House of Commons Hansard #132 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was fednor.

Topics

International Co-operation
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

John McKay Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious by now that CIDA, and possibly the minister, approved the KAIROS grant. Then persons unknown inserted the “not” in the document and doctored it to make it look like CIDA turned down the application.

What specific Conservative government policy did the Christian churches offend after being approved for the CIDA grant?

International Co-operation
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I would encourage the member opposite to look at the committee transcript from December 9, where the deputy minister responsible said the inclusion of the word “not” is just a simple reflection of what her decision was. That is exactly what she said.

International Co-operation
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

John McKay Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is the right of every minister to make ministerial decisions. However, it is not the right of a minister to make a decision and then doctor a document and make it appear as if it is someone else's decision.

Mr. Speaker, until you blew the whistle, the minister was perfectly content to mislead the House.

Is the Prime Minister prepared to fire the minister, or will he have Parliament do it?

International Co-operation
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, what is certainly very clear is the member opposite did not agree with the decision the minister made. Those of us on the government side of the House agree that the minister made the right decision. She made the correct decision. We support that decision.

Government Spending
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Daniel Paillé Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer has spoken out against the government's obscurantism before the Standing Committee on Finance. He was annoyed that the Conservatives too often use the cloak of cabinet confidence to withhold documents that he and we need to do our jobs. The expenditure reduction plan is one example.

Will they understand that it is a basic principle that Parliament authorizes expenditures? Will the government stop hiding things and give us its expenditure reduction plan?

Government Spending
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Okanagan—Coquihalla
B.C.

Conservative

Stockwell Day President of the Treasury Board and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway

Mr. Speaker, that is an interesting question.

Just yesterday I met with the Parliamentary Budget Officer and told him that if he was having trouble obtaining any documents, all he had to do was call me and we would verify whether there are any documents.

Regulations have been established here, in the House, that make it possible to provide certain documents. He just needs to call me.

Government Spending
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Daniel Paillé Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, he may very well go out for a beer with Kevin Page, but the list has been known for a long time. Come on.

Kevin Page said that “Parliament needs more fiscal transparency”. As they did in 2005 and 2006, they must make the cuts public, department by department. We need this information.

Why has it become a secret? What does the government have to hide? Its incompetence? Its intransigence? Its inability? Its ineptitude? All of the above?

Government Spending
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Okanagan—Coquihalla
B.C.

Conservative

Stockwell Day President of the Treasury Board and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway

Mr. Speaker, there was no beer yesterday because we have changed the former government's policy regarding alcohol at meetings.

Yesterday, the Parliamentary Budget Officer also said that our plan to reduce the deficit is ahead—by $5 billion. That is not necessarily our opinion, but he said that he thought we were further ahead. He can say that because he has the plan, absolutely.

Telecommunications Industry
Oral Questions

February 16th, 2011 / 2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Cardin Sherbrooke, QC

Mr. Speaker, on December 10, 2009, the Minister of Industry instructed the CRTC to determine “whether the impact of these wholesale requirements unduly impairs the ability of incumbent telephone companies to offer new converged services”.

How can the minister explain his flip-flop on usage-based billing when barely a year ago he was asking the CRTC to better protect the interests of Bell and Rogers, at consumers' expense?

Telecommunications Industry
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont
Alberta

Conservative

Mike Lake Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, that is completely untrue. Our government has expressed serious concerns about the CRTC decision and the wide-reaching implications it has for consumers, innovation and the competitiveness of small- and medium-size businesses. That is why the minister and the Prime Minister both expressed concern last week. That is why they decided to ask the CRTC to review that decision.

This government will always stand up for Canadian consumers, for innovation and for advancement in technology in this country.

Telecommunications Industry
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Cardin Sherbrooke, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' stubbornness on the Globalive issue is disconcerting. Even though the Telecommunications Act, the CRTC and the Federal Court contradict the Conservative government, it is launching an appeal. The Conservatives must stop wasting public money and admit that Globalive is a corporation controlled by foreign interests.

When will the Conservatives comply with the Telecommunications Act rather than selling our airwaves to foreign corporations?

Telecommunications Industry
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont
Alberta

Conservative

Mike Lake Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat confused right now after listening to that question because the member has asked two questions and has taken a different position on each one.

Of course with the Globalive decision, consistent with the decision we have just talked about, the government has acted in the interests of Canadian consumers and in the interests of more competition in the Canadian marketplace. We will always do that.

International Co-operation
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Bonnie Crombie Mississauga—Streetsville, ON

Mr. Speaker, KAIROS is just the tip of the iceberg. Many hard-working organizations from across Canada have been left twisting in knots, their funding cut without reason and without explanation by the government.

With the minister's admission of fraud, can others be wondering, did we suffer the same fate? What other groups did CIDA recommend for funding but received a handwritten “not”?

Will the minister tell us or not?

International Co-operation
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the minister made no such admission because there was not one. The minister made a decision, as she is entitled to do. She was very clear that she was the one who made that decision. She believed that funding would better go to support vulnerable people in the developing world rather than to a Canadian NGO.

International Co-operation
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Bonnie Crombie Mississauga—Streetsville, ON

Mr. Speaker, clear, I think not. The Canadian Council for International Co-operation, the Canadian Teachers' Federation, MATCH, AIDS groups, women's groups, human rights groups, dozens have had their funding cut.

The Prime Minister makes the rules. The message is clear: ideology over reason, “cross him and you are finished.” Will he do the right thing? Will he reverse these ideological cuts and will he fire that minister today?