House of Commons Hansard #28 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was colombia.

Topics

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

The Acting Speaker NDP Denise Savoie

All those opposed will please say nay.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

The Acting Speaker NDP Denise Savoie

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #27

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

I declare the motion carried.

The next question is on the main motion.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Conservative

Gordon O'Connor Conservative Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON

Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, I believe you would find agreement to apply the vote from the previous motion to the current motion.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

Is there agreement to proceed in this fashion?

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

There is no agreement. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

All those opposed will please say nay.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #28

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

6:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

I declare the motion carried. Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on International Trade.

(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

The House resumed from April 16 consideration of the motion that Bill C-9, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 4, 2010 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Jobs and Economic Growth ActGovernment Orders

6:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at the second reading stage of Bill C-9.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #29

Jobs and Economic Growth ActGovernment Orders

6:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

I declare the motion carried. Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Finance.

(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

7 p.m.

Liberal

Shawn Murphy Liberal Charlottetown, PE

Mr. Speaker, over the past several years, the University of Prince Edward Island has formulated a proposal to establish a centre for rural excellence. The project would benefit the university greatly, as well as other areas of Prince Edward Island.

On March 4, the finance minister tabled the federal budget. On page 242 of the budget, it states:

Upgrades to infrastructure at the University of Prince Edward Island will create over 300 jobs and inject about $30 million into the economy.

It was positive news, as it suggested the university could proceed with creating the centre.

On March 25, I asked the finance minister in this House whether the statement that was in his budget was accurate. His answer was, “The budget is accurate”.

Around that time or shortly thereafter, things started to slide, particularly the information we were receiving from the Department of Industry, as it attempted to explain the statement given by the minister in the House and the statement in the budget.

The Department of Industry explained that UPEI had previously received a small grant of $2 million and that by using the multiplier of 15, we could get to $30 million, and this was the promise. Obviously, that was ridiculous. It was next suggested that the $30 million referred to other projects, which did not add up to anything close to $30 million and also did not involve the University of Prince Edward Island.

This was a total fabrication. It was not correct. One would expect that statements in the budget would be accurate and that the minister's answers to questions put to him in the House would also be accurate.

This issue is reflective of a fundamental problem with this institution; namely, there are no repercussions for making these types of statements.

My question for the parliamentary secretary or the minister, whoever is answering the question, is extremely simple. I would appeal to him to not just read the text of the answer given to him by the Department of Finance or the Department of Industry, but to rise and answer the question, which I will ask very slowly and simply. Is the statement on page 242 of the budget, “Upgrades to infrastructure at the University of Prince Edward Island will create over 300 jobs and inject about $30 million into the economy” accurate?

7 p.m.

Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont Alberta

Conservative

Mike Lake ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Madam Speaker, I do wish to clarify questions surrounding the level of funding provided to the province of P.E.I. under the knowledge infrastructure program and, in particular, certain numbers reported in the fifth report to Canadians.

The knowledge infrastructure program is providing significant short-term stimulus in local communities across Canada by investing in infrastructure at universities and colleges. Through the program, we have committed $2 billion over two years to 536 different projects in every province and territory in Canada. This has been more than matched by contributions from the provinces and other sources, resulting in total project costs of roughly $5 billion.

Prince Edward Island has received funding for two KIP projects: one at Holland College and one at the University of Prince Edward Island.

The project at Holland College includes major renovations to the Charlottetown Centre and the construction of a new centre for applied science and technology. The total cost of this project is $17 million, of which the federal portion is $8.5 million.

The project at UPEI includes $4 million for major infrastructure upgrades, of which the federal government is providing $2 million.

Total federal funding for P.E.I. under the KIP program is therefore $10.5 million over two years.

Because my colleague from Charlottetown seems to be confused as to the content of the fifth report to Canadians, specifically an item on page 242 of that document, I appreciate this chance to offer him some clarity on the matter.

Page 242 of the fifth report to Canadians states that investments on the island under the KIP program will create over 300 jobs and inject about $30 million into the economy.

Under this program, UPEI and Holland College together received a total of $10.5 million in federal funding. When matched with provincial funds, this amounts to $21 million for Holland College and UPEI together.

Even when assessed under the most conservative evaluations of the impact of stimulus funding, we arrive at a total economic benefit to the Island economy of $31.5 million.

We have never claimed that the project at UPEI has received anything other than $2 million in KIP funding matched by the province.

I have to say that I regret the confusion that has resulted from the member for Charlottetown's misreading of the fifth report to Canadians. The fact is that we hold in high regard the provincial governments and partnering institutions for working with us on these projects, projects that are of great importance to students and faculty at both UPEI and Holland College.

7:05 p.m.

Liberal

Shawn Murphy Liberal Charlottetown, PE

Madam Speaker, the member across indicates that I am confused. However I am going to read this again, and I am going to read it very slowly:

Upgrades to infrastructure at the University of Prince Edward Island will create over 300 jobs and inject about $30 million into the economy.

I asked if that statement was accurate. The minister said it was. The parliamentary secretary obviously just said it was not accurate. He has just told this House that the correct information is not $30 million but $2 million. When you add another $2 million coming from the provincial government, that totals $4 million.

We have a grossly inaccurate statement. I am not confused. I read it three times in the House. No one in Canada is confused right now.

My question to the member across is: As it is very clear what that statement said, why was the inaccurate and false information included in the budget?