Debates of May 29th, 2009

Bob Dechert Mississauga—Erindale, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals continue with their inconsistent and, quite frankly, baffling arguments against our government's economic action plan to protect the Canadian economy during the current global economic downturn.

On the one hand, they are angry that our government is spending money to protect the unemployed, the auto sector and working to keep taxes low. On the other hand, they are really angry that we are not spending to make unwarranted changes to EI.

Can the government try to explain the Liberals' hypocritical statements and constant contradictions?

Ted Menzies Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, usually from my colleagues I expect nice questions, but that may very well be the most difficult question of the day to answer and I am not sure that I can do it.

I cannot explain the bizarre, illogical argument the Liberals are using that on the one hand we are spending too much and on the other hand we need to spend more.

We are doing what we said we would do in our economic action plan and that is providing help for all Canadians. Whether it is through support for our industries that are struggling, whether it is support for the unemployed, we have a common goal and that is to help Canadians.

Randy Kamp Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is right that this is a serious issue. Our government is committed to the long-term success of the lobster fishery. We are working with all Atlantic provincial governments and Quebec, as well as industry associations and processor associations to help the industry during this difficult time.

At the heart of the problem is the very low price due to reduced demand. That is why last week we announced an investment of $10 million to improve marketing which should help that situation. The minister is having discussions with her colleagues and provincial counterparts for additional solutions.

Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Mr. Speaker, the government's logic is nothing if not surprising. The Minister of International Cooperation says that she will hold consultations, but only after having revealed the strategic orientations of Canada's policy on international aid.

Does the minister not think that she is putting the cart before the horse? Would it not be better to start with the consultations and then determine the orientations?

Jim Abbott Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation

Mr. Speaker, in response to a question earlier, I made the point that Canada, and the Canadian government, will make its decisions in the best interests of Canada, Canadian taxpayers and the best interests of the world.

Having made those decisions, our doors are open. I have made a personal invitation to all of the nations that have been affected. I have had meetings with people, as has the minister. Our doors are open. We want to be cooperative with the people with whom we are involved in these issues.

Charlie Angus Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, the government continues to drop the ball when it comes to the mineral development of northern Ontario. Sudbury developed a unique partnership of academia, industry and the province to set up a centre of excellence in mining innovation. Through all of this the Conservatives were missing in action.

Now we learn that the Conservatives are investing in mining research in, of all places, Toronto. Sudbury is recognized as a mining innovation centre by everyone, it seems, except the government. Why has the government walked away on the research and innovation agenda of Sudbury and northern Ontario?

David Anderson Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and for the Canadian Wheat Board

Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. This government has committed to communities across this country with our community adjustment fund. We have committed with the clean energy fund as well. We undertook the most extensive prebudget consultations in Canadian history.

In terms of the mining sector we have done a number of things. I met with folks from the mining industry last week and they congratulated us on extending the super flow-through shares for mineral exploration. We are working on exploration. We are working on research and development. We are working on developing the industry and supporting mining through this tough time.

Royal Galipeau Ottawa—Orléans, ON

Mr. Speaker, for some time, the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues have been flip-flopping on the issue of taxation.

Earlier this week, The Toronto Star blasted the Liberal leader for his juvenile and illogical positions.

Now Alain Dubuc of the daily newspaper La Presse is criticizing the Liberal Party for its inconsistent positions.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary explain what the government is doing to deal with the global economic crisis?

Jacques Gourde Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services and to the Minister of National Revenue

Mr. Speaker, that is a very relevant and important question. The Liberal opposition has been doing 180s for the past week, and now it is time to see where they stand. Maybe the Liberal Party needs a GPS.

As my colleague said, we have read the Toronto Star and Alain Dubuc's piece in La Presse, and we feel certain that people understand the government's position. As Mr. Dubuc said, “The government has been subjected to unfair and, worse yet, senseless attacks”.

This is yet another reminder that partisan politics is the worst way to address—

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Today's question period is now over.

The hon. member for Wascana on a point of order.

Ralph Goodale Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order arising from question period.

On at least two occasions in question period, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister used the expression “tar baby”. In addition to being a pejorative term, which might well prove to be unparliamentary, the parliamentary secretary might consider that there are many authorities in this country and in many others that consider the term racist.

While he may want to make his views known in strong and extreme terms, he also might want to take this occasion to withdraw that expression to make it absolutely clear that he was not implying any racist connections.

Pierre Poilievre Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs

Mr. Speaker, that hon. colleague is a man with whom I have had disagreements but for whom I have respect. On this occasion though, I cannot believe that he would attempt to inject that meaning into that expression. He clearly understands that my reference had absolutely nothing to do with the one that he implied. I have worked hard to represent people of all backgrounds and I have always done so in a spirit of tolerance.

My reference to the term “tar baby” was a common reference that refers to issues that stick to one. The leader of the Liberal Party has taken this position, it has stuck to him, and now he is having difficulty explaining himself on that issue.

For him or for his House leader to inject racial politics in order to distract from that is the worst kind of base politics. I would encourage them to apologize for it.

The Speaker Peter Milliken

I am going to recognize the hon. member for Ottawa Centre.