Debates of Oct. 8th, 2009

Peter Van Loan Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, the officials in question deposited a sworn affidavit laying out in evidence in a court of law the questions that they asked, the answers that they received, and the reason they made the decisions they made in this matter. That is there for everyone to see, including the hon. member. I think it will answer any questions that he has.

Michel Guimond Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the National Assembly of Quebec, the Quebec nation's supreme governing body, unanimously condemned the federal government's plan to reduce Quebec's political weight in federal institutions. The Bloc Québécois has been defending the Quebec consensus in this House, but Conservative members from Quebec have made a poor showing by scornfully dismissing our National Assembly's demand.

My question is for the Quebec ministers. Why are they incapable of standing up for the consensus expressed by the Quebec nation?

Steven Fletcher Minister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, the number one objective of the Bloc is to ensure that Quebec has zero seats in the House of Commons. This government will ensure that the seat count in the House of Commons is protected for Quebec. These Quebec ministers do more in one hour each day than the Bloc has done in 18 years.

Michel Guimond Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC

Mr. Speaker, that is why the Conservatives lose in Quebec every time we have an election.

Not even the Minister of Public Works, a Quebec minister, has made any attempt to block this bill. Instead, he said that Quebeckers should just make more babies, and that he himself did his part by having three kids. We do not really care what the minister does at home; we care about what he does in cabinet, which is nothing.

Why did the Minister of Public Works refuse to defend the interests of the Quebec nation?

Steven Fletcher Minister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois wants Quebec to have zero seats in the chamber. All the federalists in this chamber want to ensure that Canada and Quebec are fairly represented and that Quebec has a seat count that is protected in a united Canada. I think all federalists in this House will stand up and agree to strong representation for Quebec in the House of Commons.

Claude DeBellefeuille Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois is opposed to veiled voting. That is why it introduced a bill to ensure that all voters identify themselves. During the debate on the government's bill, the Liberals changed their position and stopped insisting that all voters be equal under the law. The Conservatives also backed down, claiming that there was no consensus.

Will the government take up the Bloc Québécois' challenge and accept its full support for this initiative by introducing a bill requiring voters to show their faces when voting?

Steven Fletcher Minister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, I think we all agree that Canadians should have confidence in the political system. If we can get agreement from the opposition parties, including the Liberal Party, to deal with this issue, we will bring in legislation to ensure that there is integrity in the voting process when it comes to visual identification.

Claude DeBellefeuille Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC

Mr. Speaker, the government's bill created exceptions to the principle of the neutrality of the state. By ordering election officials to accommodate voters, the Conservatives are emulating the SAAQ, which accommodates clients who, for religious reasons, want to choose the gender of the person giving them their test.

Why are the Conservatives insisting on making the functions of the state a matter of gender instead of addressing the real problem? We have offered our support, so when will they introduce a bill?

Steven Fletcher Minister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, the government did bring forward a bill in the last Parliament, but we received resistance from the opposition parties. If the opposition parties are agreeable in this minority Parliament to support the government bringing forward a bill to deal with this issue, we will bring in a bill because we believe in Canadian democracy.

I am pleased, actually, that the Bloc is starting to buy into Canadian democracy, too.

Andrew Saxton Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, advertising is a key way for the government to reach a large number of Canadians on important issues of public concern, such as H1N1, elder abuse, Canadian Forces recruitment and the home renovation tax credit.

We are not surprised that the Leader of the Opposition and the Liberals do not want Canadians to know about measures like the home renovation tax credit. After all, they voted against it in their relentless pursuit for an unnecessary, opportunistic election.

Martha Hall Findlay Willowdale, ON

Mr. Speaker, despite all of their efforts to avoid this, we are witnessing an unprecedented, massive taxpayer-paid, partisan, self-serving ad campaign that pats the government on the back. It is not only unethical, it is breaking the law, in fact several laws. This is an attempt by the Conservatives to buy Canadians with their own money, an awful lot of their own money.

We ask, when will it stop?

Andrew Saxton Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, that comes from the party that brought us the sponsorship scandal. What a turn of events.

This government has a long-standing commitment to communicate important services and benefits to Canadians. We will continue to live up to our responsibility, especially the global economic crisis.

Is the member opposite suggesting that Canadians do not deserve to know about measures like the home renovation tax credit?

David McGuinty Ottawa South, ON

Mr. Speaker, in 2006, all parties agreed to the creation of a public appointments commission to set standards for and oversee federal appointments. Four years later, there is no commission, no commissioner and more than $1 million wasted on a phantom office.

Over 3,000 appointments were made without scrutiny. In the last six weeks alone, 37 Conservative insiders, donors, bagmen, candidates and campaign workers have received lucrative government jobs.

How many more rewards does the Prime Minister intend to hand out to his Conservative flock?