House of Commons Hansard #2 of the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was opposition.

Topics

Goods and Services TaxOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Goods and Services TaxOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

Order. We have to be able to hear the hon. member for Outremont's question or he will not get a response at all.

The hon. member for Outremont has the floor. We will all want to hear his question.

Goods and Services TaxOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

NDP

Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC

Mr. Speaker, last year the Minister of Finance went cap in hand to the banks to ask them to reduce abusive ATM fees. He was turned down flat and sent packing.

Why should a worker whose paycheque is deposited automatically by his employer have to give the bank president a $3 tip to have access to his own money? Why does he have to pay these abusive ATM fees?

Goods and Services TaxOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Whitby—Oshawa Ontario

Conservative

Jim Flaherty ConservativeMinister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the hon. member to his portfolio as finance critic. I think the question was about the GST, at least the first question.

I remind him that a very learned member of the NDP said, “I just as soon that they got rid of the GST and do something else. I haven't given up on Mr. Jean Chrétien keeping his promise and keeping his word in getting rid of the GST”. That was Bob Rae in 1994 who was NDP then and who now I think is a Liberal. It is very confusing when it comes to GST and the opposition parties.

Equalization PaymentsOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

Robert Thibault Liberal West Nova, NS

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has stated that he resolved the issue of the Nova Scotia offshore agreement. He has not. What he has done, Mr. Speaker, is--

Equalization PaymentsOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Equalization PaymentsOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

Order, please. The hon. member for West Nova.

Equalization PaymentsOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

Robert Thibault Liberal West Nova, NS

What he has really done, Mr. Speaker, is bully the weak premier into accepting a lesser deal. The Atlantic accord was supposed to be to Nova Scotia's benefit above and beyond any benefits or revenues coming from equalization or any other program. He has turned it into an either-or proposition for Nova Scotians. When will the Prime Minister stop misleading Nova Scotians and apologize to Nova Scotians?

Equalization PaymentsOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency

Mr. Speaker, quite to the contrary, most Nova Scotians to whom I have talked have been applauding the Prime Minister and Premier Rodney MacDonald for putting an end to a misunderstanding about the budget interpretation, the Atlantic accord.

What we see happening is a Liberal member who does not like good news. He certainly does not like to see issues that the Liberals struggled with for so many years, particularly issues around the Crown's share, finally resolved by a fair-minded, flexible Prime Minister. That is what has happened.

Equalization PaymentsOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

Robert Thibault Liberal West Nova, NS

Mr. Speaker, the political minister for Nova Scotia reneged on an agreement signed with David Orchard and said in this House that a Conservative member could vote against the budget and not face any repercussions. We all know what happened to the hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley. Now, he claims to have resolved the Atlantic accord issue, but without any documentation, agreement, analysis or proof.

Why should Nova Scotians believe this minister?

Equalization PaymentsOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency

Mr. Speaker, Nova Scotians and particularly members of his own riding have become accustomed to this type of bluster and wind coming from the member opposite. In fact, if he were a car, he would run on a mix of adrenalin and vitriol, but the truth on this issue is that Nova Scotians are extremely pleased to see the issue around the offshore deal now put to rest.

They are glad to see an Atlantic gateway underway. They are glad to see the progress that is happening throughout Atlantic Canada under the Conservative Party, unlike messes around the Digby wharf and the devolution of the Digby ferry, all of these issues that happened under the former minister's watch. He made a mess in his riding. We are cleaning it up.

Equalization PaymentsOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Independent

Bill Casey Independent Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

Mr. Speaker, The Daily News in Halifax wrote an article the other day. It said that under the new arrangement to which the minister just referred, “--the province also gives up all claim to all entitlements guaranteed in the Atlantic Accord”.

That line sends a shiver down the spine of every Nova Scotian. I do not think it is right. I hope it is not right, but the fact of the matter is that we just do not have a signed agreement that we can check to see whether it is right or not.

When will the government just produce a copy of the agreement so that we can all assess it and decide whether it is a good deal?

Equalization PaymentsOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's interest in this issue. I know he has followed it over the summer.

I also understand that he has had the opportunity to speak to not only the current Premier, Rodney MacDonald, but he has also had the opportunity to speak to former Premier John Hamm who thinks this is a good deal for Nova Scotia, as do most Nova Scotians.

This allows us to be the full beneficiaries of the Atlantic accord with the additional portion of Crown share that was left out under the previous government. This speaks well to the future of Nova Scotia's offshore and our ability to be the primary beneficiaries of both the accord and the new equalization formula.

Equalization PaymentsOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Independent

Bill Casey Independent Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell the House that I did have the opportunity to talk to former Premier John Hamm. I asked him if he had seen a copy of the contract. He said, “No, I haven't”. So, I do not know how he came to the conclusion, but I have great respect for John Hamm. None of us have seen the contract.

There was an exchange of letters. The minister of finance for Nova Scotia said that the federal minister will make amendments to the 2007 budget to reverse the changes to the equalization formula made in the 2007 budget. There is no reference to this in the throne speech, so when will the minister table the amendments as promised in the exchange of letters?

Equalization PaymentsOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency

Mr. Speaker, I am quite surprised, quite frankly, to see the member for Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley now casting doubt on the position put forward by former Premier Hamm.

I know he is very concerned about the details and also very concerned about his own personal situation. We just wish that he would work a little bit more productively in the interests of Nova Scotians, put his own personal crusade aside, and accept what is good for his province.

AfghanistanOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Francine Lalonde Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Mr. Speaker, the government's position on Afghanistan is paradoxical, to say the least. It has just appointed a panel of experts headed by John Manley to review Canada's mission in Afghanistan, yet we learned from the throne speech that the mandate for the mission will be extended until 2011.

Are we to understand that the government has already decided that Canada will remain in the Kandahar region until 2011 and that creating the panel was merely a way of presenting us with a fait accompli?

AfghanistanOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Beauce Québec

Conservative

Maxime Bernier ConservativeMinister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, my colleague did not read yesterday's throne speech very carefully. I would like to quote from page 7 of the speech, which is very clear on this: “Our Government does not believe that Canada should simply abandon the people of Afghanistan after February 2009”.

That is clear. We are engaged in a humanitarian mission with all the United Nations and NATO countries. We are proud to be taking part in a mission to defend human rights in Afghanistan.

AfghanistanOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Foreign Affairs should read the speech himself instead of eating Joe Louis and handing them out in Afghanistan.

For months, the Bloc Québécois has been calling on the government to restore the humanitarian side of the mission and the balance between Canada's humanitarian and military activities in Afghanistan. But what did we learn from the throne speech yesterday? We learned that the government will be buying more military equipment. The government made $20 billion in spending promises last year and is making additional promises this year. What this means is that for the Conservative Party, the military side of the mission takes precedence over everything else. We find this absolutely unacceptable.

AfghanistanOral Questions

3 p.m.

Beauce Québec

Conservative

Maxime Bernier ConservativeMinister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, like the rest of the international community, we all know that there can be no development without security, that there can be no economic development without security, that there can be no respect for human rights without security. The two are linked, and this is important. That is why we are in Afghanistan with our colleagues from France, England and many other countries.

DarfurOral Questions

3 p.m.

Liberal

Glen Pearson Liberal London North Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, for the people of Darfur, time is running out.

In late August my wife and I adopted two more children from Darfur. Each night I hear their nightmares and I am challenged as a father to know how best to respond.

Right now there are millions of such nightmares taking place in Darfur, and we as a peacekeeping country are being challenged to take action. We can no longer afford our silence. So I ask, when will the Prime Minister break the silence and work with all parties here and create a course of action that every one of us in this House can be proud of?

DarfurOral Questions

3 p.m.

Beauce Québec

Conservative

Maxime Bernier ConservativeMinister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, Canada's commitment to Sudan, to Darfur, is very important to our country. Canada is the fourth-largest contributor in international aid to the African Union. We are also working with the UN and the African Union towards a peace process. This is why, in the Speech from the Throne, we said that we were promoting the universal values of freedom, freedom of expression and democracy. This is what we must do and will always do with respect to this issue and others that are equally important.

IndustryOral Questions

3 p.m.

Conservative

Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB

Mr. Speaker, there has been wide coverage in the press of the issue of foreign investment specifically as it relates to concerns about national security and investments by foreign state-owned enterprises.

Last spring the Liberal opposition leader wanted to take us back to the economic policies of the 1970s by calling for a moratorium on foreign investment.

Will the Minister of Industry assure Canadians that the government is not, and will not become, protectionist?

IndustryOral Questions

3 p.m.

Calgary Centre-North Alberta

Conservative

Jim Prentice ConservativeMinister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, our position is quite clear. Canada is open for business but is not for sale. Foreign investment is essential to our prosperity. That said, the Investment Canada framework, the Investment Canada Act, is not perfect.

First, we will proceed with situations where there is a non-strictly commercial objective and unclear governance that may not be beneficial to Canada in the context of state-owned enterprises. I am currently examining the need for guidelines in such circumstances. Second, unlike many other countries, including our trading partners, Canada does not have a national security test. We will be looking at that this autumn.

We will protect the interests of Canadians while advancing foreign investment in our country.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

3 p.m.

NDP

Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has repeatedly ignored the will of the House. He has no intention of honouring the decisions made by elected members.

How can any member claiming to be committed to the environment let the throne speech pass when the government refuses to bring back the entire clean air and climate change act?

When did the Prime Minister lose his respect for the House of Commons, and why does he have such disdain for this place and its members?

The EnvironmentOral Questions

3 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean Ontario

Conservative

John Baird ConservativeMinister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, the challenge of global warming has gone unaddressed in this country for far too long.

Environmentalists and industry cannot come to a consensus. The premiers met this summer; they cannot come to a consensus. Neither can parties in this House.

This government is acting in a big way through mandatory regulations requiring the big polluters to cut their emissions, new transportation initiatives to address that sector, as well as major initiatives in energy conservation and efficiency.

We will not study any more. We will not research any more. This government is committed to acting and we are acting.