House of Commons Hansard #64 of the 38th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was million.
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, let me read again for the hon. member of the opposition exactly what we did say. This is part of the communiqué I issued on August 5:
It makes good sense to amend the agreement so that this essential NORAD function can be preserved and Canada can continue to benefit from the security it provides to our citizens...This amendment safeguards and sustains NORAD regardless of what decision the Government of Canada eventually takes on ballistic missile defence.
Stockwell Day Conservative Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC
Mr. Speaker, the question is, where is Waldo? We are not talking about that other stuff.
Our present ambassador, Mr. Kergin, who is a very capable man, also took a slap last year from the Prime Minister when he found out his job was being offered to Mr. Manley. Mr. Manley wisely dodged the bullet. Mr. McKenna stood up to serve his country, and now he has been undermined.
How does the Prime Minister think that Mr. McKenna can speak with authority in Washington when he has had his credibility undermined here in Ottawa by the Prime Minister?
Paul Martin LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, not only does the government have total confidence in Mr. McKenna, but there is no doubt that he will make a very dynamic and incisive ambassador for Canada in Washington.
His credibility will not be undermined by the kinds of questions from the hon. member and the inability to understand what Norad is all about, its responsibilities on the one hand and BMD on the other.
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, on November 9, the Minister of Transport promised to reduce or freeze airport rents but, so far, we have not seen any action.
Cliff Mackay, of the Air Transport Association of Canada, said yesterday, and I quote:
By not reducing airport rent, the government is wilfully undermining the economic competitiveness of the Canadian air transportation system.
He is right: this is very serious.
Why does the Minister of Transport not fulfill his promises?
Jean Lapierre LiberalMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, first I would like to say how pleased I am with yesterday's budget, particularly the reduction of the security tax announced by the Minister of Finance. This is good news, because it represents some $40 million for the airline industry.
However, there are still a few changes that I would like to see. I hope that, along with the parliamentary committee and my colleague, the Minister of Finance, we will find a permanent solution to airport rents, which, of course, should be reviewed at the earliest opportunity.
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, now he says he is proud of the budget. Six hours ago at a breakfast he said that he was disappointed by the budget, and he blamed the finance minister for breaking his own word. He said that he wanted to put the finance minister on a do not fly list for breaking his own promise on airport rents.
The Canadian Airports Council said that airports in the country would be devastated because the government had not cut rents and that the transport minister had not keep his word. The air industry and the Conservative Party have been calling for a freeze and cut in airport rents for years.
Why did the transport minister fail to keep his word?
Jean Lapierre LiberalMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, first, the hon. member should never read Paul Wells' blog because that is not what I said this morning. This morning I said that there was one missing item, and if I had my way, maybe I could put finance officials on a no fly list so they could reflect upon what was happening in the air sector. It was a good joke and it was well accepted. If my hon. colleague does not have a sense of humour, too bad for him. I think we will resolve that issue, and I count on his support to do that.
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government has betrayed Quebec' s unemployed.
How can the Minister of Finance be so cynical as to ignore the Prime Minister's commitments on employment insurance, sidestep the Liberal vote on the 28 recommendations to improve the employment insurance program and offer only seven one thousandths of what he stole from the EI fund?
Employment InsuranceOral Question Period
The Speaker
I heard the word “stole”. We are not talking about the minister.
The hon. Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development.
Lucienne Robillard LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Chambly—Borduas should be very careful in his comments. As we all know, the employment insurance fund is an accounting notion, it is a virtual fund that has existed since the Auditor General's opinion in 1986.
Over the past few years, we increased benefits by close to $1 billion to help workers who experience problems in certain parts of the country, particularly seasonal workers. Yesterday, we were very pleased to be able to announce additional adjustments.
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
Mr. Speaker, those for whom the minister speaks were quoted in this morning's press as calling the changes “indecent, insipid and frustrating.” That was how they described the budget. Yesterday the PM's Quebec lieutenant, the Minister of Transport, said in a broadcast interview that “reasonable unemployed people” will find the budget a great one.
How can he be so cynical and disdainful of people who have had $46 billion stolen from them by the government? How can he—
Employment InsuranceOral Question Period
The Speaker
I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member for Chambly—Borduas, but he is well aware that his use on two occasions of the word “stolen” is not acceptable and he must not use it.
If the Hon. Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development wishes to respond, she has the floor.
Lucienne Robillard LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada
Mr. Speaker, as you have said, we cannot allow such language in the House. I most certainly wish to reply because, contrary to what the Bloc Québécois says, what was announced yesterday were measures that will help seasonal workers.
The problem is not seasonal workers, but seasonal work. We are working with various stakeholders. Oddly enough, unlike the Bloc, I have heard what was announced yesterday described by a spokesperson for seasonal workers as a victory for them.
Guy Côté Bloc Portneuf, QC
Mr. Speaker, let us discuss honesty. The Liberals also voted in favour of the report by the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills Development, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, which called on the government to repay the billions of dollars it had pillaged from the employment insurance fund.
How can the government justify rushing to reduce the debt in order to repay the major banks, while refusing to reimburse the billions of dollars it has stolen from the unemployed?
Employment InsuranceOral Question Period
The Speaker
Order, please. Continued use of unparliamentary language will create problems with respect to oral questions.
We will move on to a supplementary from the hon. member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier.
Guy Côté Bloc Portneuf, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development is announcing that, in the future, premiums will not exceed program costs. In other words, she is acknowledging that, in the past, she has dipped liberally into the EI fund surpluses for other purposes. It sounds like she is promising not to do that anymore, but we have our doubts.
Is she admitting that she has—
Guy Côté Bloc Portneuf, QC
—dipped into EI fund surpluses? Why is she not putting the money back?
Employment InsuranceOral Question Period
The Speaker
The problem is the same as before.
We will continue with a question from the hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle.
Andrew Scheer Conservative Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK
Mr. Speaker, the transport minister said last week that we can count on the Minister of Finance to protect Regina. We found out yesterday that he was wrong.
As a result of yesterday's budget, regional airports will have to start paying millions in rent in 2006. For Regina, this means over $500,000 the first year alone. These massive hikes will jeopardize air service and hurt Regina's economy.
Why did the transport minister break his word? Why does the government continue to gouge air travellers?
Ralph Goodale LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport has not broken his word. The hon. gentleman has indicated the answer to his question in the very question. He said the rental increase with respect to Regina and other places is scheduled to take place in 2006. I would remind him this is still 2005.
Dave Batters Conservative Palliser, SK
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal cash cow known as airport rent is the biggest worry for the Regina and Saskatoon airport authorities. This rent will result in higher ticket prices for air travellers and possible service reductions.
The Minister of Transport said that he was not happy that there was no rent relief for Canadian airports in yesterday's budget. Why was he unable to convince the Minister of Finance that this needed to be addressed in yesterday's budget? Is it because he is incompetent, or because the Minister of Finance does not care about Regina and the province of Saskatchewan?
Ralph Goodale LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, as the finance minister who just delivered $710 million to Saskatchewan, I think I have demonstrated that I care.
The rental increases that the hon. gentleman refers to, and not just in Saskatchewan but elsewhere, are not rental increases that will take place this year. They will take place next year. I can assure the hon. member as I have assured the people of Regina that this matter will be dealt with in ample time.
Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, the lack of empathy that the government has for murdered police officers in this country is absolutely appalling while its leniency toward their killers is shocking.
The government refused to intervene to have Constable Joe MacDonald's killer, Clinton Suzack, removed from a club fed style prison. Hopefully, this leniency will not be repeated in the case of Claude Forget. Forget, convicted of two counts of attempted murder against Montreal police officers, is about to walk after serving a little over half his 20 year sentence.
My question is for the Minister of Public Safety. Will she ensure that Claude Forget does not receive statutory release?