House of Commons Hansard #93 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was need.

Topics

Media Literacy Week
Statements By Members

2:15 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Papineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, Marshall McLuhan wrote, “New media are not just mechanical gimmicks for creating worlds of illusion, but new languages with new and unique powers of expression”.

This week we are celebrating the fifth annual Media Literacy Week.

Media literacy has evolved with the arrival of cyberspace. Are these new technologies enriching or impoverishing our culture, knowledge and sense of community? What challenges come with regulating a borderless medium like the Internet?

This year's theme deals with gender stereotypes in the media. Despite many accomplishments, sexist prejudices against women still exist in the media, so we need to constantly re-evaluate what we read, what we say and what we write. As public figures, we must be leaders in the fight against gender stereotypes.

The challenges surrounding media's transformative capacity is not something to fear, but to acknowledge, for as McLuhan also said, “We become what we behold. We shape our tool and then our tools shape us”.

Immigration
Statements By Members

2:15 p.m.

Conservative

Phil McColeman Brant, ON

Mr. Speaker, our government is standing up for new immigrants who choose to come to Canada; the immigrants who make the choice to work hard and play by the rules. Our Conservative government stands up for immigrants who choose to make a home in Canada.

The Liberal leader's immigration spokesman wants to have it both ways. Instead of telling Canadians whether they support more, less or stable levels of immigration, the Liberals opportunistically adopted every position possible and hoped no one would notice.

This week the Liberal immigration spokesman said that Canada should not raise immigration levels. He then said the opposite, saying that the government should raise immigration levels.

On immigration and the economy, the Liberals are all error, all opportunism, all the time. The Liberal leader is not in it for Canadians or new immigrants; he is in it for himself.

Potash Industry
Oral Questions

2:15 p.m.

Etobicoke—Lakeshore
Ontario

Liberal

Michael Ignatieff Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, a few days ago, when I asked the Prime Minister to block the sale of PotashCorp, he replied that it did not matter whether it was American-controlled or Australian-controlled. He is wrong. Canadians do not wish to lose control of their strategic resources. The government is being hesitant, evasive and contradictory.

When will the government assume its responsibilities and say no to the sale of PotashCorp?

Potash Industry
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the government's position is clear: we obey the law. The government must listen to all parties interested in this transaction before it makes a decision. Obviously, it is not a simple transaction. I am confident that the minister will make a decision that is in the best interests of Canada in the long term.

Potash Industry
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Etobicoke—Lakeshore
Ontario

Liberal

Michael Ignatieff Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, this takeover deal has been mishandled from the beginning.

The Prime Minister said in the House that it was a proposal for an American-controlled company to be taken over by an Australian-controlled company, which is patently false. Everyone in Saskatchewan knows that this takeover will put at risk jobs, head offices and revenue for the government of Saskatchewan.

When will the government listen to Saskatchewan, listen to the prairie provinces, listen perhaps to members of his caucus and say no to the potash deal?

Potash Industry
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, that is a fascinating position from a party that did not just approve some transactions, did not just approve most transactions, but rubber-stamped every transaction for 13 years.

As we have said repeatedly, the government has been listening to all the facts of the issue from all the interested parties. Obviously there are very passionate views in many quarters on this. After having listened and having done his proper due diligence, I am confident the Minister of Industry will come out with a decision later today that reflects the best long-term interests of the Canadian economy.

Potash Industry
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Etobicoke—Lakeshore
Ontario

Liberal

Michael Ignatieff Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, what sets this deal apart is it is the largest resource takeover deal in Canadian history and the government has been all over the place on this issue. It has sometimes hinted yes, then it has hinted yes, but with conditions.

Why does the government not understand that the only answer that will serve the interests of Canada, the Government of Saskatchewan, the Prairies and the future resource development in Canada is a simple word, no?

Potash Industry
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, that is a fascinating position from a party that no matter how large previous transactions were, it rubber-stamped them all.

The fact is, as we have said, the government has taken no position. The government has taken all of the time necessary to ensure it listens to all parties in this issue. Unlike the rubber-stamp policies of the previous government or the anti-foreign investment policies of the NDP, this government will make a considered decision that is in the best interests of the Canadian economy.

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Etobicoke—Lakeshore
Ontario

Liberal

Michael Ignatieff Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, on another matter, for four years, the Prime Minister has been saying that we can do nothing about climate change until there is an action plan from Washington. The Minister of the Environment has confirmed that after yesterday's results, we cannot expect much from Washington.

When will this government stop following the Americans and give us a Canadian plan on climate change?

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, this government is dealing with climate change in three ways. There are national actions; we are investing a great deal in green technologies. There are continental approaches that some of our industries need. We are also taking a global approach; we are part of the Copenhagen accord. I still do not know the Liberal Party's position on this international accord.

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Etobicoke—Lakeshore
Ontario

Liberal

Michael Ignatieff Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, we have this problem on the environment, but we also have the same problem on defence procurement.

This side of the House has called for a competitive bid on the joint strike fighter. When we ask for that, the other side says the competitive deal was done in Washington. That is not good enough.

Canadian taxpayers want a competitive bid for the joint strike fighter. When will the Prime Minister realize that? When will he make amends for his $16 billion mistake?

National Defence
Oral Questions

November 3rd, 2010 / 2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, once again, not only was there a competitive process to select this aircraft, but the previous government put money into the development of the aircraft for the Canadian military. That is the position.

We are going to need to replace the aircraft at the end of this decade, and the party opposite knows that. But instead, for the sake of getting the anti-military vote on the left, with the NDP and the Bloc, the Liberals are playing this game.

The mistake is theirs. It would be a mistake to rip up this contract for our men and women in uniform as well as the aerospace industry.

Securities Industry
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, in its submission to the Quebec Court of Appeal, the Conservative government boasts that its proposed Canada-wide securities commission is evidence of co-operative, flexible federalism.

But if the government is so flexible, why is it trying to encroach on Quebec's jurisdictions at all costs? Why is the Prime Minister trying to destroy a system that is functioning well, just to impose his Canada-wide securities commission?

Securities Industry
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, this is a completely co-operative and voluntary initiative. There are 10 jurisdictions that want to participate in a Canada-wide system. They have that choice. Quebec and certain others have chosen not to and the government respects that choice.

Securities Industry
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, by moving ahead with a Canada-wide securities commission, the Prime Minister is going against Quebec's National Assembly, unions and Quebec's business community. Everyone agrees that the current systems works.

Will the Prime Minister admit that the only flexibility he has shown on this issue is to have found close to $157 million to spend on touting Toronto as the headquarters for the future Canada-wide securities commission?