Debates of March 30th, 2012
House of Commons Hansard #103 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was budget.
Topics
- Question Period
- The Budget
- Health
- Persons with Disabilities
- National Parks
- Brain Awareness Month
- The Budget
- Telecommunications
- The Budget
- Old Age Security
- Organ Donations
- AIDS Community Action Program
- Economic Action Plan 2012
- Roy Nelson
- The Budget
- Conservative Party of Canada
- New Democratic Party of Canada
- The Budget
- Pensions
- 41st General Election
- Pensions
- Health
- The Environment
- Charities
- The Environment
- Pensions
- Persons with Disabilities
- Canadian Food Inspection Agency
- Air Transportation
- Science and Technology
- The Budget
- Public Safety
- Young People
- Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
- Natural Resources
- Employment Insurance
- International Cooperation
- Foreign Affairs
- National Defence
- The Budget
- Points of Order
- Government Response to Petitions
- Committees of the House
- Petitions
- Questions on the Order Paper
- Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
- The Budget
- Criminal Code
National Defence
Oral Questions
Noon
NDP
Dany Morin Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Mr. Speaker, almost a quarter of the cuts in yesterday's budget affect defence and the Canadian Forces. Our armed forces and their families are wondering how they will be affected by these cuts. There is a cloud of doubt hanging over many military bases across the country, including the base in Bagotville, in my riding. There is nothing in yesterday's budget to reassure the families who depend on military bases to earn their living.
Can the government finally be transparent and tell us the extent of the cuts that will be made to our military bases? It is the least it can do.
National Defence
Oral Questions
Noon
Vaughan
Ontario
Conservative
Julian Fantino Associate Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, this government has made unprecedented investments in the Canadian Forces in recent years. In fact, since 2006, the defence budget has grown by an average of over $1 billion annually. Over the past two years, we have examined ways to implement cost-saving measures to ensure efficiency and effectiveness combined with the end of the combat missions. National defence will now return to a more normal pace of operation.
Departments will be informed, unions and employees, about the specific changes and we will communicate those accordingly.
The Budget
Oral Questions
12:05 p.m.
Bloc
Jean-François Fortin Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Finance tabled a shameful budget that will hurt Quebec and the regions, as well as all seasonal workers in the tourism, forest and fishing industries, who are losing five weeks of unemployment.
The government is punishing seniors by increasing the retirement age to 67. Quebec is being saddled with the cost of justice, public services are being reduced, the CBC's budget is being cut, funding for Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions is being cut by $62 million. There is nothing for agriculture or housing. What is more, the government is making drastic cuts to forestry programs.
My question for the government is simple: how could it be any worse?
The Budget
Oral Questions
12:05 p.m.
Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière
Québec
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, our budget focuses on Quebeckers' real priorities: jobs, economic growth and long-term prosperity. This budget maintains transfers to Quebec. Health transfers will continue to increase steadily and more quickly than provincial expenditures. We will create long-term jobs through research, innovation and responsible investments, which will benefit all Quebeckers.
Statements by Members
Points of Order
Oral Questions
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Mr. Speaker, my point of order is with regard to the members' statements that began this session.
I have been here for eight years. I take quite a bit of delight in bringing attention to events and people in my riding who do wonderful things. I am sure every member in the House does much the same for all the right reasons.
Members' statements that preceded question period were shameful. It was all an extension of debate in the House that we should be doing during debate. It is 15 minutes in a day. Could we not talk about the people and events of this great country for just that period of the day?
Could you please make a ruling on that, Mr. Speaker, and come back with an opinion?
Statements by Members
Points of Order
Oral Questions
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Speaker Andrew Scheer
As the member knows, members are given a great deal of latitude during statements to discuss issues that they feel are important to them or things in their constituencies. I did not hear anything today that would cause the Chair concern, but I am happy to get back to the member after reviewing the blues.
Government Response to Petitions
Routine Proceedings
March 30th, 2012 / 12:05 p.m.
Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre
Saskatchewan
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to five petitions.
International Trade
Committees of the House
Routine Proceedings
12:05 p.m.
South Shore—St. Margaret's
Nova Scotia
Conservative
Gerald Keddy Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on International Trade in relation to a study of the Trade Commissioner Service.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109 of the House of Commons the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.
Criminal Code
Petitions
Routine Proceedings
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Joy Smith Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Mr. Speaker, today I have the honour of presenting several hundred petitions in support of my Bill C-310, which will go to third reading today. These petitions were totally unsolicited by me.
I am pleased to see that these people are supporting the bill, as are all members on all sides of the House.
Asbestos
Petitions
Routine Proceedings
12:05 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin Winnipeg Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today to present a petition signed by literally tens of thousands of Canadians who call upon the House of Commons to take note that asbestos is the greatest industrial killer that the world has ever known.
The petitioners point out that more Canadians now die from asbestos than all other industrial and occupational causes combined and yet this country remains one of the largest producers and exporters of asbestos in the world. They also point out that Canada spends millions of dollars subsidizing the asbestos industry and blocking international efforts to curb its use.
Therefore, the petitioners call upon the government to ban asbestos in all of its forms and institute a just transition program for asbestos workers and the communities in which they live. They also call upon government to end all subsidies of asbestos, both in Canada and abroad. Finally, and perhaps most important, they call on the government to stop blocking international health and safety conventions designed to protect workers from asbestos, such as the Rotterdam Convention.
Air Canada
Petitions
Routine Proceedings
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure to present two petitions today.
The first petition deals with the Air Canada and Aveos concern. Across Canada, literally thousands of individuals are now unemployed because of the government's refusal to take legal action against Air Canada.
The petitioners, in this case from the province of Manitoba, call on the government to take the necessary action to hold Air Canada accountable to the Air Canada Public Participation Act.
Old Age Security
Petitions
Routine Proceedings
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, my second petition deals with the OAS.
The petitioners call upon the government to revisit the issue of increasing the qualification age from 65 to 67, recognizing that individuals should be able to retire at the age of 65. They believe very firmly in that.
Abortion
Petitions
Routine Proceedings
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Gary Schellenberger Perth—Wellington, ON
Madam Speaker, I have a petition from 27 members of my community.
The petitioners state that Canada is the only nation in the western world, in the company of China and North Korea, without any laws restricting abortion and that Canada's Supreme Court has said that it is Parliament's responsibility to enact abortion legislation.
Therefore, they call upon the House of Commons and Parliament assembled to speedily enact legislation that restricts abortion to the greatest extent possible.
Housing
Petitions
Routine Proceedings
12:10 p.m.
Green
Elizabeth May Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Madam Speaker, it seems a little ironic to stand today to present petitions on issues that are so pressing and which were so completely ignored in yesterday's budget.
The first petition deals with the need for affordable housing. The petitioners had hoped to see something in the budget that would allow for the tax benefits that once existed for purpose-built, affordable rental housing.
The petitioners are from the Ottawa area, and they ask the House to continue to look at the need for affordable housing.
The Environment
Petitions
Routine Proceedings
12:10 p.m.
Green
Elizabeth May Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Madam Speaker, the second petition deals with the issue of allowing full, fair, appropriate environmental reviews to take place, specifically with respect to the Enbridge project, the great pipeline of China, to deliver bitumen crude to tankers which will take it to foreign refineries where foreign workers will benefit from the jobs.
Of course, this is an area specifically targeted in yesterday's budget, not to ensure full, fair, transparent and unbiased review, but to call for fast-tracking and railroading toward a government objective that flies in the face of the best interests of this country economically and environmentally.
