House of Commons Hansard #37 of the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was crime.
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
Mr. Speaker, Brian Mulroney was Prime Minister of Canada in 1986 when Bill C-45 was adopted, becoming the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act. Part III of this law provides for measures to protect the health and safety of Parliament Hill employees. However, 20 years and four prime ministers later, Part III has never been proclaimed.
Why has the current Minister of Labour not yet announced his intention to enact this law without any further delay?
Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations ActOral Questions
Jonquière—Alma Québec
Conservative
Jean-Pierre Blackburn ConservativeMinister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec
Mr. Speaker, in reply to my colleague's question, I would say that employees of Parliament Hill do not fall under the Canada Labour Code in this matter, but are governed by another law which does not touch on the issue raised by the member's question.
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Mr. Speaker, the UN has introduced a convention against torture and other forms of cruelty, which Canada has ratified. However, it still has not ratified the optional protocol associated with the convention, unlike other countries such as the United Kingdom, Mexico and Spain.
Given the tumult over the Maher Arar affair and the difficulties facing Canadian soldiers in the treatment of Afghan prisoners, when will the government ratify this protocol?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, Canada remains strongly committed to human rights. In fact, under our new government, there is a renewed commitment to human rights. We will be advancing that. We will be looking at the issues raised by the protocol on the treaty on torture in examining our appropriate next moves.
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, the NDP members are the worst floor-crossers in the House. Their bodies do not change places but their principles do. They gave up on aboriginal people. They gave up on the environment. They gave up on child care. They gave up on student aid. They gave up on workplace training. They have given up on farmers.
Could I have the government's assurance that when it comes to the Canadian Wheat Board, it will not change the Canadian Wheat Board unless it has a producer plebiscite on a fair and honest question, where farmers decide, not politicians, not bureaucrats?
Jacques Gourde ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board
Mr. Speaker, our election platform was very clear. We will accept what is fairly and freely decided for all Canadian farmers.
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Mr. Speaker, in the annual state of trade document tabled in the House yesterday, the Minister of International Trade stated that trade and investment performance continued to be relatively prosperous.
Could the parliamentary secretary tell the House how Canada's trade is measuring up on the international stage?
Helena Guergis ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that both our exports and imports have been strong and continue to contribute to the improved well-being of Canadians. Overall, exports have risen by 5.2%. Our sound domestic economic policy, the excellence work of trade and investment counsellors here in Canada and abroad has made us a reliable import and export partner.
Many of the leaders with whom I am meeting are very pleased with the direction that the government is taking and are expressing a desire to invest in Canada.
Canada's trade is doing very well on the international stage, but we need to do better. Under the leadership of the Prime Minister, we will do better.
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Mr. Speaker, for over a year, Conservatives have claimed they have a plan to tackle climate change. Canadians and the NDP have been asking, where is the plan? For five months, nothing.
Yesterday the NDP launched the first part of its five point plan to a cleaner environment called the “Green Agenda for Canada”. These are costed proposals that would reduce emissions and save working families money on their energy bills.
When will the government table its plan to help Canadians make their homes more efficient?
Mark Warawa ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, it is a good question and, as we have said many times in the House, we are developing a plan that is going to be effective and realistic.
I do not expect any support on plan building with the Liberals. For 13 years, they did absolutely nothing. However, we ask everyone else in the House to help us develop a plan that will be effective.
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Mr. Speaker, I wish the government would not blame the Liberals for the lack of their plan. Actions speak louder than words.
Homeowners need relief from soaring energy costs now. Our plan would save Canadians money, create 190,000 green jobs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 42 megatonnes. Our plan calls for housing retrofits, amendments to the national building code, mandatory ENERGY STAR compliance for household appliances and the reinstatement of the EnerGuide programs.
Could the government indicate exactly when Canadians will learn which of these proposals will be taken up by the government?
Christian Paradis ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. All Canadians can agree that there has been an increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to the previous government's failure to take action.
We are a responsible government. We are reviewing programs precisely in order to keep our promises to Canadians and so as not to betray them, as they were betrayed for the past 13 years.
This is what it means to be a responsible government.
Gary Goodyear Conservative Cambridge, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the 12th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the membership of committees of the House.
Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I move that the 12th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs be concurred in without debate.
Procedure and House AffairsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
Some hon. members
Agreed.
Rob Nicholson ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
moved:
That, pursuant to Standing Order 27(1), commencing on June 19, 2006 and concluding on June 22, 2006 the House shall continue to sit until midnight.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say a few words on this, with the emphasis on a few words. It seems to me that we should not spend forever on any debate that would extend the hours of the House. We want to get to the business of the government.
It is part of a long standing tradition that in the last couple of weeks, Parliament is extended to get its business done. I believe it was 1982 that this became standardized as part of the rules for governing the House of Commons and it is generally done for the last two weeks. However, this is very specific. We are asking for the last week, beginning June 19, to extend sitting dates.
I will be quite candid with the House that we would like to see progress made on the federal accountability act. Great progress has been made in committee and there has been a certain amount of cooperation. There are a lot of amendments that have been dealt with in that committee. It is reasonable and Canadians are expecting that we will deal with that.
I say to Canadians that the schedule of the House of Commons is not overly onerous for any members of Parliament. It is a privilege to serve here and when we get the opportunity, we know we have to come here to work.
At the same time there has been good progress made in this Parliament. Bill C-9, the conditional sentencing act, has been referred to the standing committee. That is a great step forward. I am looking forward to moving Bill C-10, the bill that established minimum sentences for violent crime in this country, to committee so that it can be studied.
We recently had passage of the budget implementation bill. We have made good progress. We are expecting that the federal accountability act will be back in the House very shortly. That is among the reasons why we would like to see the House extend its time for sittings in that last week.
I think it is only reasonable. Whenever we have an election, as we did earlier this year, it cuts into House time, so the Parliament of Canada has not sat as long or as often in 2006 as we might otherwise expect in a year in which there was not an election. This is a reasonable request.
There are other bills that I know are important to members. I have had members from a number of political parties indicate to me they would like to see progress on the second reading debate on the foreign adoption bill and we are prepared to accommodate that. There is one bill I know is very important to members, which is fixed dates for elections. That particular legislation is very important. It is part of that democratic reform package on which I think Canadians are looking to us to proceed.
I am asking for the cooperation of the House in moving this forward. Let us work together and complete the agenda that Canadians are expecting of us.
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, I have a few comments to make on the motion that the government House leader has just introduced in the House.
First, I would indicate that I am a bit surprised at the government's perception that this type of motion, which as the hon. gentleman points out is not especially unusual, is actually necessary in the circumstances of this Parliament thus far.
While working and fighting very hard for the issues that really matter for ordinary Canadians, like: reductions in personal income taxes; high-quality, universally-accessible, affordable and developmental early learning and child care system; action on the funding of the Kelowna accords with and for aboriginal peoples; action on climate change and the environment; greater student aid, workplace training and innovation; help for farmers, fishers and foresters; and stronger support for the arts and cultural expression, I do not think it can be said that we have been obstructionist or dilatory in this House.
The Acting Speaker Conservative Royal Galipeau
I am sorry to interrupt the member. I just need some clarification for the purpose of managing what is happening right now.
Is the hon. member under questions and comments or under resuming debate?
The Acting Speaker Conservative Royal Galipeau
I am advised by the Table that the hon. member could be asking questions at this moment.
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, let me repeat that point for the sake of clarity. I have pointed out that members of the opposition have been very vigorous in advancing the strong views that we hold with respect to things like tax reductions; child care; the Kelowna accords; climate change; greater aid for students pursuing post-secondary education; workplace training; innovation; help for farmers, fishers and foresters; and stronger support for the arts and culture.
We have been vigorous in our pursuit of all of those items, but I do not think it can be said that we have in any way obstructed the business of the House or slowed it down from what would otherwise be the case. There is no evidence that the business of the House has been stalled.
Second, I would point out that the government has not presented a particularly heavy or even full agenda for the House to deal with thus far in this new Parliament. There have been 17 items of legislation that have been brought forward. More than half of that total are in fact recycled old items from the previous government in the last Parliament. Two or three of them are purely routine in nature and that leaves only a very small minority of items on the order paper that are truly new or potentially time consuming in what they would demand of the House.
Again, it is not abundantly clear that an extension of hours is necessary. The order paper is largely vacant in terms of new or controversial matters.
It would be useful to know, in dealing with this motion that is now before the House, if the government requires the extension of hours, what will that extra time be used for? Beyond the one item or perhaps two items that the government House leader has referred, will the government devote some of its extra time to some new initiatives that would actually achieve some good and some progress?
For example, will the government, in that two week period, produce the promised plan to generate a dramatically increased number of quality child care spaces for those Canadian moms and dads who truly need that kind of service? I would point out, as we have said in the House before, that three or four taxable dollars per week do not a system make.
The Conservatives have hinted that they may have some plan for something more at some time in terms of increasing spaces. I wonder if they would take the opportunity in the coming two weeks to produce at least the basics of that plan for more child care spaces.
On aboriginal people, the Conservatives have said that they support the spirit and intent of the Kelowna accords for aboriginal Canadians, but they just do not like the title and they just cannot find the money. They say that they are working on a plan of their own, one probably under a different name. Somehow that word “Kelowna” seems to stick in the throat.
I ask if they will be prepared to use some of the extra time that they are now asking for to table a specific action plan on Kelowna or better still, will they simply bring forward, in the next two weeks, Bill C-292, standing in the name of the right hon. member for LaSalle—Émard, so it can enjoy the confidence of the House. That would be a very good use of the extra time.
With respect to the environment, the government to date has focused primarily on cancelling programs, eliminating budgets, and embarrassing Canadians internationally in its reneging of the Kyoto protocol. Still, it talks, amidst a lot of slogans for the most part, about some vague, unspecified made in Canada plan with respect to climate change.
Canadians have languished in Conservative darkness for too long now and I wonder, in the extra time in the next two weeks, will we see that made in Canada plan with respect to climate change and the honouring of Kyoto?
My fourth and final suggestion has to do with assistance to Canadian students and those who are seeking further training in the workplace. When the government came to office, it inherited from its predecessors $2.7 billion in firm, clear commitments to enhance the level of student aid in this country, to reduce the financial barriers, so more Canadian students could have access to post-secondary education.
The government also inherited $3.5 billion that was dedicated to enhanced workplace training through labour market partnership agreements.
All of this was aimed at enhancing productivity, growth and prosperity for all Canadians.
These issues with respect to student aid, workplace training and innovation are entirely lacking from the government's agenda now. Again I would suggest that in the next two weeks it might be very useful to devote some of this extra time to an important matter such as that.
The official opposition does not intend to delay this motion or to stand in its way, but we would ask the government to pay some attention to the issues I have just referred to.
I would also ask for the government House leader's assurance that in the way the extra hours are applied he does not intend to in any way interfere with or pre-empt the normal flow of private members' business that would be scheduled over that two week period.
Similarly, I ask that the commitment that has been made to a further allotted day which would stand in the name of the Liberal Party and is tentatively scheduled for June 20 would not be interfered with in the flow of activity that the government House leader has in mind.
I wonder if the government House leader would take the opportunity at some point subsequent in this debate, before we deal with the motion, to offer the House his assurance with respect to those two matters.
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
Mr. Speaker, I think we can give the hon. member those assurances. It certainly would be our intention to continue with private members' hour and, as agreed upon, there will be an allotted day to be given to the Liberal Party in the second week.
