House of Commons Hansard #54 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was billion.

Topics

International Aid
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

The hon. member for Guelph.

International Aid
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

Frank Valeriote Guelph, ON

Mr. Speaker, contrary to the government's smears, CCIC is accountable, transparent and gives world-renowned value for our money. These cuts are from a Prime Minister who silences any group that does not pass the Conservatives' ideological test, and CCIC is his latest victim.

Over 100 aid groups work with CCIC to ensure aid is effective in eliminating poverty in the world, promoting human rights and social justice. CCIC serves the underprivileged and speaks for those who cannot speak for themselves.

How can the government simply cut them off, and who is its next victim?

International Aid
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Durham
Ontario

Conservative

Bev Oda Minister of International Cooperation

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, the proposal from CCIC is under review, but I want to tell the House about the commendations this government is receiving.

In fact, we have an organization that is applauding the federal government's review of how it spends its international aid. It is saying this kind of decision-making is long overdue. We have many NGO organizations and partners that are actually feeding children who are starving, that are actually improving the health of mothers and children in sub-Saharan Africa and protecting the rights of women and children in the Congo. That is--

International Aid
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre.

Maternal Health
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Anita Neville Winnipeg South Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, on May 26 the Minister of International Cooperation misled the status of women committee on Canada's international commitments regarding maternal health. Quoting paragraph 8.25 of the Cairo plan of action, the minister inexplicably skipped a key sentence that calls on all governments to “deal with the health impact of unsafe abortion as a major public health concern”.

When will the government stop picking and choosing which of Canada's commitments it will uphold and which it will not?

Maternal Health
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Durham
Ontario

Conservative

Bev Oda Minister of International Cooperation

Mr. Speaker, this government is committed to the Cairo plan of action, and in fact that is why we are making decisions according to the Paris accord and the Accra plan.

I have read the actual Cairo action plan and that is how I can assure that we are following the internationally accepted practices of helping women and children around the world.

Maternal Health
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Anita Neville Winnipeg South Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, it is following it selectively. The Conservative government continues to pick and choose. It turned a blind eye to the 13% of maternal deaths which occur as a result of unsafe abortions, 70,000 women each year, one woman every eight minutes, and to the orphaned children of these mothers who are 10 times more likely to die prematurely.

On what basis does the Conservative government decide which mothers and which children in the developing world shall live and which shall die?

Maternal Health
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Durham
Ontario

Conservative

Bev Oda Minister of International Cooperation

Mr. Speaker, our government wants to ensure its international aid is making a difference. In fact, I met with representatives from the Mali government and they told me that when we increased our assistance to them, that represented 20% of their national budget. They put that forward to help the health of women. Now 80% of the women in Mali have birth attendants when they give safe delivery to their children. This is the kind of difference and this is the kind of action we want to see.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Daniel Paillé Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, in addition to acting against the wishes of the National Assembly, the government is planning to make life more difficult for Quebec businesses, which now comply with the Autorité des marchés financiers.

By destroying the passport system, the government will be splintering and balkanizing a system that functions very well, according to the OECD. The government will force Quebec businesses to join the securities commission in Toronto. It will be a matter of do or die.

Will the government admit that it is eliminating the passport system with its new plan? Eliminating the passport system—

Securities
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Securities
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Macleod
Alberta

Conservative

Ted Menzies Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

The truth is, Mr. Speaker, that we are not eliminating anything. We are actually adding to the accountability, the credibility of Canada's financial system through a voluntary system, a Canadian securities regulator.

I know the Bloc has a lot of trouble thinking that something Canadian is good for this country, but most Canadians do. We are protecting the investments of Canadians. We are encouraging foreign investment into this country to help grow our businesses. That is the right thing to do and I would encourage the Bloc to stop preventing that from happening.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Daniel Paillé Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, we should forgive him because he does not know what he is doing. The voluntary system is just a show, a sham. Eliminating the passport system will create conflict among the securities authorities and will increase fees for companies that want to do business with four or five commissions. It is shoving the idea of doing business in Toronto down everyone's throats. The government is starting fires everywhere—Quebec, Alberta and Manitoba—and it wants us to call Toronto's firefighters. Is that the deal? Come on, it makes no sense.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Macleod
Alberta

Conservative

Ted Menzies Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, can I tell him what does not make any sense? It is the argument he just gave.

It is a voluntary system. I will say this a little slower: it is a voluntary system.

I would encourage Bloc members to go back to their supporters and remind them what this is all about. It is a voluntary system to help protect against some of the bad things that have happened to those people in Quebec who have been caught in scams. We need to put protection in place for them. We need to encourage investment in all of Canada.

Ethics
Oral Questions

June 2nd, 2010 / 2:45 p.m.

Bloc

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

Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Minister of Justice, the same man who agreed to pay the $2 million to Brian Mulroney, figures that there are enough new facts in the Oliphant report to warrant having the Justice Department look at the possibility of recovering the money paid to Brian Mulroney.

Contrary to what he said in 1997, the former Conservative prime minister did have business dealings with the arms dealer.

My question is clear: will the Minister of Justice try to recover the $2 million from Brian Mulroney, yes or no?

Ethics
Oral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Niagara Falls
Ontario

Conservative

Rob Nicholson Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, the dealings of the individuals the hon. member is referring to have been the subject of a report by Justice Oliphant, who tabled his report this week. Again, as I have indicated, the appropriate authorities are going to look at those recommendations very carefully.

I have a question for him. Is he going to be supporting our justice legislation for cracking down on crime in this country: oui ou non? I want the answer to that.