House of Commons Hansard #67 of the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was money.
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Speaker, he has not been elected.
Mr. Fortier has a duty to be in the House to explain to Canadians and Quebeckers why his government has sided with the oil companies, showing indifference to older workers, cutting the court challenges program and leaving women in the lurch. Canadians deserve real democracy.
Will the Prime Minister stop laughing at people and have Michael Fortier run in Repentigny, or is he so afraid of losing his minister that he prefers to hide him?
Minister of Public Works and Government ServicesOral Questions
Niagara Falls Ontario
Conservative
Rob Nicholson ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, I will again indicate to the hon. member the commitment of the Minister of Public Works and Government Services. He has done an excellent job. The hon. member mentioned the Constitution. This is perfectly in line with the Constitution of this country and has been for 137 years. We have taken members of the Senate and they have served as cabinet ministers and have served with distinction.
The hon. minister will run in the next general election. The NDP should be particularly patient. I have a feeling they will end up where they usually end up, which is in about fourth place.
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Mr. Speaker, after the government spent months cutting billions of dollars from environment programs that work, the minister had the audacity to claim that she had an integrated approach to cleaning Canada's air. By cutting dozens of programs to fight global warming, refusing to give Ontario the funding it promised to shut down coal fired electrical plants and introducing an environmental package that delays action for years, the government can only guarantee our air will get dirtier and our climate warmer.
Coal creates smog and global warming. When will the minister get her head out of the smog?
Rona Ambrose ConservativeMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, what concerns me is that while the health of Canadians is suffering, the opposition parties continue to play politics with this issue.
The clean air act will allow us for the first time in Canadian history to set national air quality objectives. If the opposition does not want to listen to Canadians, maybe it will listen to the Canadian Medical Association which said, “By recognizing and targeting the role clean air has in ensuring good health, the government appears to be on the right track”.
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Mr. Speaker, that minister and that government do not care about the environment. Their inaction says more than their words. As a result, the minority Conservative government is allowing Ontario's dirty coal fired power plants to operate for years and is delaying reduction of greenhouse gases for years.
Why is the minister going against the advice of experts who say her government is taking the wrong approach on the environment?
Rona Ambrose ConservativeMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, again, if the member opposite will not listen to Canadians, maybe he will listen to the Canadian Lung Association which said, “Improving air quality is critical to protecting the health of Canadians” and “the Lung Association is pleased to see indoor air quality regulated under the act”.
Maybe the hon. member could explain to the Canadian Lung Association and the millions of Canadians suffering from lung cancer why he is opposing this act.
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
Mr. Speaker, last Thursday, every politician from Quebec gathered at the National Assembly to commemorate together the heritage of Robert Bourassa. It was a solemn occasion.
With his odd sense of timing, the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities chose that moment to attack the Liberal government of Jean Charest. After renouncing the Kyoto protocol in the morning, the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities gave a slap in the face to the Government of Quebec and scoffed at the will of the Quebeckers in the afternoon.
Does the minister not think this was too much for one day?
Lawrence Cannon ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, it is regrettable that the hon. member was not there on Friday when I was asked a question by the hon. member for Hull—Aylmer. In response to that question, I said that the current government did not sign an agreement with the Government of Quebec, as the previous federal government did.
We are in the process of working with the Government of Quebec on a series of programs that together will help us both achieve the objectives not of the Kyoto plan, but of Canada's plan.
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
Mr. Speaker, last May, the Minister of the Environment said she was prepared to provide financial assistance so that Quebec could achieve its Kyoto objectives. Since then, the Prime Minister, who is allergic to Kyoto, has decided otherwise. Quebec will not get one red cent.
Instead of standing up to the Prime Minister, the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities and his colleagues from Quebec are simply being doormats.
How could he agree, on the very day of the tribute to Robert Bourassa, to go to Quebec City to criticize the Charest government?
Who is he to put Quebec in its place?
Rona Ambrose ConservativeMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, I know that the hon. member would like to play politics with the issue of the environment, but the truth of the matter is that the Government of Quebec and I, Minister Béchard and I have a good working relationship. We are working on a number of issues related to the environment.
Quebec has a good plan in place. It is not in law yet. We put forward regulations that are moving forward under the current legislation and also under our new act. Obviously we have to work with the Government of Quebec to ensure there is no duplication, but at the end of the day these laws will ensure that we protect the health of Canadians and of Quebeckers.
Johanne Deschamps Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Mr. Speaker, on October 12 of this year, 77 countries jointly tabled a resolution in the United Nations championing the adoption of an arms trade treaty. More than 100 countries are now co-sponsoring the resolution. Unfortunately, Canada is not yet among them.
Why is Canada waiting to co-sponsor this resolution, which will be debated at the United Nations General Assembly, and can the Minister of Foreign Affairs explain why he is taking so long to make a decision?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's information is incorrect. Canada is in fact going to be a sponsor of that resolution. We have spoken for some time about the importance of stopping the trading and trafficking in small arms, especially in conflict areas. We are happy to be putting our weight behind that at the United Nations today.
Caroline St-Hilaire Bloc Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC
Mr. Speaker, on October 3, I asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs about the actions of a number of Canadian companies that have been circumventing existing treaties to sell military equipment in its component parts.
The minister replied that he supported in principle a comprehensive and legally binding conventional arms treaty that would control the sale of this type of equipment.
Other than supporting it in principle, can the minister give us a concrete idea of what Canada plans to do to make such a treaty a reality?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, I think I stated quite clearly that we will be sponsoring the resolution at the United Nations. What could be more clear than that? We are going to be sponsoring this process to work toward an international agreement, as Canada traditionally has. In terms of small arms trading, we think that is important.
Raymonde Folco Liberal Laval—Les Îles, QC
Mr. Speaker, we were very surprised to learn this morning that a number of Conservative ministers have not declared any entertainment expenses since last summer. Even the Minister of Labour said he was surprised. I would say there is a difference between what is declared and what is spent, but I will go on to my question.
The Minister of Labour said that he is surprised by such a statement, although he submitted an expense report that was incorrect and incomplete.
How can Canadians know how much the ministers are spending? The government is not obeying the rules of transparency and integrity.
My question is simple. What are the Conservative ministers hiding from Canadians?
Jean-Pierre Blackburn ConservativeMinister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec
Mr. Speaker, we know that we are required, by law, to submit our expenses. As such, when I return to Parliament, I submit my expenses so that they may be accounted for, as required by law. Additionally, the statistics presented this time reflect the payments reimbursed to me for my expenses. Everything is in order.
That said, it appears that certain expenses are currently being processed and will be included in the next statistics.
Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Last weekend, the leader of the Bloc Québécois announced that Quebec City would be the capital of a sovereign Quebec in 2015. Among the initiatives of the Bloc Québécois is a proposed high-speed train connecting Quebec City and New York.
Can the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities tell the House whether this proposal is viable?
Lawrence Cannon ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, once again, the leader of the Bloc Québécois is dreaming in Technicolor.
He claims that a high-speed rail link would be economically viable. We have no studies to prove this. On the contrary more than 20 studies have been conducted over more than 30 years about a possible link between Montreal and New York. None of the studies concluded that such a link would be viable.
The Bloc leader should tell us what basis he has for making such an extravagant promise. Is this yet another example of political fiction by the Bloc Québécois?
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, if winning the battle against climate change is the fight of our lives, the government got knocked out in the first round.
Science has told us that anything more than a two degree rise in the earth's temperature will prove catastrophic for our planet. We need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in this country by 80% of 1990 levels.
Why did the Minister of the Environment choose ideology over sound science?
Rona Ambrose ConservativeMinister of the Environment
Again, Mr. Speaker, I would just point out what concerns me is that the health of Canadians is suffering while that member continues to politicize this issue.
That party is actually opposed to the establishment of national air quality. It is also opposed to introducing new energy efficiency and labelling requirements for 20 new products under the clean air act.
Even the Canadian Lung Association said, “We hope that energy efficiency improvements referenced in the act will result in better regulations”.
They will result in better regulations. The only thing standing in the way of this and what the Canadian Lung Association wants is the NDP.
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, the government continues to defy the very laws of biology and physics by standing up in the House every day while lacking anything that resembles a spine.
The hot air act failed to set short term targets. It failed to go after the biggest polluters.
Could the minister explain why her government lowered the bar by using 2003 as a benchmark, rather than 1990 like the rest of the world has?
Rona Ambrose ConservativeMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, my concern is that the member chooses big industry over the environment. Yesterday on TV the member said that he does not support introducing mandatory fuel efficiency standards for the auto sector, unless they are coupled with subsidies for auto corporations.
My question for him is, will he support the clean air act that will for the first time in Canadian history regulate and have mandatory requirements for fuel efficiency, or will he side with big business?
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
On October 17 the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food said that he suggested to the Canadian Wheat Board that the board review the voters list and he claimed that the board agreed with him. There was no suggestion; the minister instructed and the board had no option but to comply. As a result 16,000 producers have been disenfranchised of their democratic right, most due to lost crop.
Will the government stop at nothing to destroy the board? Will the minister come clean today, table his instructions and apologize for misleading the House?
Chuck Strahl ConservativeMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member opposite has got me dead to rights. I did ask the Wheat Board to make sure that people who were actually voting in the director elections should actually be producers of grain products.
I am sorry but it seems to me that when we have people who are voting on the future of the Wheat Board, on the directors list, they should be people who are actually producing. If the member thinks they should just be people out of the Winnipeg phone book, he should say so.
Ron Cannan Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday the House voted on a private member's bill, Bill C-292, the Kelowna press release. In typical Liberal fashion, all but one of the Liberal leadership candidates could not be bothered to stand up for the occasion.
If they were concerned about aboriginals' well-being and actually believed in the Kelowna press release, they would have supported it, would they not?
Could the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development tell us how Canada's new government is taking real concrete action to improve the lives and well-being of aboriginal Canadians?