House of Commons Hansard #59 of the 38th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was plan.
Foreign AffairsOral Question Period
The Speaker
I did not hear all that the hon. member for Elmwood--Transcona said but I think one of the words sounded out of order to me if I heard it right. The hon. member is an experienced member. If he said something out of order, he will want to retract it.
Bill Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, anything I said I have heard said before and I never heard it ruled out of order. Some of the things the Prime Minister said about Syria should be ruled out of order and he should get up and retract those things.
Paul Martin LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, we are talking about a very important aspect of Canadian foreign policy, one in which the government has been very clear and one in which I have been very clear.
If in speaking ironically about the fact that the Syrian's believe that they are there to maintain the peace and explosions of that kind occur, then that is not maintaining the peace. If hon. members have difficulty understanding that, then let me again repeat the Canadian government's position, the position that we have had from the very beginning. We support the United Nations resolution. Syria should withdraw from Lebanon.
Bill Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, there have been a number of occasions on which the Prime Minister sent the Minister of Foreign Affairs in various incarnations outside to explain himself and to retract what he had to say, most of the time when he was saying the right thing.
Why does the Prime Minister not apply a little of his own discipline to himself, do what he often asks the Minister of Foreign Affairs to do when he says things that are contrary to government policy, and retract what he had to say about Syria being in Lebanon to keep the peace?
Paul Martin LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I have explained the Canadian government's position today. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has explained it on a number of occasions. I really do not believe that on an important issue like this the opposition should play politics. If I was misunderstood, then I was misunderstood, and that is unfortunate, but I have now clarified it unequivocally.
Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB
No, Mr. Speaker, he was not misunderstood. He misspoke. What we are seeing here is a Prime Minister who is incapable of acknowledging an error and apologizing and retracting.
The Prime Minister made an enormous diplomatic faux pas when he effectively endorsed the illegal Syrian occupation of Lebanon. He insulted hundreds of thousands of Lebanese Canadians in the process.
Why will he not save face and correct the record by retracting that terribly irresponsible remark?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, I was in the Middle East all last week and I want everyone to know that the Prime Minister supported me in my work in every one of the jurisdictions I visited. I spoke with the Prime Minister throughout that week and he expressed to me his satisfaction with the messages I was passing on. The Prime Minister and I are singing from exactly the same hymn book on this issue.
Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is becoming a walking embarrassment. He is the Prime Minister who found a democratic opposition in the Chinese parliament. Now he has found that the illegal Syrian occupation of Lebanon, which is an impediment and a threat to peace and may indeed be tied to the assassination of Prime Minister Hariri, is there to guard the peace.
It was “to keep the peace”, “pour garder la paix” as he just said in French.
Will the Prime Minister simply stand up and show a modicum of humility and retract?
Paul Martin LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, we have now heard the three opposition parties speak out very strongly in favour of positions that have been taken by the Minister of Foreign Affairs. We have now heard the three opposition parties speak highly of his work in the Middle East last week.
I just want to say to the three opposition parties that we on this side of the House are very proud of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. We are very proud of the work that he did last week. I want to thank the House for this acknowledgement of everything that he has done.
Monte Solberg Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, I wonder how proud the Minister of Foreign Affairs is of the Prime Minister. Not very, I would say.
This week it was foundations. In the past it has been rusty submarines, the HRDC boondoggle, the sponsorship disaster and the gift that keeps on taking, the long gun registry.
While government spending is up 40% since 1997, Canadians have seen their take home pay frozen for well over a decade. Canadians are not any better off than they were 12 years ago.
Will the government commit to slashing waste so that Canadians can keep more of their paycheques?
John McKay LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact, Canada has had an enviable fiscal and financial record in the last number of years. It has, over the last seven years in which we have run surpluses, paid down significant sums of debt, $61 billion. The debt to GDP has been reduced to something in the order of 40%, interest rates are around 2.2% and inflation is within the band of 1% to 3%, all of which puts enormous sums of money back in the hands of Canadians where it is deserved.
Monte Solberg Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, that is the difference between my party and the Liberal party. It is concerned about how well the bureaucracy is doing. My party is concerned about how well Canadians are doing.
It is time to show Canadians a little respect. They work really hard to look after themselves and their families and they really do not appreciate it when such a big chunk of their taxes goes to pay for the lastest Liberal pipe dream.
Instead of hiding billions of dollars in foundations and buying Russian hot air or hiring thousands of people to register long guns in the firearms registry, when will the minister give Canadians--
FinanceOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance.
John McKay LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member seems to have a short term memory loss. He fails to appreciate that over the last five years we have had a $100 billion in tax cuts. During that period of time all the thresholds have been raised and all the percentages have been lowered. We now have, vis-à-vis the United States, something of a corporate tax advantage. All of that has been accomplished while paying down debt and lowering interest rates, all of which are significant accomplishments and possibly, just possibly, that is why Canadians re-elected this government.
Francine Lalonde Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, the House of Commons voted down a bill separating International Trade from the Department of Foreign Affairs. However, yesterday, the Minister for International Trade confirmed that these two sectors would continue to operate independently of one another, even though the government did not obtain Parliament's consent.
Does the Prime Minister, who doubtless wrote the order-in-council, intend to upbraid his minister, whose shameful and irresponsible comments demonstrate an intolerable disregard for the decisions of this House?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, today, my colleague, the Minister for International Trade is attending a federal-provincial conference on the very topic of international trade. I can assure the hon. member for La Pointe-de-l'Île that what my colleague was trying to say, as am I, is that, after the vote, we will continue to do our job promoting both the interests and values of Canadians in terms of international trade and foreign policy. We will continue to work in the best interests of Canadians.
Francine Lalonde Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Mr. Speaker, the malady of thinking one thing and saying another is catching. The minister's comments show a deep disregard for Parliament's decisions. The government must recognize that it made presumptions about the House's intentions and that it must now review the order-in-council dividing the department in two.
When will the members of this government finally understand that they cannot govern contrary to the decisions of this House?
Tony Valeri LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Quebec Minister of the Environment is categorical about Kyoto. There is no way Quebec will pay the bill for provinces such as Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario. Thomas Mulcair also said that the bilateral agreement between Quebec and Ottawa ought to recognize Quebec's efforts in the past.
In order to save Quebeckers from paying for other people's pollution, is the Minister of the Environment prepared to conclude a bilateral agreement that will recognize Quebec, because of its excellent record, as being much better placed than Ottawa to manage the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions on its territory?
Stéphane Dion LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, within our plan on greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, there will be bilateral agreements with each of the provinces, which will take each province's situation into account.
I will consider it a great pleasure to work with my Quebec counterpart to reach the best agreement for Quebec, as it will be to work with my counterpart from Alberta and my counterpart from Manitoba, and all together, we will make a national effort.
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
Mr. Speaker, we wonder what plan he is talking about in relation to the Kyoto Protocol, because the minister's plan is virtual.
The Minister of the Environment has finally admitted that Quebec, which has invested heavily in hydroelectricity, needs to make less of a pollution-reduction effort than provinces which produce more pollution.
After this first step, can the Minister of the Environment follow this reasoning to its conclusion and unconditionally apply polluter-pay principle, give up on 2010 as the point of departure and conclude a bilateral agreement that recognizes all of Quebec's efforts since 1990?
Stéphane Dion LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, the opposition continues to suggest that there is no plan for Kyoto. There has been a plan since 2002. They need to read it, if they are not familiar with it.
I can report that one of the results of this plan is that, according to the International Energy Agency, Canada ranks third in the world in improving energy efficiency, ahead of a great many countries including the United States, Great Britain, Japan and others.
One reason we have achieved this is because of the 2002 plan, which has resulted in the economy's growing twice as fast as emissions. That is a start, and we shall go further.
Bob Mills Conservative Red Deer, AB
Mr. Speaker, we are starting to find out where large chunks of the government money that has been wasted on Kyoto has gone. This year, for example, $26 million were spent on the one tonne challenge advertising and, of that amount, $85,000 went to Mr. Rick Mercer.
Does the minister not think the money would have been better invested in Canadian technology? Why is the minister continuing to throw away money on Kyoto when he does not even have a plan?
Stéphane Dion LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, the official opposition has no credibility whatsoever on this file since the leader of the party clearly said that he does not believe in Kyoto and that he does not believe it is human activity that is creating the greenhouse gases that are creating climate change.
They must be honest with Canadians and say that if they were in power they would give up and Canada would not do its share for the planet. It is what would happen if we did not have a great leader as our Prime Minister.
Bob Mills Conservative Red Deer, AB
Mr. Speaker, unlike the Prime Minister, I was at the international environment conference in Buenos Aires. I listened to the countries, one after the other, get up and talk about Canada being a laggard for not having a Kyoto plan.
The Prime Minister now thinks he is a world leader. He is only a leader in his own mind.
Why will the Prime Minister not stop the photo ops, take some leadership and come up with a plan for Kyoto?