House of Commons Hansard #67 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was trade.

Topics

Health
Statements By Members

2:20 p.m.

NDP

Libby Davies Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is astounding that the Conservative government plans to determine the future funding for health care based on economic growth. This comes after the government has long promised an annual 6% increase. It is an outrage that the government would consider cutting its increase in half and threaten the stability of front line health care services.

While the government is ready to cut future funding to health care, it has still not delivered on the promises made in the 2004 accord.

This week, the Health Council of Canada reported that 23% of chronically ill Canadians cannot afford their medications. This is why the government must uphold its current commitments and fulfill the promises of 2004, including a national prescription drug coverage plan. Now is the time to act on health care, not to cut its funding.

The provinces need leadership and accountability from the federal government to sustain our public health care system. Why is it backing away from the table signalling that Canadians' number one concern is not shared by the government?

Christmas
Statements By Members

December 14th, 2011 / 2:20 p.m.

Conservative

Nina Grewal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC

Mr. Speaker, Christmas is approaching and again the forces of political correctness continue with the relentless attack on the traditional traditions: judges remove Christmas trees from the court houses; school concerts are postponed to take away the Christmas theme; the lyrics of Christmas carols are changed; the distribution of candy canes is banned; and all the references to God, Christ and the Lord are removed.

Traditions are the foundation of society, culture and the faith. If we eliminate or water them down, we erode the glue that holds us together.

To embrace a diverse, secular, multicultural, multi-religious and multi-ethnic society, there is no need to preclude the celebration of Christmas. Rather than diluting the traditions, they should be celebrated, whether they are Vaisakhi, Diwali, Chinese New Year, Eid, Hanukkah or Christmas.

We must proudly put the spirit of Christmas back in Christmas.

I wish everyone a merry Christmas.

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Hull—Aylmer
Québec

NDP

Nycole Turmel Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister showed that he does not understand how serious the threat of climate change is when he said that the Kyoto targets were stupid. What is really stupid is the Conservatives' inaction on climate change. That is what is stupid.

Will the Prime Minister wake up and finally put in place some real targets to combat climate change?

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, it is a fact that the Kyoto targets were unattainable, even when the accord was signed. That is why the government that signed the accord did not have a plan to implement it. That is also why we are working with the international community to create a protocol that will include all the major emitters in the world.

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Hull—Aylmer
Québec

NDP

Nycole Turmel Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, talking about stupid things, let us talk about the F-35 fiasco.

The Pentagon is now recommending slowing down the production. Delivery of the aircraft was expected for 2016 but it clearly will not happen. There are too many flaws, too many problems and it is too costly.

The Associate Minister of National Defence talked about a plan B last month. Israel has brought in a plan B. Japan has doubts.

Would the Prime Minister tell us what plan B is for the F-35?

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I know very well that every time the government provides our men and women in uniform with the equipment they need, the NDP loudly opposes that and votes against it.

We are working on the best advice of the Canadian industry, including the Quebec industry and our men and women in uniform in the air force. We will continue to move forward to ensure they have the best aircraft that are available when we need to replace the current fleet.

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Hull—Aylmer
Québec

NDP

Nycole Turmel Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, the F-35 is a real quagmire, a money pit. The Prime Minister should realize this instead of continuing to sink in that quagmire. This aircraft does not work. We have learned that if, in the end, the plane does successfully get off the ground, our pilots will not even be able to train in Canada. They will have to spend 10 years in Florida. That is practical: Florida to simulate the Arctic.

Does the Prime Minister realize that the F-35 program is just a big joke?

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the F-35 is an aircraft that is supported not only by aviators in the Canadian Forces but also by the aviation industry, including Quebec's aerospace industry. I note that the NDP and NDP members from Quebec regularly oppose the interests of Quebec industries. Clearly, this government supports industries throughout the country.

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Kellway Beaches—East York, ON

Mr. Speaker, respectfully, I would caution the Prime Minister against borrowing from the Associate Minister of National Defence's speaking points because just yesterday the air force commander contradicted those very speaking points. He said that F-35 training might take place in Canada at some point maybe, but not for a decade. Documents from National Defence say that there might be no training in Canada at all.

Could the Associate Minister of National Defence explain why he gave the House incorrect information? Does the Associate Minister of National Defence have any idea what he is doing on this file?

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Vaughan
Ontario

Conservative

Julian Fantino Associate Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, the construct of that question illustrates an absolute desperation.

My response about training that I gave on November 4 was, “We are moving training to Canada”. The chief of air staff stated, “My intention is to move training to Canada”.

We are both right, while the member opposite is wrong.

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Kellway Beaches—East York, ON

Mr. Speaker, if the Associate Minister of National Defence were to look beyond his speaking points and into the file, he would have read that the Pentagon has a lack of confidence in the F-35s.

A 55-page detailed technical report leaked last weekend concludes yet again that costs are through the roof, that there are major technical problems with this plane and that the delivery date will not be met.

Is the associate minister prepared to contradict the Pentagon and tell us yet again that the program is on track? Does the Pentagon have it wrong or does the associate minister have it wrong?

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Vaughan
Ontario

Conservative

Julian Fantino Associate Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, I am really amused by the quick reference to notes, while the member opposite relies heavily on them.

However, the secretary of defense, Mr. Panetta, spoke recently about the commitment that the U.S. had, along with the nine countries, to ensure the F-35 program continued. It is on track. We are part of that process and we will continue to be.

Ethics
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC

Madam Speaker, the Canada Elections Act explicitly states that one cannot falsely publish a notice that a candidate in a constituency has retired or withdrawn. Given the fact that the Canada Elections Act says this and given your ruling yesterday about the reprehensible behaviour against the member for Mount Royal, does the Prime Minister believe the Canada Elections Act needs to be clarified and will he issue an apology to the member for Mount Royal?

Ethics
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

York—Simcoe
Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, you have ruled on this issue very clearly. It is certainly the practice of our government to respect all rulings of all Speakers of the House. That has been our practice in the past. It will continue to be our practice in the future.

Clearly the member for Mount Royal continues to take his seat in the House and we, as a government, acknowledge that.

Government Accountability
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I guess we are not going to get that apology.

The intimidation tactics continue. A notice of motion was introduced before a committee to the effect that the work of committees should be done in secret, that is to say, behind closed doors so that the public and the media cannot see what is happening. When will this abuse of democracy stop? When will this Prime Minister, who has done so much preaching about openness and transparency, start to respect those principles?