House of Commons Hansard #30 of the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was nations.

Topics

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, this government is seeking mandatory targets for all the major polluters on this planet. The Bloc Québécois position would result in doubling greenhouse gas emissions worldwide and that is not acceptable to this government.

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Bernard Bigras Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, Quebec is asking that real greenhouse gas reduction targets be set, instead of the ones set by the Conservatives to help out their friends the oil companies, and that the reference year be 1990, and not 2006, so that Quebec companies can reap the benefits of the effort they have already made.

Does the Minister of the Environment plan on going back to the drawing board, as Quebec would like him to do, in order to avoid penalizing Quebec companies that have already made an effort? If the minister does not want to help them, the least he could do is not hurt them.

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, our goal was very clear. We are calling for reduced greenhouse gas emissions here, in Canada, and in the rest of the world. If we want to win the fight against climate change, we must have the real targets for each major country. That is the message we will be sending in Bali.

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Bernard Bigras Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister should think about the virtues of his environmental plan, because it has been criticized by everyone except, of course, the oil companies. Minister Beauchamp from Quebec is rightfully critical of the federal plan, because it will impose strict penalties on Quebec industries and manufacturers that want to participate in a carbon exchange.

Will the government take the suggestion to set absolute and binding targets, and will it choose 1990 as the only reference year?

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to see the new relationship between the Liberal government in Quebec and the Bloc Québécois. If these two political parties could work together, it would be better than the passage of the motion recognizing Quebec as a nation within a united Canada. And that was a proud moment.

Canada Pension Plan
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Jack Layton Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, between 2001 and 2006, the Government of Canada miscalculated the consumer price index. The result was that four million Canadian seniors were shortchanged on the payments they were supposed to receive on the Canada pension plan, OAS and GIS.

We know that many seniors are living on the margin and many live below the poverty line. The government is always happy to go after seniors. If they make a tiny mistake on their taxes, boy, the government never lets go, but when the government makes a mistake, the Prime Minister does not lift a finger to pay back the seniors who are owed money, the seniors who built this country. Why not?

Canada Pension Plan
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Medicine Hat
Alberta

Conservative

Monte Solberg Minister of Human Resources and Social Development

Mr. Speaker, this government's policy is unchanged from that of the previous government. We pay according to published rates and that is in accord with international practice.

The one thing this government has done is it has made seniors a priority. We have put in place a minister responsible for seniors. We have lifted them off the tax rolls. We have enhanced benefits. We have done more for seniors in the last 22 months than the previous government did in 13 years.

Canada Pension Plan
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Jack Layton Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, I said that the Prime Minister would not lift a finger but I at least expected him to stand up and answer to Canadian seniors for the billion dollars that they have been shortchanged.

The government has admitted that it made a mistake and that it shortchanged four million Canadian seniors of something that belongs to them, which is their pension plan and their assistance.

The government, supported by the Liberals, can find billions of dollars for corporate tax cuts, no problem, but when it comes to paying back seniors for a mistake the government made, it cannot find a penny. Why not?

Canada Pension Plan
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Medicine Hat
Alberta

Conservative

Monte Solberg Minister of Human Resources and Social Development

Mr. Speaker, let me tell the House where the NDP stands with seniors. When this government brought in legislation to lift 385,000 low income Canadians off the tax rolls, including seniors, the NDP voted against it. It voted against lowering the GST twice, measures that help seniors across this country. It voted against measures to raise the age credit, the pension credit and pension splitting. That is where the NDP stand on seniors.

Airbus
Oral Questions

December 4th, 2007 / 2:25 p.m.

Liberal

Sue Barnes London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of National Defence said that he was 22 or 23 when he worked in Germany for Thyssen. We now know that was not true.

He also, yesterday, referred to a discussion that took place at cabinet. Just what did these cabinet discussions involve? Was it Schreiber's extradition? Was it the decision to scrap the justice department's review of the Mulroney settlement or maybe the letters that the defence minister received from Mr. Schreiber himself? Just what was it?

Airbus
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Central Nova
Nova Scotia

Conservative

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question and the sincerity of the member opposite.

What I had planned to do today is correct the record of yesterday but since I have been given the opportunity now, I will say that I was in fact 26 years old. I was off by about three years but that was 15 years ago. This, of course, has nothing to do with myself, my responsibilities or this government.

Wireless Industry
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

Sue Barnes London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, that answer will not satisfy Canadians. I will ask the Prime Minister a different question.

What discussions did the Prime Minister have or any of his staff have, either informally or formally, with Brian Mulroney on the issue of the wireless auction?

Wireless Industry
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Calgary Centre-North
Alberta

Conservative

Jim Prentice Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, I thought we had resolved this yesterday. There were no discussions.

The real question is why the Liberals will not support consumer choice with respect to telecommunications.

Even in the good old days of BlackBerries and budget leaks by Liberal cabinet ministers, choice would have been good. They could have had all sorts of different products. Those five friends' plans could have been a possibility. Most important, lower cost service that could have saved a little money for their legal counsel.

Wireless Industry
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

Scott Brison Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, Martin Masse was the former industry minister's senior policy advisor. Masse was opposed to taxpayer funded wireless set-asides.

In May, Brian Mulroney's spokesperson, Luc Lavoie, took Masse to lunch to try to change his mind. That did not work. Masse refused.

Is the Prime Minister aware that Lavoie then called Ian Brodie, the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff, to demand that Masse be fired?

Wireless Industry
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Calgary Centre-North
Alberta

Conservative

Jim Prentice Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, the only ones at lunch are members of the Liberal Party because we have put forward s a telecommunications plan wireless auction that involves more consumer choice, better service and lower costs.

I do not know why the Liberals insist on higher taxes, higher consumer prices, less foreign investment and less jobs. They are the ones who are out to lunch.