Debates of June 14th, 2006

Canadian Heritage

[Bev Oda, Conservative, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to confirm that I am in full compliance. In response to the question, I have had no discussions.

In fact, I would like to point out that only a member of the Liberal opposition would even suggest that a member of Parliament interfere when it is an independent body making those decisions.

Telecommunications

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Industry directed the CRTC to rely more on market forces to reach its telecommunications objectives.

Are we to understand that the Minister of Industry has decided to abandon the regions to their fate by imposing a double standard? Clearly, this means that level of service will be more important for cities than for the regions.

Under this new approach, will the minister be dropping the universal level of service principle? This is a sad day for regions of Quebec and Canada.

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to have introduced in this House yesterday a proposed policy direction for the CRTC. This is a first. The proposal is clear: we are telling the CRTC to rely more on market forces, and, as I said in a speech yesterday in Toronto—if my hon. colleague had read it, he would have known—to ensure that remote regions continue to enjoy the same services they do now.

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Industry told the CRTC that it should rely on the invisible hand and the free market to meet its objectives. There is every reason to be concerned about whether the same criteria are to apply to radio broadcasting.

Can the Minister of Canadian Heritage reassure us and commit to never using her industry colleague's tactic to deregulate and thereby justify reduced francophone content on the airwaves, for example?

[Bev Oda, Conservative, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, Canada enjoys the strongest broadcasting system. It has been through years of working with the private sector, the public sector, the CRTC and government, as well, that we have enjoyed a strong broadcasting system, and we intend to do so in the future.

Softwood Lumber

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the more time goes by, the less likely it seems that there will be a quick agreement on softwood lumber. The more time goes by, the more companies have to deal with enormous difficulties, deprived as they are of $5 billion of their own money that they still have not recovered.

In view of the deadlines dragging on for reaching a final agreement, why does the government still refuse to provide loan guarantees for companies that are still grappling with the softwood lumber crisis?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber industry waited five years for what we managed to get for it.

Since the election of this new government, we have brought prosperity to Canadians working in the softwood lumber industry. More than loan guarantees, we have brought guarantees of a prosperous future; these are guarantees of free, unfettered access to the American market; these are guarantees of a better future for the communities.

I am proud of that and proud of the work done by my colleague, the Minister of International Trade. We are going to continue down this same path.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, while the minister makes hollow speeches, the American department decided this very day in a preliminary decision to increase the countervailing duties on Canadian softwood lumber. The minister must know that even if the agreement were concluded today, many long months would pass before the industry gets its money back.

Would loan guarantees not be an excellent way of showing the American negotiators that the government is ready to support its softwood lumber industry until a satisfactory final agreement can be reached since they are still increasing duties on softwood lumber from Canada and Quebec?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, this is the best agreement that we have ever had. It is a historic agreement. We are proud of it and very pleased. We are going to ensure that the softwood lumber industry finds its way back to prosperity.

Health

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have shown absolutely no leadership and made no commitment to reducing wait times in our country, to increasing the accessibility of doctors and to implementing a national pharmaceutical strategy.

Is it because, number one, the minister's 25% ownership in a drug company has compromised his ability to do his job, or is it, number two, because this is yet again another “harpocracy” where the Conservatives have no plan to protect public health care in our country, or is it number three, that the minister's real priority is to increase the profits in his drug company?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, I have already indicated to the House that there is a code in place and it applies to all ministers and parliamentary secretaries. My colleague has made complete disclosure. He has complied with all directives.

This may not satisfy the Liberal Party, because it has a different ethic, but it certainly satisfies the Ethics Commissioner.

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, at first it was the Prime Minister who was muzzling his MPs. Now it is a House leader who continues to muzzle his ministers.

Why does the minister continue to hide behind his House leader? Why does he not stand in the House, do the right thing, admit that he has made a mistake and sell his shares in his drug company?

Yesterday, the minister stated that he did not have to answer to the House. Let me tell the minister that Canadians want answers. They want the minister to get to work and start protecting public health care in Canada.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, I have already indicated that this is a very unfair question from the hon. member.

The member is the health critic for the Liberal Party, yet one year ago, when she was in government, her disclosure said that she was the sole owner of a health consulting company. Did she sell her shares? I want to know that.

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

Order, please. We will have a little order.

The hon. member for Pierrefonds—Dollard has the floor now. The previous question and the answer are finished.

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first, my colleague from Brampton—Springdale was not a minister.

Yesterday, the health minister said that he could not find any takers for his shares in Prudential Chem Inc.

My question is very simple. Why does the health minister not just make amends and donate his shares rather than selling them, if it is so difficult?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has made complete disclosure according to the code. He has followed it to the letter of the law.

If the members are truly interested in the whole question of ethics, they will make every effort to ensure the federal accountability act gets passed before we adjourn for the summer.

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is not a problem of disclosure. This is a problem of conflict of interest. The minister's personal monetary interests are ahead of the interests of Canadians.

Since having shares in a pharmaceutical company is preventing the minister from introducing a national strategy on pharmaceutical products, why is he keeping his shares in the company?

Is it because he knows that the aim of a national strategy would be to provide medications at the lowest possible cost and this would make him lose money?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the hon. member could help us out with something. Since his colleague from Brampton—Springdale is the critic for the Liberal Party, could he answer the question that was posed a year ago? Has she sold her shares in a health consulting company? We would be interested to know that.

Natural Resources

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Mr. Speaker, revenues from energy resources are vital to the Quebec economy and the Canadian economy. However, some Liberal members are even prepared to put this industry at risk. Liberal leadership candidates want policies that are cause for great concern. The hon. member for Kings—Hants is even proposing to implement an energy tax.

Can the Minister of Natural Resources explain the harmful repercussions of this measure on Quebec's hydroelectricity industry?

[Gary Lunn, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, only a Liberal could believe that imposing punishing taxes on clean, renewable energy is good public policy. Ninety-five per cent of Quebec's power generation is hydroelectric, which emits virtually no greenhouse gases. Quebec's hydro industry employs over 20,000 workers and last year alone contributed over $2 billion to the Quebec economy.

It is beyond ridiculous. I guess only the Liberal Party could think that the path to energy is paved with regressive taxation and robbing Quebeckers of their hard-earned tax dollars. How could anybody do something so ridiculous, wanting to tax clean, renewable energy?

Employment Insurance

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, working families who care for their loved ones in difficult times deserve some help. The NDP pushed the Liberals for years to broaden the definition of who could qualify for EI benefits under the compassionate care program. Then we saw classic Liberal politics, announcing but taking no action.

Now we learn the Conservatives are no better and are refusing to implement the very changes they also called for when in opposition.

When will the government do what it said and put compassion back in the compassionate care program, as it should do?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, as happens too often, misrepresentation of the facts is going on in the House.

I am pleased to inform members that the government has made regulatory changes that will be an important improvement to the EI compassionate care benefit. No longer will other family members, friends or neighbours be disqualified from this benefit. I am pleased to inform members that this takes effect immediately.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, it is sad to see that this has to be in the news for the government to take action. It is sad that families have to suffer. In future, the government will have to be less heartless to those who are struggling and caring for their loved ones. Furthermore, the government should be able to put programs in place without the media having to push it to take such decisions.