Debates of Oct. 29th, 2009

The Speaker Peter Milliken

The hon. Minister of Finance.

Jim Flaherty Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, again, I thank the NDP member opposite for the idea she has put forward. A number of ideas are being put forward by the provinces, the territories and the federal government.

We did our comprehensive package earlier this week on pension reform, but there is more to be done. That is why we have the intensive research being done. This is a complex issue.

I thank the member for her thoughts. I wish the Liberal Party had even one thought on this subject.

Stockwell Day Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to respond, because we have had an unprecedented process in Canada, a process that will include the provinces and territories in the negotiations with the European Union. Thanks to such agreements, we are going to have employment growth, investment growth et economic growth.

France Bonsant Compton—Stanstead, QC

Mr. Speaker, in addition to putting supply management up for negotiation with the European Union, this government is constantly targeting collective marketing mechanisms and is joining forces with the other members of the Cairns group—who are the strongest opponents of supply management—to ask that negotiations at the WTO be accelerated.

Does this government realize that it has no credibility when it claims to stand up for supply management?

Stockwell Day Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway

Mr. Speaker, again, I am going to be very clear. Our government is very clear. We will continue to stand up for supply management and to cooperate with the industries, the provinces and the territories. This cooperation is unprecedented, because we are respecting provincial jurisdictions. If we can have such an agreement, they will enjoy economic growth, and so will Canada.

Frank Valeriote Guelph, ON

Mr. Speaker, ailing southern Ontario businesses have waited nine long months to see applications for FedDev Ontario funds, yet not all the funds from the agency's core program have been made available, already spread thinly from Ottawa all the way to Windsor. There is silence from the government on its remaining $60 million commitment to southern Ontario, despite the looming March spending deadline.

When will the minister tell suffering southern Ontario exactly when it can access the rest of the money, instead of getting ready to just rush it out late, with the usual misguided, self-serving fanfare?

Gary Goodyear Minister of State (Science and Technology) (Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario)

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that not very long ago the member was telling us we were spending the money too fast. Now he is telling us we are spending it too slowly.

We have an application process in for $40 million. We are in negotiations for the balance of $60 million. We are taking our time. We are doing our due diligence. We are respecting taxpayers. These are going to be good projects.

The member can wait a little while longer. We will make the announcements.

Frank Valeriote Guelph, ON

Mr. Speaker, it has also been over two months since the Prime Minister announced the so-called headquarters for the FedDev Ontario agency in Kitchener. Yet its staff offers no guidance to applicants other than directing them to a call centre in Toronto, which only offers information from the website, no advice, and we are told in briefings that it is costing a staggering $28 million for staff and office space.

FedDev applications are crucial to the livelihood of southern Ontario businesses. Should $28 million not provide more help to businesses than just directing them to a website?

Gary Goodyear Minister of State (Science and Technology) (Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario)

Mr. Speaker, our staff are up and running, working 24/7. The member continues to phone them and actually bother them during the good work they are doing.

We have now almost 100 applications in, almost $200 million in asks. We have over 100 employees staffed up and trained. We have offices in Kitchener, Peterborough, Stratford, Toronto and Ottawa. The member has no idea what he is talking about.

Irene Mathyssen London—Fanshawe, ON

Mr. Speaker, RCMP figures show that the number of officers on disability for stress has skyrocketed over the last decade, from 10 in 1999 to 162 last year. Officers say that this is a direct result of staff shortages, heavy workloads and lack of support in the field.

It is not surprising. The government has broken its agreement to officers on pay increases, fighting their request to unionize and failed to deliver the 2,500 new officers it promised.

The minister likes to talk tough on crime, but why will he not support police on the front lines?

Vic Toews President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, our government supports hard-working men and women in law enforcement. That member and others have consistently voted against measures that would assist the RCMP and other police forces in the country to get the job done.

We in fact are working very hard to ensure that law enforcement not only has the legal support and legislative support, but that it has the appropriate resources in place.

Irene Mathyssen London—Fanshawe, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General has raised concerns about the fact that the Privy Council Office, the Department of Finance and Treasury Board will not commit to using gender-based policy analysis. This goes beyond unacceptable. It contravenes our international commitments.

These three central government agencies advise the cabinet daily. They are compelled to play a significant role in enforcing gender equality. The refusal to commit to gender-based analysis is a sleight to all Canadian women and results in policy that is brutally unrepresentative.

Will the Prime Minister commit to implementing the use of gender-based analysis in the government's central agencies?

Helena Guergis Minister of State (Status of Women)

Mr. Speaker, when we became the government, there was absolutely no directive in place whatsoever for gender-based analysis to be done within the challenge agencies.

When we came in, immediately in 2006 in the budget tax measures we started gender-based analysis and continue to do so. Treasury Board submissions in 2007, also now under the leadership of this government, required evidence of gender-based analysis. In 2008 we put a requirement in place that all memoranda of the cabinet would require evidence of gender-based analysis.

We have acted. That is leadership. The member is wrong.