House of Commons Hansard #102 of the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was change.

Topics

The Environment
Oral Questions

11:30 a.m.

NDP

Jack Layton Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, speaking of the billions of dollars the government is proposing to invest in this issue over the years, the fact is that right now it is investing $1.4 billion of taxpayers' money a year in the big oil and gas companies. These are the most polluting industries and they are also the most profitable.

Why will the government not take action now and simply stand up and say that it is no longer going to put tax dollars like the previous government did, like it continues to do, into these big oil and gas companies that frankly have profits that are going through the roof and gouge people every day at the pumps?

The Environment
Oral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Pontiac
Québec

Conservative

Lawrence Cannon Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is we have to take an approach here that is constructive and not destructive. The government is working on ways to strengthen not only our economy and remain competitive but at the same time go out and do what we have to do in terms of reducing greenhouse gases and reducing air pollution.

That is the reason why we presented a piece of legislation that is being discussed in committee, a piece of legislation that wants us to regulate the industry across the sector. We are looking for everybody's--

The Environment
Oral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

The hon. member for Bourassa.

Aerospace Industry
Oral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Denis Coderre Bourassa, QC

Mr. Speaker, I ask this question as a federalist Quebecker.

In the Boeing C-17 affair, it is now clear that Canada will not see the direct economic spinoffs it needs to develop the aerospace industry, not in Quebec or anywhere else in Canada. The purchase of the C-17s demonstrated to what extent the Conservatives care more about Boeing's interests than the interests of Canadians. However, the terms of the contract with Boeing could be hiding other unpleasant surprises.

Did the Prime Minister have an agreement with President Bush for us to be excluded from the American security regulations—ITAR—thereby also excluding us from the discriminatory American dual-citizenship trade policy?

Aerospace Industry
Oral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Oshawa
Ontario

Conservative

Colin Carrie Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Frankly, Mr. Speaker, this member should be embarrassed. This member sat at the cabinet table with the Liberal government for 13 years and ignored industry. There were zero benefits to industry and zero jobs. This member should be embarrassed for bringing that up.

Aerospace Industry
Oral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Denis Coderre Bourassa, QC

Mr. Speaker, that man will remain parliamentary secretary for a long time.

Yesterday, the unelected phantom minister, Michael Fortier, said “nothing in that contract will prevent any Canadian of any religion or nationality from working on those planes,--”.

Now, the only way to do so is to be excluded from ITAR, the American regulations.

We have learned that the C-17 contract will not be under a foreign military sale, so ITAR will apply, meaning that a contractor will not be able to keep an employee if he or she has double citizenship from one of the 25 countries banned by the U.S.A.

Who is protecting our charter--

Aerospace Industry
Oral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

The hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Aerospace Industry
Oral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Central Nova
Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency

Mr. Speaker, as usual the member has run out of time with his theatrics. The reality on this subject is that we have been working very closely with American officials to bring this issue to the forefront. We want to ensure that both countries will be able to benefit from the ongoing discussions.

We know that the member opposite would much prefer the approach that was taken by the previous government, which was of course to rent planes, not to build planes, not to give the Canadian forces the ability to transport their own troops, and to work with other countries on these important missions. He wanted to rent planes.

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Eyking Sydney—Victoria, NS

Mr. Speaker, our mission in Afghanistan will only succeed if we ensure that all elements of the treaty approach are followed, yet the government has seriously neglected the diplomatic and development component.

I ask the minister responsible for international development, why is the government spending 10 times more on the combat mission than it is on reconstruction and development in Afghanistan?

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

11:30 a.m.

Macleod
Alberta

Conservative

Ted Menzies Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade and Minister of International Cooperation

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question, but once again his facts are very far from the truth.

The actual facts are that we need to spend money to defend the people who are there doing the development work. We heard this loud and clear from the defence committee that just returned from there. In fact, members from the member's own caucus said how important it was that we provide defence for the people doing the development.

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

11:35 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Eyking Sydney—Victoria, NS

Mr. Speaker, that is not what our members conveyed. There is a lack of information about the development and what is being done in Afghanistan.

Last year Colonel Heatherington said that we would see development projects completed by the year 2006. Well, it is 2007. The members of this House just returned and they saw disappointing results.

The reality is that the minister is not getting the job done. Why?

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

11:35 a.m.

Macleod
Alberta

Conservative

Ted Menzies Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade and Minister of International Cooperation

Mr. Speaker, it is far from the fact that the job is not getting done. We are seeing irrigation water flowing in canals that Canada's money has built.

We are seeing girls back in school who were not in school two years ago. We have solid quotes from the members who were there that defined how important security was before we let our Canadian people, who are doing the good work, go out in the country to help. They are getting the job done and it is very unfortunate that we criticize the good work they are doing.

Aerospace Industry
Oral Questions

11:35 a.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

Mr. Speaker, Canada wins. Boeing will get its contract without enough spinoffs for all of Quebec. The Minister of Industry, a faithful servant of the Montreal Economic Institute, is the submissive messenger.

How can the Minister of Industry claim to defend the Quebec economy when, from the very beginning, he calmly accepted the choice of Boeing, which penalized all of Quebec?

No matter if they are federalists or sovereignists, all Quebeckers are penalized by the subservient attitude of the Minister of Industry.

Aerospace Industry
Oral Questions

11:35 a.m.

Oshawa
Ontario

Conservative

Colin Carrie Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth.

Under our process, it is a fair bidding process and there are enough benefits for this procurement to be shared across all Canada.

The real issue here is for Quebec, how many jobs were created by the Bloc Québécois? Zero. How many benefits were there for Quebec aerospace? Zero. How many benefits were there for the industry in Quebec? Zero. The Bloc Québécois gets an F while the government gets an A for action.

Aerospace Industry
Oral Questions

11:35 a.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

Mr. Speaker, what he said is very typical of the Conservatives. The Minister of Industry is using the free market as an excuse for not acting in Quebec's interest.

Consequently, the Minister of Industry, who is from Quebec—as is the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities—is directly contributing to the weakening of Quebec's aerospace industry, and he knows it. All Conservative members from Quebec know it.

This kind of pitiful performance makes Quebeckers wonder what kind of wimp we have as a Minister of Industry.