House of Commons Hansard #29 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was tax.

Topics

Rail Transportation
Oral Questions

11:35 a.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, it is now a full year since the rail freight service review was completed. It is over six months since the government promised to implement it. In March the government said it would work with all parties to draft legislation giving shippers the right to enforceable contracts with the railways. Now the government is suggesting a process to avoid legislation.

Which is it: enforce shippers' rights or avoid shippers' rights? I ask for the fourth time, will the legislation be introduced this year?

Rail Transportation
Oral Questions

11:35 a.m.

Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia
Manitoba

Conservative

Steven Fletcher Minister of State (Transport)

Mr. Speaker, in March of this year our government announced a comprehensive strategy that responds to the findings of the rail freight review. Our government is following up on its commitments to improve the performance of the rail-based supply chain. Stakeholders, all parties and certainly ours, everyone in the commercial sector and people who rely on rail freight will work together to make sure that we can have an efficient and effective rail freight operation in our country. We will be naming a facilitator for this process shortly.

Rail Transportation
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Malpeque, PE

Mr. Speaker, it has been over a year. Clearly the government is dragging its feet on implementing the railway service review. Who gains by the slow response? The railways of course, while farmers pay higher rates for poorer service.

Are the government's efforts to destroy the Canadian Wheat Board really to protect its railway friends? We know it was the Wheat Board that challenged the railways on price gouging. It defended farmers' interests before the CTA and won 14 times against United States grain interests. Just for whom and why is the government making the reckless decision to destroy the Canadian Wheat Board?

Rail Transportation
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Cypress Hills—Grasslands
Saskatchewan

Conservative

David Anderson Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and for the Canadian Wheat Board

Mr. Speaker, our government remains committed to giving western Canadian grain farmers the marketing freedom that they want and that they deserve. An open market in western Canada will attract investment. It will encourage innovation and will create value-added jobs. It is going to build a stronger Canadian economy.

The member knows that is true. He should join with us in bringing western Canadian farmers the freedom they deserve.

Democratic Reform
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

Stéphane Dion Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister dismissed the Liberals' advice on his Senate bill, but will he listen to independent experts and staunch Conservatives?

Three out of four western academics say that his ill-conceived plan would hurt Alberta and British Columbia. The Prime Minister's former chief of staff, Tom Flanagan, said, “This bill scares me”.

Why do the Prime Minister and the Minister of State for Democratic Reform want to hurt their own province?

Democratic Reform
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Edmonton—Sherwood Park
Alberta

Conservative

Tim Uppal Minister of State (Democratic Reform)

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' agenda is clear. They would rather support the status quo in the Senate than reasonable and achievable reforms.

Alberta has shown that giving Canadians a say in Senate nominees is not only possible, but it works. We congratulate Premier Alward and his government on committing to give New Brunswickers real input into their Senate representatives.

G8 Summit
Oral Questions

October 7th, 2011 / 11:40 a.m.

NDP

Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General has confirmed that he cannot determine how the amounts allocated to the G8 slush fund were set. In the minutes of one of the meetings of the very select local area leadership group, the MP for Parry Sound—Muskoka stated that the Prime Minister's Office was in charge of determining the budget.

Because the local MP is not talking about local issues, can the foreign affairs minister tell us why the Prime Minister wanted to have a $50 million slush fund?

G8 Summit
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, that of course is not the case. The $50 million was allocated in budget 2009 as part of Canada's economic action plan. The goal was to spruce up an already beautiful part of our country so we could present our best face to the world. People at these summits stay over 100 kilometres away from the exact summit site. There was also, as is traditional for these types of initiatives, funding made available to thank the region for hosting the world. All 32 of the projects came in on or under budget.

G8 Summit
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

NDP

Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

Mr. Speaker, according to the minutes that report what the minister said, amounts over and above the basic budget for the G8 Summit Management Office must be determined by the Prime Minister's Office.

The Conservatives cannot deny what is in the documents uncovered by the NDP. That is why the mayor of Huntsville is embarrassed.

Who approved the slush fund? Was it the Prime Minister, as the President of the Treasury Board said?

G8 Summit
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Minister of Foreign Affairs

No, Mr. Speaker.

President of the Treasury Board
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

NDP

Pat Martin Winnipeg Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General called the monkey business in Muskoka unlike anything he has seen in his 33 years of working in the Auditor General's Office. I would remind members that he was here during the sponsorship scandal.

How can the miscreant minister from Muskoka be the President of the Treasury Board when he himself shows such contempt and disregard for the very Treasury Board guidelines that were put in place to protect us from this kind of partisan political pork barrelling?

President of the Treasury Board
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, I say to my friend from Winnipeg Centre that it will not come as any surprise to him that I disagree with the premise of his question.

The Auditor General did review this issue and came forward with a number of observations on how the government could be more open and transparent. No one argues with her good judgment. We have accepted all of her advice.

The good news I can report is that on all 32 public infrastructure projects every single dollar was accounted for and they all went to public infrastructure projects.

The good news is that all of these infrastructure projects, as part of Canada's economic action plan, have created hundreds of thousands of jobs. Even in September, 61,000 net new jobs were--

President of the Treasury Board
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Andrew Scheer

Order, please. The hon. member for Winnipeg Centre.

President of the Treasury Board
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

NDP

Pat Martin Winnipeg Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, maybe he did not see the headline: “Rules were broken”. The government broke every rule in the book. However, unlike the sponsorship scandal, there is no Chuck Guité here to be the fall guy. In fact, the architect and the mastermind of this whole Muskoka slush fund was the minister himself. We know what happened to Alfonso Gagliano. He got put out on an ice floe.

Why does the government continue to defend this miscreant minister from Muskoka, when he would make a perfect ambassador to, say, Hans Island?

President of the Treasury Board
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, I will not cede sovereignty over Hans Island. We will not send an ambassador to Hans Island because Hans Island is part of this great country. We will not allow the NDP to sellout our sovereignty and give away an island. Shame on this member.