Debates of May 16th, 2006

Francophonie

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

I am sorry to have to interrupt the hon. member.

The hon. Minister of International Cooperation.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Minister of International Cooperation and Minister for la Francophonie and Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to see that the Bloc member is interested in Canada's international reputation.

The hon. member was in Saint-Boniface. She was therefore able to share in the warm welcome given Mr. Diouf by Canada, Manitoba and the Franco-Manitoban community.

Softwood Lumber

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in response to a question from the Leader of the Bloc Québécois last Thursday, the Prime Minister said that no bill to implement tax on the export of softwood lumber would be tabled before the text of the agreement is finalized. Yesterday, in committee, the Minister for International Trade said that he intended to table the bill in spring without making any reference to the final agreement.

Can the Prime Minister confirm in this House that there will be no bill implementing a tax on softwood lumber exports as long as the agreement is not finalized?

[David Emerson, Conservative, Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics]

Mr. Speaker, what I was explaining yesterday, when we were talking about this in committee, was that there would be a requirement for a ways and means motion which would enable an export tax to be put in place so that revenues could flow back to those provinces to enhance the economic prospects of the industries in those areas.

The timing of that bill is uncertain at this time. We think we will have a finalized agreement before Parliament rises in June.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, will the Prime Minister agree that the debate and passing of a bill to implement tax on exports before the softwood lumber agreement is finalized and accepted by the industry would send an odd signal to the Americans, suggesting that Canada is prepared to accept anything and would prejudge the final result of the negotiation?

[David Emerson, Conservative, Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics]

Mr. Speaker, I do not really think the softwood lumber industry in Canada nor the working families that are involved in the softwood lumber industry want this dispute to carry on for months and months, into the summer and into the fall. That is exactly what we are trying to avoid with this settlement. We are trying to restore predictability and certainty and we need to move ahead in a timely manner to ensure the softwood lumber industry in Canada is strong and competitive.

Canada-U.S. Border

[John Maloney, Liberal, Welland, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today I am meeting with the Niagara River Bi-National Border Mayors’ Coalition about U.S. passport requirements. My region is very concerned about this initiative.

The blow to tourism has been estimated at nearly $1 billion in the U.S. and twice that in Canada. Border congestion could cripple our crossings with detrimental effects for manufacturers, importers and exporters.

It is unclear why the Prime Minister continues to allow our border policy to be made in the U.S.A. When will the government stand up for Canadian business and tourism?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, it would be more helpful if the member opposite and his colleagues, who ignored this problem for two years, would report on the progress that is being made. I will be meeting with the Niagara mayors this afternoon.

The Prime Minister has made this a priority. We now have officials working with U.S. officials to see which documents will be acceptable for Canadians. We have already moved them to the position that alternative documents will be acceptable. We have had our MPs on this side of the floor working with the border caucuses in the United States. We have alerted governors to the problem. They have action plans in place. We are supporting amendments in the United States. We have premiers on side.

Why do they not report the good news that we are getting something done on this file.

[John Maloney, Liberal, Welland, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as the minister well knows, it was the Liberal government that submitted an official response to the Americans on the western hemisphere travel initiative warning them about the mutual effects of changes to documents required at our borders.

It was the Liberal government's aggressive campaign that fought for Canadians to ensure that the U.S. passport requirements did not negatively impact trade and travel at our borders, including assurances about the Nexus and FAST programs.

The only strategy the present government favours is capitulation. Why does the government continue to have no plan?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where the member of Parliament was for two years when we asked the Liberal government to take action on this initiative and it did nothing. It was members of this party and members of other opposition parties who finally forced a debate on the issue. One of the first priorities our Prime Minister made was to make this a top level item at Cancun.

We have made great progress. I talked with Secretary Chertoff again yesterday on this and the Minister of Foreign Affairs talked with Condoleezza Rice on it yesterday. The Americans know our concerns. We are making progress for Canadians. Those people over there did nothing.

[Raymond Chan, Liberal, Richmond, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the previous Liberal government set the standard to speed up border crossings with programs like Nexus and FAST. The Liberal government launched a debate about the use of biometrics to comply with U.S. standards but the Conservatives loudly opposed a made in Canada solution.

Could the minister explain to Canadians why, after 15 years of sitting on their hands in opposition, they have no plan of their own to address the crisis at our borders?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, it has been said that we should introduce a little levity in this place to change the atmosphere a bit. Talk about 13 years of sitting on their hands doing nothing, that is exactly what those members did and now, because of our initiative, Canadians are working from coast to coast on this issue with our American counterparts to get the message across.

We already have an agreement that there will be alternative documents that will be acceptable. We are in the process of defining those. I will tell members how successful it has been. All across the country people are working on this. Even the Liberals are starting to care about it now.

[Raymond Chan, Liberal, Richmond, BC]

Mr. Speaker, if that is the case, why did the Prime Minister, in his first meeting with Mr. Bush, throw up his hands and say that it was already a done deal? Canadians are tired of the government's inaction on this file and want real answers, not Republican Party spin.

Why does the minister refuse to act while premiers and border mayors are aggressively trying to save their communities?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, it really does not matter how many times we say it. We are working with the people across the country from coast to coast who are making an impression and who are getting the job done. Amendments are in place and they are being sent to the U.S. Congress, amendments that have been encouraged by the work of our Prime Minister and others.

It would help if those members would get on side but they did not help for 13 years. We really do not need them because Canadians from coast to coast are doing this. When they talk about throwing up, I think they are reflecting on the policy that they have had for the last 13 years.

Firearms Registry

[Garry Breitkreuz, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General has reported on what we have suspected for years. The cost of the gun registry continues to spiral out of control. The Auditor General's 2002 report criticized Liberal spending. At that time the former prime minister said, “We have to make sure it does not happen again. It is simply inexcusable”. However he and his Liberal government continued to fail to keep costs under control.

Could the Minister of Public Safety tell us how the Liberals managed to fail so completely and misspend millions of taxpayer dollars?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, taking some of the excerpts from Sheila Fraser's report, it reminded me of the many comments made by the member for Yorkton--Melville over the years. He warned about this. Did the Liberals listen?

Ms. Fraser talked about the Liberals going to great lengths to hide the true cost. Did they listen? No. She talked about cost overruns that were incredible. Did they listen? No. She talked about the fact that there were no written records of key meetings. Did they listen? No. She talked about the fact that they used lawyers to deny her key information. Did they listen? No. She talked about the fact that there was a lack of performance standards and that the lack of performance standards put our officers at risk. Did they listen? No.

Are we going to fix the problem? Yes.

David Dingwall

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it appears as if we have another case of the Conservatives acting just like the Liberals. Yesterday the documents on the David Dingwall affair were finally released. Lo and behold, major parts were blacked out and still remain secret.

I would like to ask the government because in opposition it demanded that this information be released. Now that the Conservatives are in government their tune has changed.

I want to ask the government the very same question it asked, when it comes to David Dingwall what is the government trying to hide?

[John Baird, Conservative, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, the government is more than prepared to table any and all information that it is legally entitled to table.

We know two things. First, the House was misled when it was told of the status of Mr. Dingwall's employment and how it came to an end.

It was this government that sought to release the information in the first place. It is this government that will continue to do that, to provide open and transparent government to the people of this country.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that sounds an awful lot like the same answers we received from the other side for all those years.

Mr. Dingwall says he is entitled to his entitlements. Apparently the government thinks it is entitled to black out massive portions of an important document that it promised to release in full.

Will the minister admit that, first, the Liberals were right to hide information on the Dingwall affair from the Canadian people or, second, that his government has done a major flip-flop on the issue of secrecy?

[John Baird, Conservative, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, I say to my friend from Hamilton Centre that we will not defend the lack of transparency in the previous government.

The Conservative government is the government that put forward the truth on the issue surrounding Mr. Dingwall and his departure on the eve of an election. It was the Conservative government that committed to and has delivered on releasing every single aspect of this issue that can be legally made public and will continue to do so.

Equalization Payments

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, already this--

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

Order, please. It is clear that all hon. members want to hear the member for Markham—Unionville. With the noise, I am apprehensive that no one will be able to hear the hon. member.

The hon. member for Markham—Unionville has the floor.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, the finance minister has already broken the Prime Minister's promise to honour the Canada-Ontario agreement. He has reneged by withholding $384 million last year and by cancelling funds for phasing out coal.

Will the minister at least commit today that every penny of the $6.9 billion will go to the Government of Ontario, as opposed to deceptively including funds for tax credits that people will receive in any case?

[Jim Flaherty, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, we committed two weeks ago in this place, when the budget of the government came forward, to fully fund the Canada-Ontario agreement over six years to the tune of $6.8 billion.

That commitment stands. That is a commitment of the government. We keep our commitments, unlike the members opposite. The member opposite still has not decided whether Dingwall resigned voluntarily or not.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this homeless, jailing, extreme finance minister never answers the question.

I am trying again by asking a very simple question.

Can the minister confirm that every dollar of the $6.9 billion will be paid directly to the Government of Ontario? Yes or no?