House of Commons Hansard #128 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was park.

Topics

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Central Nova
Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, I do not know what the member for Beauséjour has against the truth or his previously held position.

His previously held position, as a Liberal parliamentary secretary to defence, was to support this procurement back in 1997.

We are going to proceed with the best aircraft at the best price, which is the best for the Canadian Forces and the best for the Canadian aerospace industry. This is a fifth generation aircraft that will replace an aircraft now approaching 40 years old.

Canadians need to know that the government is behind their Canadian Forces. The member should get back on board with his previous position.

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Liberal

Dominic LeBlanc Beauséjour, NB

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative's phoney accounting on the F-35 simply does not add up: $200,000 on a bogus communications exercise; cost overruns, which have almost doubled the price per plane to $90 million from the $50 million originally; and software delays, which we learned of that now make a mockery of the minister's delivery date.

Why waste $200,000 on a publicity road show when holding an open Canadian competition would cost nothing and save taxpayers at least $4 billion?

National Defence
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Central Nova
Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, I will just to put a few facts forward.

Back in 1997, the Liberal Party started the procurement plan and spent almost $150 million on that plan. Why would the hon. member now suggest that we should do anything less than proceed with a competition that has occurred to buy the best aircraft available for the Canadian Forces to ensure mission success and follow along the track that he laid out with his government?

This is what Secretary of Defense Gates said about the air force variant that we are purchasing. He said that it was progressing quite well and that the price was coming down.

Securities
Oral Questions

February 10th, 2011 / 2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, following the merger of the Toronto and London stock exchanges, political and economic players have been very clear: the derivatives-based Montreal exchange should remain as it is and even grow.

In light of this major transaction, does the Prime Minister realize that, now more than ever, a Canada-wide securities commission based in Toronto and influenced by the Toronto business community is harmful to Montreal, and to Quebec and its economy?

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that these markets are international. Our initiative has the support of 10 provinces and territories, but we are clear: we have turned this controversial issue over to the Supreme Court and we will always respect federal jurisdiction.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, at last count, four or five provinces were against this plan. The government should take note.

In response to the announcement of the plan to merge the stock markets, business people in Toronto have spoken out in support of a single securities commission based in Toronto, which would mean that all decisions would be made in Toronto, even decisions affecting the Montreal Stock Exchange. Will the Prime Minister face the facts and stop playing into Toronto's hands at Montreal's expense?

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the federal proposal is for a decentralized commission. That is the nature of our country; we do not want a centralizing agency. This issue has been handed over to the Supreme Court and we will respect its decision. We will move forward only in accordance with our jurisdictions.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Daniel Paillé Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, the London Stock Exchange's potential acquisition of the Toronto Stock Exchange will mean that the new stock exchange will operate in many countries and territories. This new entity will be accountable to several regulatory authorities. Thus, the Conservatives' desire to eliminate the Autorité des marchés financiers du Québec no longer makes any sense. The financial community is accustomed to dealing with multiple jurisdictions.

Does the Minister of Finance realize that this plan for a new stock exchange calls into question the relevance and pertinence of his Canada-wide commission?

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka
Ontario

Conservative

Tony Clement Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, regarding that merger, we are looking into how the Investment Canada Act applies to the proposed transaction.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Daniel Paillé Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, I cannot help but notice that the Minister of Finance and the Minister of State for Finance still remain silent.

Several financial authorities would regulate the new stock exchange. The passport system exists in Europe, as it does here. Although the minister may not like it, that is the solution and it works very well.

Will the Minister of Finance abandon his predatory project and leave in place a passport system among the various financial market authorities, a system that works just as well in Europe as it does in Canada?

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Macleod
Alberta

Conservative

Ted Menzies Minister of State (Finance)

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for pointing out the fact that there are actually 10 provinces working with the federal government to protect Canadians. The whole role behind securities regulation is to provide a mechanism for investment to come into this country, investments that do not have to go through 13 different processes coming into this country.

We need to protect Canadians as they put their money away for their retirement. That is the most important thing we need to do for Canadians.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Jack Layton Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister likes to say that the reason the banks of Canada weathered the recession so well was that Canada has strict rules, particularly with regard to controls on foreign ownership, and that banks have major strategic importance here in Canada.

If they are so important, why not apply the same concept to the Toronto and Montreal stock exchanges?

Securities
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, there are procedures for reviewing this very complex proposal. The provinces will have a decision to make under the Investment Canada Act and so will we. I cannot comment without conducting a thorough review of this transaction.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Jack Layton Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister may still be having trouble figuring out whether this investment needs to be reviewed or not but experts do not have any problem with it. The executive director of the Rotman School of Management says that this is a takeover, not a merger.

According to the Investment Canada Act, the Conservatives must agree to review the proposed takeover.

When will they stop dragging their feet and actually conduct a full review and make it a public, transparent process, the way it should be?

Securities
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the review will take place according to the laws that we have. That is what has been done in the past.

As this government has made clear, both in words and through its actions in past transactions, we will approve only transactions that are in the net benefit of this country.