House of Commons Hansard #173 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was violence.

Topics

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, I have a brief comment and a question.

This is a important issue. I listened to the member and, having had the opportunity to be here the first time around when the bill came out at second reading, I know that there individuals from my caucus, such as the member for Labrador and other Atlantic representatives, who are keen on the whole seal issue. However, it is obvious that Canadians from all regions of the country are also concerned about the issue.

There is a great deal of economic benefit, but there is also a heritage component to sealing. The member never really made any reference to heritage or culture, although sealing has been happening for many years. Perhaps he might want to take the opportunity to comment not only on the importance of the industry but also on the cultural or heritage aspect of it.

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

6:40 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Kerr Conservative West Nova, NS

Mr. Speaker, I did mention the Seal Days on the Hill as being one of the efforts to recognize the importance of sealing to both the culture, the livelihood, and the economies of northern communities. I agree with the member that it is important to keep putting sealing forward. I also indicated that this industry has been under way for some 300 years in our country and has made great strides and great improvements over the years. However, we must remain vigilant and continue to support it. It is part of how our country was developed. I certainly agree that anything we do to keep promoting it is a positive thing to do.

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

6:40 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Norlock Conservative Northumberland—Quinte West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I was pleased and honoured to support my friend with respect to this bill coming to the House. It appears that we will have unanimous approval for it. I think it is worthy of that, and I applaud the member.

In part of his speech he referred to the importance of sealing to our aboriginal community. I know he has had communication with the Minister of the Environment, and I am sure she has advised him as to how important it is. I wonder if he could talk about how important this industry is to not only those who are on the eastern coast of our great country but also to the aboriginal community here in Canada.

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

6:40 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Kerr Conservative West Nova, NS

Mr. Speaker, we did not quite get unanimous support. One member could not quite come with us. However, we have had great support across the--

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

6:40 p.m.

An hon. member

So close.

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

6:40 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Kerr Conservative West Nova, NS

It was that close, you are right.

Mr. Speaker, we had great support from the various parties and very positive input. For those who were at the Seal Day that took place in the Speaker's quarters inside, when we were talking to the native folks who were here, we heard what they had to say and how incredibly dedicated they are to doing it right and how important it has been to their actual survival. It is the income that in many cases provides the food on the table and provides the opportunity to look after families. They, I think, sometimes are puzzled as to how the uninformed or misinformed people can be so negative about what this achieves within their community and their culture. Anything we can do to keep supporting it and making sure it is done correctly I think is a very important thing, and we in the House can make sure that it happens.

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

6:40 p.m.

NDP

Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC

Mr. Speaker, once again, I would like to thank my colleague for presenting this very important bill. It brings clarity to a problem we are all aware of, namely that there are obstacles, problems and even safety issues in the marine environment, on the ice, for the fishers who hunt seals. This can be a very dangerous undertaking. If we wish to improve conditions for fishers, it is an admirable idea to propose a measure such as we have here today, which will probably help them. Once again, I would like to thank the member who introduced this bill.

On the other hand, let us be clear that what the bill is changing is that people with a seal fishery observation licence will not be able to approach a seal-fishing site closer than one mile, rather than a half-mile. In itself, it does not change much, but it is certainly a step in the right direction.

The real issue is to determine how well we can ensure the safety of our fishers involved in the seal hunt, whether in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, the north Atlantic or the far north. Communities that depend on the income from seal hunting deserve even more support than they will get through this bill. It is a step in the right direction but we really must take it further.

Not all the fishers asked for this bill as the first step. There were really a lot of discussions. The Senate did a study on grey seals and on the fact that their numbers are increasing dramatically. There are 30 times more grey seals now than there were 30 years ago. Their population is growing rapidly, probably because their predators have been eliminated. The region's ecosystem is out of balance, and all the governments involved and the members of this House must do something to restore this balance.

There is still a moratorium on cod fishing; it was once the major source of income for most fishers in the region. However, they still cannot fish for cod in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence. That is very worrisome and many fishers wonder why. Even 20 years after the moratorium was imposed, is the population explosion among grey and harp seals the reason the cod population is not increasing? This question really needs to be asked.

Once again, I will refer to the Senate report. Unfortunately the senators were not able to determine exactly what measures should be taken. They proposed several measures on a trial basis, to see whether the species imbalance problem in the region could be solved. Even after its study, the Senate was unable to make any practical suggestions that everyone could agree on. I hope that we will continue to have a much sounder, more intensive debate on this issue.

However, let us not forget that first nations have been hunting seal for hundreds of years. Depending on the community, European settlers in Canada have been hunting seal for decades or hundreds of years. In my riding, in the Magdalen Islands, the seal hunt adds to people's winter income. There are not very many ways to earn money during this period. In winter, very few industries operate in my region. The tourism industry is in full swing in the summer, but almost non-existent in winter. People cannot fish for groundfish in the dead of winter. The Gulf of St. Lawrence is mostly frozen over and is not accessible. The seal hunt is an alternative. It is a way to earn extra money. That has always been the case in the Magdalen Islands.

That is the case in Newfoundland and the far north, where people try to find revenue where they can. This government should work with the people in my region, who are now being denied employment insurance, which was a source of income for the winter. They are having significant financial difficulty and need a lot more assistance.

If the government really wants to help the people of eastern Canada, it should think about the seasonal industries in that region, particularly seal hunting, which is paired with the groundfish fishery. It would have been worthwhile to commercialize the seal hunt, but nothing was done.

As for European free trade, we should have forced a debate with the Europeans. They wanted to open their market for other commodities to Canada, which would have been a golden opportunity to remedy the fact that the European market closed its doors to seal products. There are even barriers between provinces in Canada. People cannot transport seal products, including oil containing omega-3s, because there are a lot of interprovincial barriers. We should have this debate and help people in eastern Canada earn money in the winter.

This bill helps us keep our fishers safe, but it has to be profitable for fishers to go out on the ice. We can safeguard our fishers all we want, but if there is no market for their products, they will not fish. Fisheries and Oceans Canada allows the hunting of thousands of seals each year, but since it is not profitable, only hundreds are hunted. Licences are useless because the product cannot be marketed.

We must remember that sales of this product grew quickly because of European seal hunts. In the 1950s and 1960s, the Europeans hunted thousands of seals and were more numerous than sealers from eastern Canada. With the resurgence of the issue of cruelty to animals, a hotly debated topic, people hesitate to hunt seals.

I believe that people have good reason to be concerned about this, but it is the reason the Europeans abandoned us and stopped hunting large numbers of seals. Once again, they were the ones who took large numbers of seals, not us. Animal rights activists should be criticizing the Europeans, not us, for seal hunting. We have always believed in sustainable hunting. Unfortunately, the Europeans abandoned us by closing their market. The seal hunt has a bleak economic future because there are no markets for this product. We need to find ways to help the sealers in eastern Canada and the far north market the product, but the bill is silent on that.

Keeping sealers safe is very commendable. Let us work on that. We have to find ways to help them. However, the government closed the marine rescue sub-centre in St. John's, Newfoundland, it wants to close the maritime search and rescue centre in Quebec City, it wants to cut positions at the vessel traffic management centres throughout eastern Canada, and it cut the Canadian Coast Guard's budget. How can we say we are going to improve the safety of our sealers when they do not have the tools they need?

Even if their safety during the seal hunt were guaranteed, we still need to find a market for the product. Unfortunately, the bill before us today does not address these issues. Let us go ahead and improve the safety of our sealers, but let us find the economic tools to help them. That should be the next step.

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

6:50 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to be here today, speaking on Bill C-555, an act respecting the marine mammal regulations, introduced by my hon. colleague from West Nova. Originally, the member for Cardigan was going to speak on this, but he is stuck in a snowstorm blizzard in P.E.I. He is shovelling snow, and he has sealskin cap on as he is doing it. He would love to be here, but I am taking his place.

I would like to thank my hon. colleague for introducing this bill. He is well aware that I and the Liberal Party of Canada will be fully supportive of the Canadian seal hunt and the sealing industry. It is an industry that is so important to so many rural and coastal communities in our country.

The nature of the bill is to increase the safety of all those who are involved in the seal fishery, whether they are the fishers, the observers, or the enforcement officers. The safety of all those involved in the seal hunt must always be the top priority. We have to do everything we can to help those involved in the seal fishery industry and to keep it secure.

We know that, here in Canada, we practise a sustainable and humane seal fishery. In fact, it is one of the best run and monitored seal fisheries in the entire world. The Canadian seal hunt is a tradition that provides so much value to so many rural, northern, and Atlantic coastal communities.

We have to do everything we can to make sure that everyone involved is safe and secure when they are carrying out their livelihoods. The seal hunt on our shores dates back thousands of years and to this day remains such an important part of our history, culture, and economy of communities right across Atlantic Canada, in Quebec, and in the north, as an hon. member mentioned.

Over those thousands of years, many have lost their lives out there, hunting seals. It is usually in the spring, when people are quite far out on the ice. One of the books that I read left a big impression on me. It is called Death On The Ice: The Great Newfoundland Sealing Disaster Of 1914. It is a true story about the Newfoundland and Labradorian men and their sons who were out. They used to go out on the ships and they would be sent out to get the seals. All of the ships got lost, and they were out on the ice in a storm overnight. Many perished during the couple of nights out there, hunting seals.

As I said, many families in rural and remote communities make between $20,000 and $30,000 a year or less. When they can make between $2,000 and $5,000 more for seals, it is big for their families, especially in these rural areas where there is no other income, and especially during that time of year, March and April.

In addition to the economic and cultural importance of the seal industry, seals provide a wide variety of great products, including meat, pelts, and oil, which is very high in omega-3 fatty acids.

Seals are the biggest consumers of fish. They are very competitive, and with the population explosion that we have seen, they are competing with our commercial fishermen for fish in the water. When I go out on the boat with my friends off of Bird Islands in Cape Breton, I can see all of the seals there. They are really cleaning up on the fish.

My friend from Cape Breton, Robert Courtney, is a sealer. He and some of his buddies from Neil's Harbour in northern Cape Breton go sealing. It is a short season, so it is a very serious issue. My colleagues know that they are fishermen and getting seals to make a living. Their livelihood is being hurt by the massive population explosion off our coasts. These seals are eating a lot of fish, and a lot of them carry parasites that go into other fish.

There is quite an imbalance out there, so it is a great thing if we can get a livelihood and cull these seals at the same time. This is one of the reasons why we need to ensure the safest possible hunt every year. We need the government to do more to open markets, because we can sell more of these products. It is a healthy product.

There is a lot of talk and activity from wealthy people, these Hollywood celebrities and others, who live thousands of miles away from our communities. They do not realize or understand how we live in these rural communities. They do not understand how much fish the seals are eating. They know nothing about the Canadian seal hunt or the sealing industry. They prey on people who believe the misinformation in their campaigns. They raise money and use their efforts to try to disrupt the seal industry with their pictures and propaganda.

It is hard to believe the kind of misinformation that these people use, and it is hard to believe that they would ever try to stop our seal hunt.

If they were successful in stopping our sustainable and humane seal hunt, where else would they go? They would then move on to maybe the slaughtering of our cows, chickens, or pigs. It would not stop there. They just do not believe in this balance we have with nature and the nutritious products we get from it.

That is why I wish the government would take these well-funded campaigns of misinformation more seriously and do more to combat them to fight the spread of this misinformation. We should never bow to the pressure from other countries or interest groups when it comes to this humane and sustainable practice that provides jobs and food in a traditional way for so many people. That is also why the EU ban on our Canadian seal products, and the recent WTO ruling in its favour, is particularly troubling. The reason given was public morals. It is so unfortunate that the Conservative government left those discussions to the WTO, when it knew very well that this would happen.

Only two short years ago, the Prime Minister and the fisheries minister went on a trip to China. Before they left, the Prime Minister was speaking to The Globe and Mail and said that he was going to open up the large Chinese market to help our sealing industry. We have not seen that market open. We have not seen any amount of seal products going to that Chinese market.

In fact, much more needs to be done to promote all our seafood products in China and Asia. We need to let our Asian customers know about the importance and quality of our Canadian fish and seafood products, including, of course, our seal products. I was in Taiwan last year on a trade mission. It is big market. They love the way we manage our fisheries and how good our product is. It is a big market for us, and we have to be on it all the time, or others will take it.

It is also sad to see that the Conservative government has let down our sealing industry by not fighting harder for it.

People in the fishery struggle every day. It is very hard to be out there with the elements. They have to ship their product far away to markets. It is a struggle every day, and I commend them for going out in the springtime and being on the ice. Springtime in Montreal or Ottawa is quite different from springtime off Newfoundland or Cape Breton. It is all ice. It is cold out there. It is still as dangerous as ever, but they go out there for the seal hunt.

The hunters and fishers do not need these outside forces tormenting them and endangering their lives. It is a hard living, and every dollar counts. That is why the government needs to do more for Canadian sealers and the seal industry.

I think the private member's bill is a good start, and I commend the hon. member for doing that. However, the bill comes down to safety, which is so important. The safety of our sealers and those involved in the seal hunt has to be the number one concern. I believe that this is a good bill that would help increase the safety of all those involved in the hunt.

I would like to thank my hon. colleague once again for introducing the bill. We will truly miss him when he does not come back to the House in the next term.

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

7 p.m.

Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission B.C.

Conservative

Randy Kamp ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to speak in support of Bill C-555, an act respecting the Marine Mammal Regulations (seal fishery observation licence), both as a concerned member of Parliament and also as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans.

Let me begin by commending the member for West Nova for his initiative with this legislation. The bill is quite short, but the member has demonstrated that one does not have to have a long bill to make an important contribution to Canada.

Doubling the safety zone between seal harvesters and unlicensed observers is a sensible proposition that would help improve the safety of many. Given that the bill received all-party support at second reading and passed committee without amendments, clearly my colleagues agree.

On paper, the bill is about protecting seal harvesters from unlicensed observers who may disrupt the seal hunt and put sealers' safety at risk, but on a deeper level the bill is also an opportunity for the House to validate once again the legitimacy of the seal harvest. It is humane, sustainable, and well-regulated, and seal harvesters deserve to carry out their work without being harassed and endangered.

In my time today I would like to begin by putting the issue of the safety of seal harvesters into context.

Harvesting seals has never been for the faint of heart. In the 19th century, for example, sealers ran the risk of having their wooden steamships wedged in the ice while chasing seals. In these conditions the mere movement of the ice could crush the hull. Meanwhile, harvesters working away from the ship could have easily been stranded as well. It would be prudent here to remember the men who were lost in the 1914 sealing disaster on the SS Newfoundland and SS Southern Cross.

In our modern era, better vessel designs and more sophisticated technology have helped protect ships from the ravages of ice, although for the sealers themselves, the job has become more dangerous in some new ways.

Hundreds of years ago, sealers only had to contend with the forces of mother nature. If the ice shifted or cracked beneath their feet, it was largely outside their control. Today, sealers have to be mindful not only of the dynamic environment, but also of onlookers who seek to disrupt their work.

I respect the rights of Canadians to protest the seal harvest even if I do not agree with threatening the livelihoods of hard-working Canadians from rural, coastal, and aboriginal communities. When such dissent puts the very lives of harvesters at risk, we as elected officials must take action.

If a protest ship gets too close to harvesters, it can crack and break up ice flows. Even a mild shift in the ice can disrupt the balance or concentration of a seal harvester. Given that almost all harvesters are using high-powered rifles or shotguns, the result could be fatal.

We have a responsibility to our constituents and to Canadians to ensure that they are able to provide for their families in a safe and secure work environment. Whether they work in an office, in a factory, on a boat, or anywhere else, Canadians deserve to know that all safety risks are at a minimum.

According to existing regulations, unlicensed observers must stay at least one-half nautical mile away from seal harvesters. This legislation proposes to double the distance to a full nautical mile. That would result in a buffer of 6,000 feet, or about 1,800 metres. This extra distance would ensure the integrity of the ice under the sealer's feet and give DFO enforcement personnel more time to react if a protest vessel breaches the distance requirement. This increased buffer would give additional assurance to sealers that DFO and the Coast Guard will be able to intervene if necessary to protect sealers whose safety may be put at risk by such reckless action.

Our seal harvest is humane, sustainable, and well-regulated. Our sealers are trained in the use of the three-step process for humanely dispatching a seal. Sustainability is assured thanks to thorough regulations and good stock management. In fact, the population of the harp seal has more than tripled in size since the early 1970s and the grey seal population has increased by 30 times. Some would say that we have managed the population too well, with the seal population now having a major effect on fish mortality in Atlantic Canada.

The government thoroughly monitors the industry's compliance with regulations to ensure that the harvest continues to meet these five standards.

We recognize that misinformation continues to circulate, provided by radical groups committed to the abolition of this traditional seal hunt. This is particularly true around the type of seals that are harvested. It has been more than 30 years since Canada allowed the commercial harvest of unweaned harp seals, often referred to as whitecoat seals, and young hooded seals, known as bluebacks. However, some critics continue to use outdated photos to malign the nature of today's harvest and to market their campaign against the industry.

Despite the misinformation, Canada seal products are in demand around the world. Between 2005 and 2011, Canada exported $70 million worth of seal pelts, value added garments and edible seal products, such as oil and meat, to more than 35 countries.

There is no denying, however, that the European Union's ban on the import and sale of seal products and other bans which followed it have hurt this proud and historic industry. That is why our government has been relentless in its effort to end this ban, and last fall we had a major breakthrough.

Members may recall the ban exempted certain types of seal products, including those related to indigenous hunts. This is an important recognition of the social, cultural and economic value of the seal hunt to Inuit and aboriginal communities.

However, it was never entirely clear how this exemption would work. For example, in some cases, Inuit rely on suppliers in southern Canada to support them. Some thought the involvement of non-indigenous people should disqualify these products from the exemption.

In October, Canada and the European Union announced a joint statement regarding the operationalization of the indigenous exemption. In includes a provision to allow non-indigenous Canadians and groups to process, manufacture and market seal products harvested by indigenous Canadians. This is good news for Inuit and aboriginal seal harvesters, for their partners and for greater future market access in Europe.

In the meantime, our government continues to vigorously defend the commercial seal industry as humane, sustainable and well-regulated. By approving the bill, the House can complement our government's efforts.

To summarize, the bill demonstrates to both sealers and our trading partners that Canada believes in the legitimacy of the seal harvest. On a practical level, it helps to protect the safety of seal harvesters while they are at work.

An act respecting the marine mammal regulations is strong legislation that received all-party support at second reading, and it deserves the full support of this House at third reading.

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

7:10 p.m.

NDP

Ryan Cleary NDP St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL

Mr. Speaker, I begin this speech on one of the most controversial of Canadian topics, the seal hunt, with one of the country's most controversial commentators, Don Cherry.

Don Cherry, who has made his career on and around the ice, recently took a shot at the Newfoundland and Labrador ice industry, our seal hunt. It was a Saturday night earlier this month on Hockey Night in Canada. Don Cherry was doing his usual Coach's Corner, with his CBC sidekick, Ron MacLean. MacLean was actually in St. John's, Newfoundland, for Rogers Hometown Hockey, and he mentioned during the segment how he had eaten a seal burger for lunch that day. The seal burger was prepared by Chef Todd Perrin of Mallard Cottage in Quidi Vidi Village in east end St. John's, one of our finest restaurants. Indeed, we have some of the finest restaurants in Canada.

Don Cherry's immediate reaction to the mention of a seal burger was disgust. That is what I saw in his face. “Imagine eating a baby seal”, Cherry said, before questioning whether McLean was a savage or a barbarian. It was hard to tell whether Don Cherry was serious, or whether he was just ribbing MacLean, which is what he often does. However, the immediate reaction in Newfoundland and Labrador to Don Cherry's comments was not good. To slight the seal hunt is to slight Newfoundland and Labrador, more so than any other slight, from “Newfie” on down. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians take any criticism of the seal hunt as a direct personal attack, not just against us and who we are as a people, but also against our forefathers and our very outpoured souls. To attack the seal hunt is to attack Newfoundland and Labrador. To attack the seal hunt is to poke the bear that is the fighting Newfoundlander. One does not joke about the seal hunt. We are not ready for that yet. The constant attacks on the hunt have left a wound that is still much too raw. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are sensitive, and for good reason.

In the words of Bernie Halloran, the owner of a small outerwear shop in downtown St. John's that has been selling seal products for 30 years, sealing is the most bullied industry on the planet. Bernie Halloran said that in a letter he wrote to Don Cherry.

Don Cherry later issued what was more of a clarification than an apology. He said he had no problem with people who hunt seals and no problem with seal meat, but also said, “I do however find it very unusual, in my world, that a person would go into a restaurant and order a seal burger for lunch.” That may be unusual to Don Cherry in Don Cherry's world, but it is not unusual in my world. Flipper pie is a true Newfoundland and Labrador delicacy, and the best meat by far that I have ever eaten is seal tenderloin fried on a cast iron pan with butter, salt, and pepper and left for 15 minutes. It is heaven on a plate.

Don Cherry may know hockey, but he does not know Newfoundland and Labrador. He does not know our people. He does not know our cultural industry. At what point did Don Cherry become soft? To quote a constituent, “Go buy Rock 'Em Sock 'Em 97, where grown men punch the face off each other for two hours”. Is that not barbaric?

To quote another Newfoundlander, “I wonder what the wings and ribs at Don Cherry's restaurant are made of?” Is that not hypocritical: beef, chicken, seal? The sealing industry has been vilified.

To once again quote Bernie Halloran, owner of that seal shop in downtown St. John's, “...my opinion, if sealing is wrong, the whole world is wrong”.

That brings us to the bill before the House today. Her Majesty's official opposition, the New Democratic Party of Canada, supports Bill C-555, the seal fishery observation licence.

This bill would increase the distance that an unofficial observer—a seal protestor, for example—must keep from sealing. Right now, it is against the law for an unofficial observer to come within a half nautical mile of the hunt. Bill C-555 would increase that buffer zone to a full nautical mile. It would increase from a half nautical mile to a full nautical mile.

When I spoke on this bill in March 2014, almost a year ago, I called this bill a charade, to make it appear that the Conservative government is actually doing something for the hunt, for sealing. This bill is a sham, to make it appear that the government is defending the seal hunt. It is an illusion, to make it appear that the government is a champion of the seal hunt.

Changing the distance that unofficial seal hunt observers can approach the hunt from a half mile to a full nautical mile means absolutely nothing when the half mile zone that is there now is not enforced.

Sealers on the ground in my province of Newfoundland and Labrador say that this is a good idea, but they do not see how it would change anything. The east coast seal hunt has seen the biggest collapse of seal markets in its history under the Conservative government. That is a fact.

Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Taiwan, the European Union, and all of its member countries have banned the importation of Canadian seal products while the Conservative government has sat idly by, touting its undying support, for all the good it has done.

The anti-seal hunt groups have been very effective, incredibly effective, in pounding our industry. I recently travelled to Taiwan with a parliamentary delegation. I was curious to ask the Taiwanese first hand why they banned Canadian seal products in 2013, because that is the way it was sold over here: yet another country has lined up against the Canadian seal hunt.

However, what I learned was that the Taiwanese ban on the export or sale of marine mammal products had solely to do with Japanese whaling and the Japanese dolphin hunt. It had nothing to do with Canadian seal products. The seal hunt is not an issue in Taiwan. This is a country where people eat barbequed squid on a stick. Taiwan and Asian countries like it are seafood meccas.

The Conservative government has to do more to educate people around the world about our sustainable and humane seal hunt. The government is not doing enough to spread the word. The Taiwanese quote Greenpeace and the International Fund for Animal Welfare as gospel, as the last word on the seal hunt, when they should not be quoted at all.

To wrap up, my party supports this bill on extending the seal fishery observation licence, but that will not change a thing with the hunt. It will not reopen closed markets. It will not lift the ban on seal products in so many countries around the world. This bill will not stop people like Don Cherry from describing those who eat seal burgers as barbarians or savages. Joking or not, such comments do nothing to promote our sealing industry. The comments sting.

I just attended the 10-day Mount Pearl Frosty Festival in my riding of St. John's South—Mount Pearl. Mount Pearl is a city alongside St. John's, a city that I describe as a land-locked outport. People there are first-, second-, or third-generation baymen. Baymen means that they come from rural Newfoundland and Labrador, meaning sealing is in their blood.

The seal fashion that I took in during the Frosty Festival—the sealskin boots, jackets, and coats, mostly on the women—was absolutely lovely. Besides sending a note to Don Cherry, Bernie Halloran of St. John's mailed him three seal ties, including a blue one in memory of Don Cherry's late dog, Blue. How nice was that? That is who we are.

The best thing that could happen to the seal hunt is if someone like Don Cherry, with his unique fashion sense, embraced our industry, embraced our fine fashion sense and melded it with his own.

Don Cherry in a sealskin jacket and tie would get two minutes for looking so good.

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

7:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

Is the House ready for the question?

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

7:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

7:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

7:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Marine Mammal RegulationsPrivate Members' Business

7:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

I declare the motion carried.

(Motion agreed to)

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Intergovernmental AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:20 p.m.

Liberal

Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to try to get clarification to a question I asked not so long ago involving infrastructure and in particular housing.

At that time I asked for the government's response to the information that close to 5,000 seniors in the city of Winnipeg and in the province of Manitoba were going to lose their housing because of the government's failure—in fact, its deliberate choice—not to renew housing agreements and sustain subsidies. Many of these house seniors in particular in Manitoba. The response I got back was, “Don't worry; everything is okay. We are renewing housing agreements.” Those housing agreements do not, will not, and have not sustained or secured those seniors' future. In fact, it has all been put at risk, and that is wrong.

My question also talked about the fact that infrastructure dollars, which amounted to $2 billion just a few years ago, have been reduced to about $210 million over the last calendar year. This constitutes a 90% cut to infrastructure spending in this country, in particular for municipalities.

I was on a television panel with the Parliamentary Secretary for Infrastructure and Communities, who said, “No, that's not true. Money is being delivered.” However, I was on that panel with six other mayors across Canada—the mayors of Vancouver, Calgary, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal, and Mississauga—and they all confirmed that their infrastructure allotment from the federal government last year was zero dollars. In fact, the parliamentary secretary's own riding, which contains the city of Kitchener, not only received zero dollars in 2014 but also received zero dollars in 2013 as well, and because of the delay in the budget, it is now in a position to get zero dollars this year. The government is missing in action.

As I said, the response I got back from the minister of social development at the time was that a federal project in a part of my riding that I used to represent on city council went over budget. Somehow she blamed a local councillor for a federal program going over budget when it was her department that allocated the money and signed off on the budget allocation. How that happened is beyond me. Her department spends money, and I get blamed because her department does not do due diligence and check its books. That is a new kind of accountability model, I guess, in Canada: the federal government chooses how to spend the money and then blames local politicians when things go wrong, as opposed to taking responsibility.

On the infrastructure file, it is absolutely clear that the current government has cut infrastructure spending for municipalities by 90% this year. It was $2 billion two years ago and it is $210 million this year. While the Conservatives talk about an extended program over 10 years and the fact that it is the largest in Canada, what they do not explain to Canadians is that it is back-end loaded, which means that there was no money last year and, because the budget has been delayed even as city councils across the country are setting their own budgets, there is no money this year. When we couple that with the fact that they have pulled out of housing agreements across this country, people in Winnipeg and Toronto are looking at waiting lists that are growing longer and repair bills that are getting higher, and they do not have a federal government as a partner.

My question is a very simple one. Will the government commit to renewing the housing agreements and the subsidies for people in Manitoba and will it increase infrastructure spending in this year's budget?

Intergovernmental AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:20 p.m.

Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley Nova Scotia

Conservative

Scott Armstrong ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister of Labour

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Trinity—Spadina is calling for the government to both renew long-term social housing agreements and provide new funding for housing, and I am pleased to explain our position on both of these matters.

The social housing agreements to which the hon. member referred were signed many years ago, in some cases close to 50 years ago. The end date has been known since those agreements were signed and typically coincides with the final payout of the mortgages on these properties. As I noted in the House some time ago, Canadians understand that when their mortgage expires they stop paying the bank.

That is essentially what is happening here. As the agreements end and as they mature, housing providers will find themselves with a valuable real estate asset and reduced operating expenses that can be used to continue to offer affordable housing to the clients. The fact is that most non-profit co-operative housing projects are expected to be financially viable when the agreements come to an end and the federal subsidies stop.

For those who may experience difficulty, CMHC has been actively working with them to help them prepare for the end of these operating agreements. For example, CMHC's affordable housing centre offers a range of tools to assist housing providers, such as a project viability calculator, capital planning tools, and project profiles. Our government has also created more flexibility in some housing programs administered by CMHC to give eligible housing providers better access to funding for capital repairs and renovations.

Hon. members will recall that in economic action plan 2009, we provided more than $1 billion to renovate and retrofit existing social housing so it could continue to be available for Canadian individuals and families in need. Close to 15,000 social housing projects were completed across Canada, everything from replacing roofs and windows to upgrading plumbing and electrical systems.

As for new funding for housing, I would remind the hon. member that economic action plan 2013 renewed the investment in affordable housing for five years, with an additional federal funding of $1.25 billion. This brings the total federal commitment under this initiative to close to $2 billion over the previous eight years.

This funding is delivered and cost-matched by the provinces and territories, which are best positioned to identify and address local housing needs. Depending on their priorities, provinces and territories can also opt to use the investment in affordable housing funds to support projects whose operating agreements have matured, or for other purposes such as new construction or renovation projects, shelter allowances, or assistance toward home ownership.

I am pleased to advise the hon. member that the renewal agreements have now been signed with almost all provinces and territories. The governments of Canada and Ontario, for example, signed a renewal agreement last August that provides for a joint investment of more than $800 million over five years.

The investment in affordable housing is doing exactly what the hon. member has asked for. It is reducing the number of Canadians in housing need. Looking specifically at Ontario, our government has invested some $5.7 billion in housing in that province since 2006. This includes more than $240 million under the investment in affordable housing—funding that means almost 18,000 households in that province are no longer in housing need.

However, there is more to be done. That is why we have renewed the investment in affordable housing and why, again this year, our government will continue to invest about $2 billion in housing across Canada.

Make no mistake: action is being taken. Working with the provinces and territories, we are ensuring that the housing needs of Canadians are being met.

Intergovernmental AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:25 p.m.

Liberal

Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON

Mr. Speaker, what the member opposite has just described is the status quo. The status quo is failing, and it is failing everywhere across this country.

The agreement the member just spoke to, the $800 million renewal, in Toronto means that 60 new units of housing will be built this year, and 60 units a year for the next five years. We have a waiting list of 92,000 families waiting for housing. What the member opposite has just described to us is effectively a 1,500-year wait list. While that wait list is not being met by the current government's inaction and support of the status quo, the idea that the mortgage will run out and suddenly they will be able to subsidize their neighbour with their rent is ridiculous. That money is now needed for repairs for the housing that he himself describes as 50 to 60 years old. The math just does not add up.

The question is very clear. Is the government going to renew the subsidy agreements? Are they going to be renewed? If they are not going to be renewed, what does the member tell the 5,000 seniors in Winnipeg who are facing eviction because of his government's policies?

Intergovernmental AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

February 17th, 2015 / 7:25 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

Mr. Speaker, as I said, Canadians understand that when the mortgage is paid off, they stop paying the bank. These agreements are coming to an end.

We are continuing to invest large sums of money in housing across the country. We are working with our provincial and territorial partners to ensure they have the resources necessary to continue to deliver housing to the most needy across Canada. We have signed agreements with almost every provincial and territorial government in the country. We are getting the job done when it comes to housing, when it comes to infrastructure, when it comes to supporting Canadians to get the shelter they need, the most in need Canadians.

What would not help them is the Liberal policy to increase taxes, implement a carbon tax, which would kill jobs and force more Canadians into poverty and which would increase the need for housing across Canada. That is a plan that will not work.

Intergovernmental AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7:31 p.m.)