Debates of Dec. 7th, 2010

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, women, like all Canadians, benefit from this government's policies. We are not spending only in the areas mentioned by the Leader of the Opposition; we are also spending on health and education. We are also spending to reduce taxes and to provide benefits to families. All of these programs are important to Canadian women.

Michael Ignatieff Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, but there is nothing for family caregivers.

What we are hearing across the country is that emergency rooms are jammed, hospital waiting lists are growing longer and families cannot get care in the home. Home care can relieve the pressure on hospital waiting lists, but instead of acting, the government is investing in prisons, planes and corporate tax breaks.

Why does the Prime Minister not understand that these priorities are actively hurting the Canadian health care system?

Michael Ignatieff Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, if we want to help Canadian families, they need help with home care. The Liberal home care plan would provide home care for 600,000 Canadian families. It would reduce pressure on hospital waiting lists. Instead, the government's priorities are clear: prisons, planes and corporate tax breaks.

Why can the government not understand that these priorities are not the priorities of Canadian families?

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the priorities of this government, beyond national defence and criminal justice, are pretty obvious. It is preserving jobs; it is making sure Canadian families do not pay taxes that are too high; and it is making sure that we fully fund transfers for health and education to the provinces, so that unlike in the previous government, the health care system of this country can move forward.

Lise Zarac LaSalle—Émard, QC

Mr. Speaker, in Cancun, as in Copenhagen, there is no leadership from this government. The report by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development confirms this: the Conservatives' environmental record is terrible. Meanwhile, the provinces are working proactively to repair the damage the Conservatives have done to our international reputation.

Why should Quebec and the other provinces have to do the federal government's work? Why are the Conservatives abandoning their role and holding Canada back, when the rest of the world is moving forward?

Chuck Strahl Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, of course, nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, we are working closely together across a whole of government approach on addressing environmental issues.

We welcome the commissioner's report. We of course are working to address those concerns that were raised. We welcome his suggestions. In fact, we are already taking action on preventing and preparing for environmental emergencies, which is something that he highlighted, as well as strengthening our water monitoring program and investing in climate change adaptation. Those recommendations are welcome and they are consistent with what the government is already doing.

Joyce Murray Vancouver Quadra, BC

Mr. Speaker, the government's measly words on climate change mean nothing. Its messaging is all to distract Canadians from a woeful lack of leadership. It is all part of a climate change con job.

Today the environment commissioner confirmed that the Conservatives have no plan. They weakened their emissions targets, but they have no plan to achieve even that. The part-time minister scolds other countries making real reductions, to hide that he has no plan.

Why is the Prime Minister trying to con Canadians? When will he stop the deceit on climate change?

Chuck Strahl Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where the member is coming from. In fact, it was our government that helped to negotiate the Copenhagen accord.

We have been working closely with the Obama administration. We have harmonized our targets with the United States. We have introduced continental tailpipe emission standards for vehicles. We have established biofuel content regulations. We have introduced national waste water regulations. We have introduced regulations to phase out coal-fired electrical plants. We have expanded our national parks, and yesterday we created the Lancaster Sound park.

We continue to work for the environment on behalf of all Canadians.

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, Quebec announced that it had reduced greenhouse gas emissions to below 1990 levels, but the Canadian government is going in the opposite direction by speaking out against Kyoto renewal and doing whatever it can to interfere with international climate change initiatives.

Does the Prime Minister realize that, by refusing to recognize efforts made by Quebec and Quebec businesses, such as aluminum smelters, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, Canada is penalizing Quebec and preventing it from moving forward?

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I know that the Bloc likes the Kyoto protocol, but the truth is that two-thirds of global emissions are not covered by the Kyoto protocol. That is why we negotiated the Copenhagen agreement as a step toward our goal of having a binding greenhouse gas regulation system for all of the world's major emitters.

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, the C.D. Howe Institute reached the same conclusion in a report stating that the government's wait-and-see attitude toward climate change will put us so far behind technologically that it will cost us dearly in the long run.

Does the Prime Minister realize that his single-minded focus on the interests of oil companies is preventing him from recognizing Quebec's and Canada's interests with respect to climate change?

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, Canada's energy sector capacity—including all sources of energy—is important to our country in terms of climate change. We believe this is a serious problem. That is why we are investing in technology. We are taking action with respect to technology and adaptation, and we are working with our international partners to reach an effective global agreement.

Paule Brunelle Trois-Rivières, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources seems to be unaware that it is possible to strike a balance between environmental protection and economic development. By going to Chicago to lobby for dirty oil from the oil sands, he has clearly shown that he is on the oil companies' side.

In light of Canada's poor performance in the battle against climate change, should the Minister of Natural Resources not be concentrating his efforts on reducing greenhouse gas emissions rather than on increasing the production and export of oil from the oil sands?