Debates of May 13th, 2010

Leona Aglukkaq Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, again, there is an independent organization that has the resources to pay the victims. Each application is reviewed and responded to accordingly.

Jim Flaherty Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals like to talk about the 1990s. I understand the Liberal leader was not in the country in the 1990s but he should speak to some Canadians who were actually in Canada at the time, for example, the Liberal member for Toronto Centre who, when he was premier in the mid-1990s, had this to say, “When the federal [Liberal] government decided in its wisdom that it would cut back unilaterally, particularly in the area of social assistance, it had a major and devastating effect on the people of [Ontario]”, and the nurses and the students and all the others.

The people of Ontario remember well.

Keith Martin Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC

Mr. Speaker, while we celebrate the navy's 100th anniversary, the government is gutting our navy.

According to Admiral McFadden, half of his combat systems are going to be cut. Anti-submarine capabilities are going to be cut. Worst of all, key weapons systems to protect our sailors are going to be cut.

Why is the government choosing to gut our navy and put the lives of our brave men and women sailors at risk?

Peter MacKay Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, the reality, for the member opposite, is that this government is going to be increasing the budget for the navy by almost $200 million this year. That is up from last year and it is up over the year before. It is certainly up over the time that the hon. member was part of the previous government when it slashed and burned not just our navy but our entire Canadian Forces.

We are investing in the navy. We are investing in the Canadian Forces in unprecedented numbers. There will be $40 billion for shipbuilding in the next 20 years. The men and women of the Canadian Forces and the navy will get our support, unlike the time when the member was in government.

Carole Lavallée Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC

Mr. Speaker, the government is justifying the cuts to the FrancoFolies and Montreal High Lights festivals by claiming that they have established new selection criteria. However, the majority of the events that will receive funding in 2010 do not meet these so-called criteria. And there is no way that $350,000 over two years can replace $1.5 million each year for the FrancoFolies. The minister needs to find another answer.

Instead of manipulating the existing program's funding rules and starving one festival to feed another, why will the government not increase the overall envelope and finance the festivals according to their actual needs?

James Moore Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

Mr. Speaker, this is the problem with the Bloc Québécois policies: every time we invest in arts and culture to increase festival funding, for example, they vote against it.

They voted against the International Festival of Films on Art, the Festival Jazz et Blues de Saguenay, the Festival de Lanaudière, the theatre school festival, Musiques des nations, the Festival de Trois-Rivières and the Portuguese festival.

The Bloc Québécois has voted against the interests of Quebeckers every time.

Claude Gravelle Nickel Belt, ON

Mr. Speaker, on May 7, an incident occurred at the Copper Cliff smelter. A smokestack extension collapsed and fell onto oxygen and nitrogen pipelines. This is one of the most complex plants to operate and it is located in a residential neighbourhood.

Unfortunately, the company is using strikebreakers who are not adequately trained. It was only a matter of time before such an accident occurred.

What is the Minister of Labour doing to ensure the safety of workers and other people and to shed light on what caused this accident?

Lisa Raitt Minister of Labour

Mr. Speaker, I would appreciate getting more information on the incident so that we could look into it.

What I can say is that when it comes to occupational health and safety, we do very much in the labour ministry. We want to educate employers. We want to make sure that employers work with workers in terms of occupational health and safety. Of course, if there are indications that something has been contravened, we do enforce.

James Bezan Selkirk—Interlake, MB

Mr. Speaker, it is becoming more and more apparent that the Liberal Party does not care about public safety or criminal justice.

The Liberal agriculture critic and the Liberal public safety critic continue to demonstrate that they are only concerned with maintaining the wasteful long gun registry that turns farmers into criminals. Instead, the Liberals are trying to turn convicted criminals into farmers.

Can the Minister of Public Safety inform the House on how we are taking the right steps to stand up for our farmers and law-abiding Canadians?

Vic Toews Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his question and for all of his hard work.

It is clear that if one is a Liberal, one is more interested in a prisoner's right to plant tomatoes than in keeping Canadians safe on our streets. If one is a Liberal, law-abiding farmers should be criminalized by a wasteful long gun registry. If one is a Liberal, one encourages reducing prisoners' sentences while refusing speedy passage of a bill that would limit pardons for notorious criminals.

Well, our Conservative government believes that Canadians deserve much better, even if the member for Ajax—Pickering does not.

Ralph Goodale Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, I would be interested in the government's program for the balance of this week and, especially, the week after the constituency week, which is scheduled to come up after this weekend.

Before the end of May, we have to deal with the estimates of two government departments in the committee of the whole under the provisions in our Standing Orders. We have indicated, on behalf of the opposition, that the departments we wish to call before the committee of the whole are the Department of National Defence and the Department of Natural Resources.

I wonder if the government House leader, when he gives the business plan for the next week or 10 days, would also be able to designate those days.

Jay Hill Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, we will continue today with Bill S-3, the tax convention bill, followed by Bill C-15, nuclear liability. It would be by intention to call these two bills tomorrow if they are not completed today.

Might I add that, thankfully, as my hon. colleague noted, next week is a constituency work week.

When the House returns on May 25, it is my intention to call Bill C-3, gender equity in Indian registration, which will be at the report stage. Following Bill C-3 will be Bill C-20, the National Capital Act, and Bill C-10, Senate term limits.

My hon. colleague asked about the committee of the whole. I would inform the House that pursuant to Standing Order 81(4) I would like to designate May 27 for consideration in committee of the whole of the main estimates of the Department of National Defence and May 31 for the Department of Natural Resources.

Friday, May 28 shall be an allotted day.

The Speaker Peter Milliken

I understand there is agreement for the House to proceed at this time to tributes to the late William Corbett, former Clerk of the House of Commons.