Debates of Feb. 8th, 2005

Film Industry

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to tell the House about the significant contributions of men and women from Drummondville to the film industry.

Pierre Gendron produced The Decline of the American Empire and Night Zoo . Claude Desrosiers was the director of Dans une galaxie près de chez vous . Sébastien Montour and Jean-François Lepage directed Ça déménage un premier juillet . The music for Séraphin: Heart of Stone was written by Michel Cusson and that for Seducing Doctor Lewis by Jean-Marie Benoit. Karine Vanasse had notable roles in Set Me Free and Séraphin: Heart of Stone . Guy Paquin and Francine Dubois showed their expertise in set design in The Day After Tomorrow . François Camirand wrote the screenplays for Les Boys I, II and III , while Pierre Sénécal made his entrance into the world of cinema with Evil Words .

The Discovery Channel devotes many hours to Jeffrey Gallant and his films and research on sharks.

All these people have won our admiration and respect for the quality of their work and the many small pleasures they have given all of us. To all these people, many thanks.

Veterans

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, history repeats itself. Sixty years after the government finally recognized veterans involved in chemical warfare experiments, Canadians were upset to learn that soldiers who are members of Joint Task Force Two, Canada's elite anti-terrorist unit, are being denied pensions for service related injuries. It was, to quote the military ombudsman, “the invocation of threatened prosecution under the Official Secrets Act” then that prevented recognition, as it does today with JTF2 veterans.

While Canadians are proud of the men and women who serve in Canada's armed forces, Canadians are not proud of the way the veterans are treated by the government in this the year of the veteran.

It is time the federal government learned from the mistakes of the past and recognized the tremendous job our military does on behalf of all Canadians. No veteran should be made to beg for his or her pension.

Seniors

[John Maloney, Liberal, Welland, ON]

Mr. Speaker, many senior citizens are finding it financially difficult to support themselves on low fixed incomes as their day to day living expenses increase far in excess of their incomes. In too many cases indexation of the old age security pension and guaranteed income supplement has not kept step with increases in the cost of modest rental accommodations, utilities and food. An evening meal of tea and toast is just not acceptable for our seniors.

Canadian society takes great pride in our values of justice, equality and compassion, yet too many senior members of our community who have contributed to building this great country worry and suffer in silence at a stage in their lives when they are most vulnerable and physically incapable of improving their lot.

A strong commitment here in the House of Commons along with a commitment at the provincial level is essential in guaranteeing that seniors who face financial difficulties with fixed incomes will have greater ease in their retirement without severe financial worries.

I call on the government to take immediate steps to address this shameful situation.

Sponsorship Program

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, we are witnessing the extraordinary spectacle of a former prime minister being hauled before a judicial inquiry. He is again trying to justify what occurred by wrapping himself in the flag. We all remember his statement that it does not matter if millions of dollars were stolen as long as the country was safe.

Does this Prime Minister clearly understand that the unity excuse for the theft of taxpayer dollars is completely unacceptable?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the continued attempts by the Leader of the Opposition to subvert the Gomery commission will be responded to in due course.

On another issue, the other day the Leader of the Opposition said that the protection of a certain minority right, that is to say the definition of civil marriage, was an attack on multiculturalism. That is an attack on the Charter of Rights. It is the worst example of the politics of division.

I ask the hon. member to take this opportunity--

[The Speaker]

The hon. Leader of the Opposition.

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, I had hoped we would get some clear answers before the Prime Minister was hauled off to the inquiry himself.

What Mr. Chrétien does not seem to grasp is that the Liberal sponsorship program is the biggest gift the Quebec separatist movement got in the past decade.

Does this Prime Minister clearly understand that the sponsorship program is a national unity catastrophe?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is simply repeating questions that he has stated in the House time and time again attempting to subvert the Gomery inquiry.

The real issue before the House is his statement the other day, the statement which he confirmed yesterday, which was a blatant attack on the Charter of Rights, the statement that the protection of a minority right was an attack--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker]

Order. I cannot hear the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister has the floor. He has finished, but we could not hear his answer. I would ask for some order in the House. Whether members agree or disagree with the answer is irrelevant; we have to be able to hear the answer and the question. The Leader of the Opposition perhaps will try to ask a question now and we will hear the answer.

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, I am tempted to call the Prime Minister the artless dodger.

We will continue to ask this Prime Minister questions in the House about the sponsorship scandal until we get answers from him.

Last week, the Prime Minister said, and I quote, “I am very proud of what the last government did and I am very proud that I was part of it”.

My question is simple. Is the Prime Minister proud of the sponsorship program and was he part of it?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I will give the Leader of the Opposition the definition of dodging. Dodging is when the member makes attacks on the charter, when the member challenges the charter outside of the House and is afraid to come in here before the Canadian people and make the case. That is dodging and it is cowardice.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is feeling a little thin-skinned today. I hope he is as animated when he testifies before the Gomery commission.

Daily the testimony at the Gomery commission shows direct links between the Liberal Party's political activities and the sponsorship program itself. Liberal Party luminaries, Chrétien, Kinsella and now John Manley, have come out in an attempt to discredit the process that was designed to get to the truth. John Manley is quoted as saying, “The Gomery commission is not a very good idea”.

Will the Prime Minister clearly signal to his Liberal colleagues that they should back off all attempts to discredit or derail the Gomery commission?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about unity. In a multicultural bilingual nation like Canada, the role of any leader of this country is to unify Canadians, to bring people together, whether it is English Canadians, French Canadians or minority language groups.

Instead of uniting Canadians, the leader of the Alliance-Conservatives is pitting one minority group against another. Anyone who pits one minority group against another does not deserve to ever lead this great multicultural masterpiece of Canada.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, that Liberal's lips are moving, but I can actually hear Herb Gray. John Manley is saying that the cost of revealing the information at the Gomery commission is too high for the amount of money it is costing.

Clearly, the toll that he is talking about is not on the public treasury, it is on the Liberal Party. Continued comments by prominent Liberals to discredit the Gomery commission are an indication that this testimony is hurting the Liberal Party.

Will the Prime Minister just admit that this mantra about the sponsorship scandal, and the ends justifying the means, is really about the ends which the Liberal Party intended the sponsorship program to do, which was to fill its pockets?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, the real issue here is why the Alliance Conservative Party is trying to divide Canadians instead of trying to unite them. It is shameful for that party to take advantage of Canada's multicultural minorities and to use them as pawns for cheap political purposes.

No wonder the director of the World Sikh Organization is quoted today as saying, “Why would politicians like the Leader of the Opposition use constitutional rights issues to further divide multicultural communities in Canada? It doesn't make sense”.

She is right. It is shameless and it does not make sense for anyone who seeks to lead this country to try to do so by dividing Canadians.

The Environment

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, after the car manufacturers, who clearly have the foot on the brake when it comes to producing less polluting vehicles, now the oil industry wants to deduct from their taxes all expenditures in connection with achieving the Kyoto targets.

Instead of sticking taxpayers with the bill, will the Prime Minister apply the polluter pays principle and have the oil companies, which are responsible for 20% of all greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, pay their share?

[R. John Efford, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, we have full intentions of working with all industry stakeholders and automakers right across the country. We have gained tremendous milestones in the last number of years with what we have done in dealing with climate change. We will continue to do so. We will find a balance between protecting the environment and protecting industry.

One should not be done at the expense of the other, but the environment is equally as important in developing a good strong economy in the country.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, plainly stated, this means that it will give in to the great polluters, as the automotive industry predicted yesterday, an opinion shared by the oil industry as well.

Since 1970, the federal government has spent $66 billion for oil, gas and coal, all of which are polluting energies. The people of Quebec have paid their share of that, on top of supporting alone the cost of developing their own hydroelectric resources.

Instead of making Quebeckers pay twice, if he could actually answer once in a while, will the Prime Minister make sure that the great polluters assume themselves the cost of taking the measures necessary to achieve the Kyoto targets?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, we will soon have a plan to announce for Kyoto, which will be the 2002 plan, but a significantly improved plan. Rest assured that, on the one hand, everyone, including the oil industry, will do its part and that, on the other hand, the targets will be met. When we Canadians pull and work together, we do achieve great things.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Alberta—by far the largest greenhouse gas emitter with 71 metric tonnes per inhabitant, compared to 12.6 tonnes in Quebec—has the financial resources to assume its responsibilities with regard to the Kyoto targets.

Does the Minister of Environment not believe that it is only fair for Alberta—which is in an exceptional financial situation because of its oil and gas activity—to pay for the environmental damages caused by its own oil development?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, indeed, there is a lot to be done in Alberta. We will work together with Albertans and the Alberta government, not only to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in that province, but also to further strengthen the Alberta economy from which Albertans and all Canadians, including Quebeckers, benefit.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Alberta's tax rate is very low, there is no sales tax and the province no longer has any debt. This enviable situation is due to the enormous profits from oil and gas development.

How can the Minister of the Environment today ask Quebec to pay 25% of the necessary costs to achieve the Kyoto objectives, when it is Alberta that has profited from oil and gas development? Would a territorial approach not be more equitable than a sectorial approach?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I hope the hon. member does not want to give Albertans the impression that a territorial approach should be used when it comes to oil, a resource that benefits all Canadians. Recently we were able to vote in favour of equalization, including for the Government of Quebec, in part because of Canada's resources, in particular Alberta oil.

Employment Insurance

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition will not defend his attacks on rights here in the House and the Prime Minister cannot defend corruption in his own party in the House. It is no wonder Canadians are fed up.

The NDP has been speaking out for a long time against the 1996 employment insurance reform, which has caused serious problems for seasonal workers.

Will the Prime Minister use the budget as an opportunity to reform EI and correct the seasonal gap problem affecting these workers?