House of Commons Hansard #134 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was information.

Topics

Public Safety
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I wish, for once, the Liberal Party would talk about the costs of crime to the victims who suffer from crime.

We tabled in the House a response to the questions that the Liberal members requested. What about the cost to insurance? What about the cost to victims when their cars are stolen, particularly in the city of Winnipeg where the number of automobiles that are stolen is incredibly high?

I would like to ask the Liberals, would they for once consider the cost to victims of crime?

Public Safety
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

Massimo Pacetti Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are asking for: the costs. According to documents tabled yesterday, 13 crime bills will not cost a single penny.

The Conservatives are seriously trying to make us believe that it will not cost anything to keep prisoners in their cells, that it will not cost anything to feed them and that prison guards are volunteers.

What fairy tale is the Minister of Public Safety living in?

Public Safety
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the information that we tabled before Parliament yesterday is in response to the questions the Liberals asked.

One of the bills that will cost a significant amount of money is the truth in sentencing bill. This is the terrible situation where criminals get a two-for-one benefit to their sentencing.

Interestingly enough, when the bill passed Parliament on June 8, the Liberals made no request for how much this would cost. They are now asking how much it will cost after they voted for it.

Why did they not do their job and ask these questions before they supported this important legislation?

Finance
Oral Questions

February 18th, 2011 / 11:40 a.m.

Conservative

Russ Hiebert South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC

Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals launch a tour to promote their Liberal leader's reckless $6 billion tax hike, our Conservative government is standing up for lower taxes at home and abroad.

On the global stage we are fighting a global financial transaction tax on Canadians. This tax would hit Canadians in their wallets, taking their hard-earned money out of our local communities to fund an unprecedented global tax.

Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance please tell the House what our Conservative government is doing to oppose reckless tax hikes?

Finance
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Saint Boniface
Manitoba

Conservative

Shelly Glover Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to answer that question.

Our Conservative government believes in low taxes, not higher taxes. We are fighting against the Liberal tax hike on job-creating businesses. We oppose any global financial transaction tax on Canadians as well. Unfortunately, the Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition does not agree.

I am absolutely shocked to report that the NDP member for Burnaby—New Westminster is introducing a bill to impose a financial transaction tax on Canadians. We will fight against a new coalition tax both--

Finance
Oral Questions

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Order. The hon. member for Burnaby--New Westminster.

International Trade
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

NDP

Peter Julian Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, just like everything else, the government now has a major problem with its botched trade agreement between Canada and the European Union.

Last week, we learned that this agreement will result in increased drug prices. Today, we learned that Canada's automobile industry is also threatened by this agreement. People are worried that Canada's automobile industry is being sold at a rock-bottom price.

What does this government intend to do to reject this faulty deal now that this sector has joined the likes of agriculture, arts and the municipalities? What will they do now that this agreement—

International Trade
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

Liberal

International Trade
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

South Shore—St. Margaret's
Nova Scotia

Conservative

Gerald Keddy Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade

Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear. The member is simply incorrect in his entire statement.

Canadian manufacturers compete with the best in the world. They can count on our government to continue to open markets and allow them to do this. A trade agreement with the European Union could boost Canada's economy by $12 billion. That includes improvements for sectors across the Canadian economy.

Negotiations are ongoing. There is no agreement yet. The hon. member and Canadians can rest assured that any agreement will be in the best interests of Canadians.

International Trade
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

NDP

Peter Julian Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, that is not what the auto sector is saying.

We have seen what the Conservatives can do. They badly botched negotiations on softwood lumber, costing our softwood communities $1.2 billion and counting, and 50,000 jobs. Our companies are still being denied access to the U.S. because of botched buy American negotiations.

The auto sector now joins other sectors to say no to the botched EU negotiations.

How can we trust a government so willing to sell out Canadian jobs? It does not do its homework. It does not do its due diligence. It is incompetent at the negotiating table. How can we trust Conservatives when they have failed Canadians again and again?

International Trade
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

South Shore—St. Margaret's
Nova Scotia

Conservative

Gerald Keddy Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade

Mr. Speaker, I will tell the member what our government is committed to.

We are committed to promoting free trade, opening new markets and creating jobs for Canadians, unlike the member opposite and his party who are committed to creating higher taxes and having jobs leave Canada for the rest of the world. We want jobs to stay in Canada.

Employment Insurance
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

Bloc

Josée Beaudin Saint-Lambert, QC

Mr. Speaker, in advance of the next budget, the Bloc Québécois has toured Quebec to get a sense of what Quebeckers expect; more than ever, a comprehensive reform of the employment insurance system is necessary. Older workers, seasonal workers, young victims of discriminatory clauses, independent workers and women working part time came forward to denounce the flaws in the system.

Instead of misappropriating EI contributions, will the government finally start improving the system?

Employment Insurance
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

Haldimand—Norfolk
Ontario

Conservative

Diane Finley Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development

Mr. Speaker, during the global recession, we have introduced a number of initiatives to help those most affected by the global recession. That is why we had programs for long-tenured workers, in order to increase the benefit period by five weeks. We have a number of other programs, including programs to train workers for another job, another career, after the recession. However, the Bloc voted against all our initiatives.

Employment Insurance
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

Bloc

Josée Beaudin Saint-Lambert, QC

Mr. Speaker, instead of improving the employment insurance system, the Conservatives are limiting access to EI by not renewing the pilot project for regions with a high rate of seasonal employment. In the Gaspé and on the Magdalen Islands, this change has had dramatic consequences.

Will the government show some compassion and reinstate pilot project No. 13 to help seasonal workers?

Employment Insurance
Oral Questions

11:45 a.m.

Haldimand—Norfolk
Ontario

Conservative

Diane Finley Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development

Mr. Speaker, the government is using pilot projects to determine whether one idea or another will achieve the government's goals. Since this government is accountable to Canada's taxpayers and this pilot project did not achieve our goals, we abolished it.