House of Commons Hansard #66 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was funding.

Topics

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

Siobhan Coady St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL

Mr. Speaker, in May the Conservative government promised there would be an open competition for Canada's next generation of fighter jets. Then over the summer, the Conservatives said it was not necessary. Then they said it had actually taken place in 2001, but in the United States.

Why is the Conservative government throwing the rule book, for fear of competition, out the window? Why would the government do it for Canada's largest military purchase, a $16-billion purchase, instead of trying to save taxpayers' money and ensuring industrial benefits for Canadians?

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Edmonton—Spruce Grove
Alberta

Conservative

Rona Ambrose Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for Status of Women

Mr. Speaker, it is great to be back in the House. It is good to see you, and it is good to be back representing the good people of Edmonton—Spruce Grove.

On the issue of a competition, there was an international competition. In fact, the Liberals were part of that competition, so they should know it very well. Holding another competition would risk the future of our aerospace industry because any delays, frankly, would be slamming the door shut on Canadian jobs and Canadian companies.

I would ask the member opposite, why would the Liberals take such a risk?

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

Siobhan Coady St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL

Mr. Speaker, this is an open competition. On access to information requests by me, they uncovered a truth from the secretive Conservative government: a plan written by DND called for a competitive process that would run in 2010. It needed a competition to find a fighter jet that would suit its needs.

Instead, the Conservative government decided to proceed without competition, arbitrarily making this decision.

I ask the Minister of National Defence, when exactly did the open competition he promised change and who exactly made the decision to do so?

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Central Nova
Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, what the member opposite has said is patently false. That is absolutely not the position that was taken by the Department of National Defence.

However, let us take it out of the realm of the partisan. Let us take it away from individuals without credibility who are criticizing this. Let us listen to the chief of the air staff, Lieutenant-General André Deschamps, himself a pilot, himself a member of the Canadian Forces and the air force for many years. He said:

Analysis of our mandatory requirements for Canada's next fighter jet made it clear that only a fifth generation fighter could satisfy these requirements in the increasingly complex future security environment. The Lightning II is the only fifth generation aircraft available to Canada. Not only that, but the F-35 offers the best cost value--

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Order. The hon. member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord.

Census
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Robert Bouchard Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC

Mr. Speaker, the government is determined to get rid of the long-form census for ideological reasons. This decision will result in extra costs for Quebec, the provinces and businesses. What is more, the voluntary census is so unreliable that an American demographic database will refuse to use the data.

How can this government uphold a decision that compromises the reliability of the data and will run up extra costs?

Census
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka
Ontario

Conservative

Tony Clement Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, as I said, our approach is quite fair and reasonable. It consists in finding a better balance between collecting necessary data and protecting Canadians' right to privacy. Our position is that a balance needs to be struck between rights and necessary data.

Census
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Robert Bouchard Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne feels that the government's decision to abolish the long-form census violates the Official Languages Act because there will no longer be any reliable data on official languages to help properly serve francophone communities.

Why does this government not overturn its senseless ideological decision to abolish the long-form census?

Census
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka
Ontario

Conservative

Tony Clement Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, last summer, we announced two additional mandatory questions in the census. The purpose of this decision is to protect the rights of official language communities.

We have acted. We have done what is fair and reasonable in the circumstances, and we will continue to do so.

Employment Insurance
Oral Questions

September 20th, 2010 / 2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Yves Lessard Chambly—Borduas, QC

Mr. Speaker, the forestry crisis is far from over. The closure of the AbitibiBowater plants in Gatineau and Dolbeau-Mistassini shows us that workers in the regions need help to get through the crisis. But on September 11, this government put an end to the pilot project that provided an extra five weeks of benefits.

How can this government be so insensitive as to make cuts to the employment insurance program in the middle of a crisis?

Employment Insurance
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Haldimand—Norfolk
Ontario

Conservative

Diane Finley Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development

Mr. Speaker, our government acted quickly by creating the economic action plan to help workers during the worldwide recession. We established temporary, targeted measures to help those who were hardest hit by the recession. We clearly indicated that these measures would be temporary, but we also made unprecedented investments to help workers get the training they need to find jobs.

Employment Insurance
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Josée Beaudin Saint-Lambert, QC

Mr. Speaker, when they were in opposition, the Conservatives criticized the Liberals for taking money from the employment insurance fund. Now they are doing the exact same thing.

They are about to pillage nearly $20 billion from the EI fund, when the employment crisis is not over and there is a desperate need for help.

How can the government claim not to have money to help the workers who are losing their jobs, when it is about to pillage $20 billion from the employment insurance fund?

Employment Insurance
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Haldimand—Norfolk
Ontario

Conservative

Diane Finley Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we wanted to help those who were hardest hit by the recession. Our efforts were targeted and temporary. It was very important to do what we did—the Bloc voted against these measures, I should add—to help those people by providing training so that they would have the necessary skills for the jobs of today and tomorrow.

Public Safety
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Marlene Jennings Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives continue to insist on building new mega-prisons and keeping Canadians in the dark about their price tag.

Kevin Page estimated the cost of implementing just one of the Conservatives' many crime bills to be “one billion dollars annually...at a time when we are still generating deficits.”

What will these mega-prisons cost? Can the minister tell us?

Public Safety
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Provencher
Manitoba

Conservative

Vic Toews Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, our government has been very clear that our first priority is the safety and security of Canadians. We are prepared to put dangerous offenders in prisons.

We believe that the cost with respect to these prisons is justified in terms of the safety on the streets that it will create.

We would ask the member to support these initiatives to ensure that law-abiding Canadians can walk the streets and that prisoners remain in prison until it is time for them to come out.