House of Commons Hansard #130 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was parole.

Topics

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka
Ontario

Conservative

Tony Clement Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, today I made an announcement about the proposed merger of the London and Toronto stock exchanges, saying that the federal government would review the transaction under the Investment Canada Act. Of course, British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec and Ontario have the right to review the transaction as well. From our point of view, this is a very complex transaction, so the review must be very thorough.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Joe Comartin Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

Mr. Speaker, this government is not able to see what is so obvious to the rest of the country: the takeover of the Toronto Stock Exchange needs meaningful input from the public. All we are asking is that the Prime Minister do what is required of him by law, in other words, the bare minimum.

Will the Prime Minister keep sitting on the fence, or will he finally recognize the significance of this takeover and announce a full public consultation?

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka
Ontario

Conservative

Tony Clement Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, as I have already said, this is a very complex transaction. The Investment Canada Act must be taken into consideration. The process needs to comply with that act. Today I announced that the review will go ahead.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Joe Comartin Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

Mr. Speaker, everyone knew last week that this was a takeover and that we needed a full public review, not just minimum adherence to the law.

Before Christmas, in response to the NDP leader, the Prime Minister admitted that the Investment Canada Act was broken and needed fixing. Those were his words. Since then we have seen nothing from the government.

Now we have another takeover in a strategic sector. How many more takeovers will we see with no public consultation before the Conservative government finally revamps the act?

Securities
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka
Ontario

Conservative

Tony Clement Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, my obligation of course is to review this under, as I said in French, the black letter of the law. Of course, I will be doing so pursuant to my obligations as Minister of Industry. It is a very complex transaction and we have to do it by the book. The book in this case is the Investment Canada Act.

There is a review. We are in favour of a review of the ICA. I referred it to the industry committee and we look forward to its deliberations as well.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Joe Comartin Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

Mr. Speaker, after many months of promises, we finally see the beginning of some change by this government for some kind of public review. However, the provinces, business analysts, traders and even oil industry executives are all voicing concerns about this deal. While the exchanges are private companies, they are tightly regulated because of their strategic importance as capital markets.

Will the minister commit today to a full public review that allows for open and transparent consultations on both this decision and any conditions that might apply if the deal is approved?

Securities
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka
Ontario

Conservative

Tony Clement Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, we all know where the NDP members stand on this. Whenever there is a foreign entity that wishes to invest in Canada, they are against it; they are against it across the board, so their position is easy. Of course, when the Liberals were in power they were in favour of every transaction.

We take the view that the net benefit test to Canada under the act is an important test. We review each transaction individually to ensure that we do have a net benefit to Canada. We will continue to defend Canada's interests in this regard.

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Immigration announced a 5% reduction in the family class of people coming to Canada.

I will give just one example of how discriminatory that decision is. It directly contradicts a statement made by the Minister of Human Resources who said last week that people did not need to send their kids to child care centres, but could have their parents and grandparents and their loved ones take care of them.

The minister is stopping those loved ones, is stopping those grandparents, from coming to Canada. How does he justify that kind of discriminatory practice?

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Calgary Southeast
Alberta

Conservative

Jason Kenney Minister of Citizenship

Mr. Speaker, I expect more from that member than that kind of base demagoguery.

The reality is that yesterday I announced that in 2010 we welcomed 281,000 permanent residents to Canada, the largest number in 57 years, and 106,000 more than the Liberals did shortly after they came to office and cut immigration levels. We are welcoming more family members, more economic immigrants. We have announced a 20% increase in the number of refugees that we have resettled.

We are getting the job done for newcomers.

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, although the minister did not reply in the spirit of Valentine's Day, I would like to ask him another question in the same spirit. Today is a day of love and reconciliation. So why did the minister announce a reduction in the number of people who will be allowed to immigrate to Canada in the family reunification category? They will have a harder time helping their families.

Are family values no longer important to the Conservative Party?

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Calgary Southeast
Alberta

Conservative

Jason Kenney Minister of Citizenship

Mr. Speaker, we did no such thing. More and more Canadians' children will be welcome in Canada.

Let us be clear. What the member is really saying is that we should reduce the number of economic immigrants coming to Canada because there are trade-offs.

There are trade-offs, and this government is focused on the priorities of Canadians, and those are economic growth and prosperity. We need more newcomers working and paying taxes and contributing to our health care system. That is the focus of our immigration system.

Judiciary
Oral Questions

February 14th, 2011 / 2:30 p.m.

Liberal

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

Mr. Speaker, last Friday, the Minister of Immigration launched an attack on the judiciary. According to him, judges make up excuses to allow foreign criminals to stay in Canada. He described judges' rulings as capricious and he deplored what he called their misplaced clemency.

Will the minister give us the name of a single judge who has acted in this way or will he allow his disgusting comments to tarnish the reputation of every judge in Canada?

Judiciary
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Calgary Southeast
Alberta

Conservative

Jason Kenney Minister of Citizenship

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I am not aware of the rulings her husband made when he was on the IRB.

That being said, I can say that it is unacceptable that we still have terrorists in Canada when we have been trying to turn them away at the border for 20 years. Everyone is entitled to natural justice and a fair trial, but at the end of the day, we should be able to turn away foreign criminals and terrorists at the border.

Judiciary
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Immigration escalated his attack on the judiciary. He said that Canadian courts do not allow the law to be enforced.

This is a serious and unprecedented charge that must be explained. The Minister of Justice has a responsibility to defend the independence of our judges and our Canadian court system. Why has he been silent?

Why is the Minister of Justice allowing his colleague to intimidate our judges and our court system? Why?

Judiciary
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!