

Independent nations need leaders, not pollsters.

Bernard Bigras Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is rejecting Kyoto, and his future plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions could very well be a carbon copy of the Bush plan, an approach that is very attractive to the oil companies because it imposes no restrictions and relies on voluntary action.

Will the Prime Minister see reason, listen to what Canadians are telling him and, in no uncertain terms, reaffirm Canada's support for the Kyoto protocol targets?

Rona Ambrose Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, the critic for the environment should be embarrassed about the motion that he put before the House last week because it means for Quebec massive job losses and impacts the Quebec economy. He did nothing to explain to Quebeckers what his motion would actually entail and the consequences of exactly what he put forward.

Bernard Bigras Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, the motion voted on yesterday enjoys broad support in Quebec.

From 1980 to 1990, Canada fought against acid rain using a territorial approach, which enabled the country to surpass its international targets.

In the wake of yesterday's vote on the Kyoto protocol, what is preventing the government from taking the same approach? Can the government promise to give money to Quebec so that it can implement the Kyoto protocol in its own territory?

Rona Ambrose Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, this is not about money. This is about the environment. We have seen the Liberal record of billions of dollars in wasted money and we are 35% above our Kyoto targets.

If the member actually cared about the environment and the future of Quebeckers, he would be working with us for a sensible approach instead of putting forward a motion that means shutting down the Quebec economy and doing nothing for the environment.

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Order, please. The hon. member for Toronto—Danforth has the floor to put his question.

Jack Layton Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, in the face of this Canadians are rather shocked. Given that the House of Commons was not prepared to appoint the one man, someone who made quite a controversial speech to the Fraser Institute, the Prime Minister's favourite think tank, the question is, why would the Prime Minister decide to cancel a good idea just because his guy did not get the job?

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, Gwyn Morgan was voted the top CEO in the country. He brought forward with him a team of highly qualified executives, people from different partisan backgrounds, all of whom were willing to work to clean up the appointments process in this country for nothing, absolutely free to the taxpayers of Canada.

Mr. Morgan, instead of having an examination of his credentials, was treated to a buffoonish show of partisan behaviour at the committee. No quality person is going to go before that committee again for such an appointment and this Prime Minister is not going to ask anyone to do it.

Jack Layton Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am beginning to understand it now. Votes for the best CEO by whomever casts those votes is respected by the Prime Minister, but a vote in the House of Commons to respect international engagements on the environment is not respected by the Prime Minister. A vote in this place that would reject his personal choice for the appointments commission would not be respect by him.

This afternoon and this evening, when there is a vote in the House on the deployment of troops in Afghanistan, is he going to respect that vote or is he just going to say, “It's my way or the highway and just get used to it”?