Jeff Watson

[Canadian Arab Federation, February 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Arab Federation recently circulated videos from banned terrorist organizations, such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, called Israel a “racist state”, and attacked a member of the House because of his wife's involvement in the Jewish community.

The Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism has said that extreme groups like CAF should not expect to receive taxpayer subsidies, but the Liberal Party appears to disagree. The Liberal member of Parliament for Willowdale has said that taxpayers should fund extreme groups like CAF.

What is the government's position on whether such groups should receive taxpayer support?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2009, February 9th, 2009]

We wanted you to be the leader.

[Infrastructure, January 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remind the House of our government's commitment to stimulating economic growth and investing in Canada's core infrastructure.

By expanding and accelerating our infrastructure investments, we will provide almost $12 billion additional stimulus for our economy, above and beyond our $33 billion building Canada plan.

Through Canada's economic action plan, we will take immediate action to repair vital bridges, like the Peace Bridge in Fort Erie and the Champlain Bridge in Montreal, and work with our provincial colleagues to twin parts of the Trans-Canada Highway.

These actions will provide long term safety benefits and reduce traffic congestion. More important, though, our actions are putting Canadians to work, helping our communities and positioning Canada's economy for a stronger future.

The government continues to work with all levels of government to get these projects moving and strengthen our economy.

[Opposition Coalition Proposal, December 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, on October 14, Canadians spoke with their votes. This government under this Prime Minister was re-elected with a clear and stronger mandate to address the global economic crisis.

Canadians rejected the Liberals, handing them their worst share of the vote since Confederation. Canadians rejected the NDP and its job-killing economics. Both the NDP and the Liberals rejected a coalition on the campaign trail.

Now they want to connive, aided and abetted by the separatist Bloc, to overturn the results of an election held only seven weeks ago. They want to impose a prime minister rejected by the people four to one and a coalition for which nobody voted. Worse still, the Liberals and the NDP will give the Bloc a separatist veto on all spending and national decisions.

We will use every legal means possible to keep the separatists out of power and keep Canada moving forward. This Conservative government is standing up for Canada.

[Automotive Industry, November 27th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, a global credit crunch, beginning in the U.S., has created a serious cyclical problem for global automakers. For the Detroit 3, this adds to the serious structural problems they were already facing.

This government takes seriously its responsibilities to workers and their families, the communities that rely on this industry and the Canadian taxpayers.

Building on our auto action plan and the auto innovation fund, with first funding in Windsor to reopen the Ford Essex Engine Plant, our government has worked in bipartisan fashion with the Government of Ontario, approaching industry and U.S. officials, exploring options for support during this current crisis. Our auto caucus has also extended an invitation to meet with the CAW who must be part of the solution.

It is important to note that the Detroit 3 have yet to define their ask to this government, to present a detailed plan to complete their restructuring and explain how government support would be applied. When industry fulfills these, we will do our due diligence.

In tough economic times, we are acting responsibly for the auto industry.

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, November 26th, 2008]

Madam Speaker, I listened very carefully to the member's speech. I congratulate him on his recent election to Parliament. I am sure he is breathing a heavy sigh of relief that he was not in the last Parliament when his leader would have forced him to vote against the ecotrust fund, the $1.5 billion that this government set aside. The share for Ontario was $586 million, which was for the stated purposes of retiring the coal-fired generation plant in Nanticoke as well as for establishing some infrastructure for the east-west power grid.

The member is threatening to vote against the throne speech because Mr. McGuinty has failed to act on money we have delivered. Can he explain that to the House?

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, November 26th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, let me congratulate my colleague on his successful re-election to the House, now over 15 years representing the good folks in Cariboo country back in British Columbia.

I am sure he is sitting here thinking that over the last couple of years particularly he is glad that he is on this side of the House rather than being on the Liberal side of the House. The Liberals clambered for the return of money for the softwood lumber mills and then they voted against the softwood lumber agreement that brought that money home. They clambered for millions for the pine beetle issue and then they voted against it on that side of the House. They clambered for a long term strategy for the forestry industry and then they were forced to vote against those types of things, or they clambered for more money for the port of Vancouver and then voted against it.

Can the member talk to us a little bit about what the future looks like for British Columbia because of the measures of the government?

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, November 25th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my neighbour and colleague on his re-election.

I appreciate the question, but I just want to be clear for the record. I think the member said that the throne speech refers to more free trade agreements. I am going to quote page 8 of the throne speech where it says, “New trade agreements will be pursued in Asia and the Americas”. It did not specifically say what type of agreements.

To understand the philosophy of this government, there are two important things. I have heard the Prime Minister speak about two very important things with respect to the auto industry. The first is that we need to find ways to help the industry be more competitive against the rest of the world. We started with our auto action plan in that regard. The auto action plan proposes a number of initiatives, including helping the industry retool to produce products that are extremely competitive not only in North America but also globally.

The second thing I have heard the Prime Minister say is very important is that deals are not going to be signed that are not going to guarantee us some access. We bring the issue of South Korean negotiations into this one because this is an important question. Everybody says, “These guys have a signed agreement and it is going to sell the industry out”. The Prime Minister has been clear. First, we have no agreement in principle and the precise reason is that in the negotiations we do not yet have guarantees that we are going to get into their market. We have to have proven demonstrable access to their market before we will conclude agreements. That is the wise position to take. We have not been in a rush to conclude something that is necessarily going to expose our industries to further disadvantage. We want access to markets.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, November 25th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that some of these issues have been addressed in some amount of detail in previous throne speeches. What we are talking about is the throne speech that is in front of us today which lays out five important pillars and some areas that are significant not only for my home province of Ontario, but for the province of Quebec as well.

The Prime Minister has said very clearly that we are prepared to take a number of incredibly important steps. One of the specifics we have talked about is the additional funding for the aerospace industry. I know that is an important industry not only in my province of Ontario, Manitoba and others, but also in Quebec.

The goal of the Prime Minister has been very clear. We want to see working families back at work. We may not always agree on every single item, but I think we are going to have some very productive discussions about the steps moving forward. Those will come in the debates following the throne speech. I ask my colleague opposite to look at the broad parameters that have been laid out and agree with the government on the general direction.

We want to reform the global financing system. We want to ensure sound budgeting while we address a global economic crisis. We are going to work hard to secure jobs for families and communities. We are going to make our government more effective. Rather than batten down the hatches of protectionism, we instead will burst open further markets for our goods so that we are not overly reliant on one market to the south of us.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, November 25th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, in addressing the last question first, it is important that we take a measure of the House to see whether or not we agree on the priorities. I could sit here and speculate, but I think we all agree on what the five pillars are moving forward and what some of the potential solutions are. I think it is important for members to stand in their places and be counted on whether or not they agree with this particular issue. If they have a differing opinion, let them speak on that.

With respect to the automotive industry, this was a very significant investment decision. To give a little bit of the history on this, the auto action plan was announced in February and the budget which came out very shortly after that put the funds aside. Notwithstanding the opposition of some parties in the House and one party that did not vote on it, we did get those funds approved and set aside. That is approved money for the purpose of this investment.

We had to wait for Ford to weigh in, in terms of its fiscal situation coming out of the second quarter, on whether it could still go ahead with the investment. Ford did agree after $15 billion in write-downs in the second quarter that it was still on track to make the investment.

As I understand it, we are now at the phase of talking about signing contracts and moving that particular investment into reality. The budgets have already been set aside. It is not something we are going to have to try to nail down. That is a very important announcement for our region.

With respect to the infrastructure investments approved in two consecutive budgets, we had federal-provincial agreements to sign. I think we are getting through that type of stuff. We have heard the minister say that we are really going to push in terms of green lighting the decision to get investments out the door.