House of Commons Hansard #70 of the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was budget.
Lucienne Robillard Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is being arrogant, controlling and even threatening, when he should show some humility in his position.
“The people express their wishes as much through the opposition as through the government”, he once said. Has he forgotten? Has he forgotten that almost two out of three Canadians rejected the Conservatives in the last election?
Instead of childishly complaining, can the Prime Minister learn to put his rigidity aside and be open to ideas other than his own?
Jason Kenney ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, Canadians elected a minority Parliament and this government will keep its promises within this minority government. That is why the federal accountability act was subject to serious consideration by a special committee of this House, with the amendments that were proposed by the opposition parties and accepted by this government.
The problem is that the Liberal party, especially in the Senate, has refused to act to meet Canadians' expectations of this government's promises. We are waiting for the Liberals to start cooperating to meet Canadian's expectations as far as federal accountability is concerned.
Lucienne Robillard Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the words “listen” and “consult” are not part of the Conservatives' vocabulary.
Neither environmental groups nor the provinces were consulted about dropping the Kyoto protocol. Women were not consulted about the change to the mandate of Status of Women, and even less consideration was given to the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada about abolishing the court challenges program.
Does the Prime Minister know that he does not have a monopoly on truth in this country?
Jason Kenney ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, after 13 long years of a cynical Liberal government that did not keep its promises to the Canadian electorate, we have a government and a Prime Minister who keep their word. One of our promises was to reduce waste and focus public expenditures on the priorities of the general public. That is precisely what we have done and will continue to do by lowering taxes for working families in Canada.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the new directive of the Minister of Industry to the CRTC could come into force on November 4. Pushed by the Minister of Industry, it will recommend that market forces be allowed to prevail by regulating the telecommunications sector as little as possible, and only when necessary.
Since the government is no longer interested in regulating telecommunications, why does it not just transfer its telecommunications authority to the Government of Quebec?
Jason Kenney ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, this government will continue to act responsibly towards all industrial sectors, including telecommunications. This government already has a good economic record and will continue to work with the telecommunications industry so that, like all industries, it benefits from that record.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, that does not answer the question raised.
I would like to quote from a document of the Quebec communications department, when the current federal Minister of Transport served as its minister:
Quebec must be able to establish the rules for operating radio and television systems, and control development plans for telecommunications networks, service rates and the regulation of new telecommunications services.
Will the government follow the advice of its Minister of Transport and transfer telecommunications and broadcasting responsibilities? This could be done through an administrative agreement, for example.
Lawrence Cannon ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, I believe that the leader of the Bloc Québécois should also add that the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in this regard with the Guèvremont decision, which confirmed federal authority over communications.
If the leader of the Bloc Québécois wishes to rehash the past, we could cite the example of the member for Roberval who, together with René Lévesque, eliminated all the rights of Quebec workers when they went back on the collective agreement they had signed.
Paul Crête Bloc Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Mr. Speaker, let us come back to the former communications minister in Quebec and current Minister of Transport who wrote in a discussion paper on telecommunications that Quebec should have full jurisdiction and use a single regulatory body.
People who once made such remarks ought to believe in what they said for the rest of their life.
In light of the fact that his colleague at Industry asked the CRTC to regulate telecommunications as little as possible, does the Minister of Transport intend to press him to have the responsibility for telecommunication regulations in Quebec delegated to the Government of Quebec?
Bev Oda ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women
Mr. Speaker, the CRTC has national federal responsibilities. This government believes that we need a strong federal Canada. We will continue to work with Quebec in order to make sure that all the telecommunications and broadcasting services to all Canadians are what they want and what they need.
Paul Crête Bloc Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Mr. Speaker, the minister is no doubt unaware of the fact that control over broadcasting and telecommunications in Quebec is a traditional demand of Quebec governments, regardless of political stripe.
What is the Minister of Industry, who does not feel like regulating telecommunications, waiting for to delegate these powers to the Government of Quebec, which will assume its responsibilities?
Bev Oda ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women
Mr. Speaker, as everyone knows, today's communications world is not only provincial, it is national, international and global. That is why we believe it is in the interests of Canada to have one unified voice for Canada while respecting and acknowledging the special needs of every region and province in this country.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, according to government officials, the U.S. and NATO counter-insurgency operations in which we are now involved in Afghanistan claimed the lives of 60 civilians this week. Since U.S. and NATO forces invaded five years ago, this marks the deadliest week for Afghan civilians. We also heard this week reports of starving Afghan women and children, whole families.
I ask the Prime Minister, with only one dollar going to aid for every $9 going to the combat effort, is it any wonder that civilian deaths and starvation are on the rise while security and stability are on the decline?
Jason Kenney ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I think it is regrettable that the leader of the NDP constantly diminishes the tremendous work being done by our aid workers in Afghanistan.
He talks about one dollar. The truth is this: $100 million a year is the contribution that the government is making right through to 2010, the single largest aid contribution to a country in the world in our aid development history.
Our aid workers are doing a good job. Our military and diplomats are joining them in trying to bring stability to that region so that we can provide the kind of social and economic development we all want to see in Afghanistan, which would not exist if we pulled our troops out.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
It is unfortunate we do not hear an acknowledgement of the civilian casualties, Mr. Speaker.
According to Afghan government officials, NATO's counterinsurgency operations have claimed the lives of at least 60 civilians this week, making this the deadliest week since the invasion for Afghan civilians.
This mission is not balanced. It is the wrong mission for Canada.
Why does the Prime Minister not realize that the mission is not working and that, instead of improving, the situation is worsening, especially for civilians?
Jason Kenney ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, what is not balanced is the NDP's position on this issue. The NDP is talking about tragedies affecting the Afghan people of course. It is as if there was some kind of moral equivalence between the Taliban and the democratic government of Afghanistan and NATO's forces operating under a UN mandate.
We make a distinction and believe that the international community should support the Afghan government in creating a space of security for that country.
Navdeep Bains Liberal Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
Mr. Speaker, the President of the Treasury Board with his cabinet colleagues from Human Resources and Public Works have been caught muzzling public officials and acting in contempt of Parliament.
The minister's answers at committee could only be described as evasive, argumentative and, imagine this, hotly partisan. That is why we invited Treasury Board Secretariat officials to testify. We wanted to get their non-partisan feedback on the cuts.
Why were Treasury Board officials instructed not to speak before the committee? Is it because of fear that their answers might contradict their boss?
John Baird ConservativePresident of the Treasury Board
Mr. Speaker, I gave no such instructions to my deputy minister or officials.
Navdeep Bains Liberal Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
Mr. Speaker, yes, the minister was accompanied by officials, but he forgot to mention that they were gagged.
When the President of the Treasury Board testified, he stated that the issue of LRT funding for Ottawa did not arrive on his desk until September 28. Here are some of the facts: The LRT contract was signed September 15; the memorandum of understanding was signed over a year ago; and the minister was aware of the council's final vote on the issue in July.
Does the minister expect us to believe that he was not involved in this file when his parliamentary secretary requested funding details of the project eight days prior?
John Baird ConservativePresident of the Treasury Board
Mr. Speaker, we deal with issues based on the facts. The facts are that this issue came before the Treasury Board on September 28. We believed it was tremendously important that on one of the largest contributions, one of the largest grants given this year across the country, we do something that was rather unusual, something that might be foreign to Liberal members opposite. We did our homework. We did a thorough review of the case. We were told then by numerous officials that a decision had to be made just a few short weeks before an election. When it was discovered that we had more than enough time to wait until after the election, we were very pleased to do that.
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Mr. Speaker, the Treasury Board president's decision to meddle in municipal infrastructure matters during an election campaign is deeply troubling. He made unproven claims about the terms of a confidential contract. He claims there will be no costs associated with delaying funding until December 15, even though he has been told otherwise, to the tune of $65 million. Also, he leaked pages of this confidential contract to justify his decision to settle old political scores.
Where is the accountability? What town or city is next on his political hit list?
John Baird ConservativePresident of the Treasury Board
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to see the Liberal Party members opposite wanting to see government veiled in a cloak of secrecy. It reminds me of an editorial I read in the Ottawa Citizen on Saturday, October 14, which stated:
Turns out there are some people [the Liberals opposite] who favour secrecy, who are happy to keep the taxpayer in the dark, and not surprisingly they belong to the federal Liberal party--the same party that when in power was hardly famous for openness and transparency.
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Mr. Speaker, there is this fish off the coast. It is called a blowfish. Whenever the blowfish gets in trouble, it puffs up, changes colours and pretends to be much larger than what it actually is.
My question is, which cabinet colleague signed off on this decision and when was that decision made? Now is the time to come clean.
John Baird ConservativePresident of the Treasury Board
Mr. Speaker, when I was a young fellow growing up in Canada, I would often visit my grandfather in the Maritimes. We used to go digging for clams. The clams like to be cold and in the dark. That is not how this government operates. What we decided to do was to accept our responsibilities and do our due diligence.
I say to the member opposite that when it comes to public transit and light rail in his own constituency, I promise the same accountability.
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
Mr. Speaker, this morning, a large coalition of environmentalists and people representing business, politics and unions condemned the government's abandonment of Kyoto.
Will the government reconsider its decision, respect what Quebec has clearly said it wants and return to the Kyoto protocol objectives, as the Quebec coalition has asked?