House of Commons Hansard #4 of the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was afghanistan.
Lawrence Cannon ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, in the 2006 and 2007 budget speeches, the government took into account not only the recommendations made in the Séguin report, but also a broad consensus among the provincial premiers. It acted to correct the fiscal imbalance by balancing the distribution of federal government revenues.
The federal government and the other provinces have been wrangling over the issue of federal spending power for more than 40 years, and we are going to tackle that.
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, there has never been a tax transfer under this government. All we have seen are inadequate money transfers.
The Prime Minister promised to eliminate the fiscal imbalance and therefore also eliminate federal spending power in Quebec's exclusive areas of jurisdiction. The throne speech does nothing to accomplish this.
Is the Prime Minister aware that if he digs in his heels, he will irrevocably break the promise he made to Quebeckers in December 2005, which will prove that it was nothing but a Conservative election ploy.
Lawrence Cannon ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, it must be said that if this was a ploy—which it most certainly was not—the fact remains that the Bloc Québécois supported it. The Bloc Québécois quite clearly stands behind the report by the former finance minister of the Government of Quebec, Yves Séguin, whom I knew personally. But I have to say that there were other comments as well. Canada is a federation, and the other provinces had their say too. I have to say that the results in Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean have proved our party right. In fact—
Monique Guay Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
The results in Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot also prove something, Mr. Speaker.
If the elimination of federal spending power is not accompanied by the unconditional right to opt out, with full financial compensation for Quebec, then they are trying to fool us because the government intends to restrict its spending power only in cost-shared programs, which are almost nonexistent.
Will the government admit that, with the promise in the throne speech, there is nothing to stop it from continuing to meddle at will in Quebec's areas of jurisdiction?
Lawrence Cannon ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, the federal government is very aware of the areas of jurisdiction and it practices a form of open federalism. We have proven this with such gestures as recognition of Quebec's role in UNESCO, among others. We did so when we were able to resolve the fiscal imbalance to the satisfaction of Quebec. We did so, everyone in this House did, when we recognized that Quebeckers form a nation within a united Canada. I believe that what they did not like was the part about a united Canada.
Monique Guay Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, had the Bloc Québécois never spoken of a nation, it would never have come to pass here in the House of Commons. Thanks to our hard work Quebec has been recognized as a nation.
All federalist parties were in league yesterday to defeat the sub-amendment by the Bloc Québécois, the voice of the unanimous will of the Quebec National Assembly, which is calling for the unconditional right to opt out with full compensation.
Does the government acknowledge that with this vote it has demonstrated, once again, that it does not have any intention of eliminating federal spending power?
Lawrence Cannon ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, I want to immediately make one thing very clear to the Bloc Québécois. We will not eliminate the federal spending power; we will limit it, as we said in the consideration of the throne speech. That is in French, therefore we can understand it: we will limit the federal spending power.
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, this week's throne speech confirms that the government is continuing to take Canada in the wrong direction on many key issues. By completely ignoring the prosperity gap, we know exactly where working families stand with the government's agenda, and that is just the beginning.
Twice this Parliament has passed legislation to protect workers from bankruptcy by protecting their wages. Yesterday, the NDP agreed to bring back the crime bills. Will the government now reinstate Bill C-62 for the protection of workers' wages from bankruptcy? It is long overdue. Why is it not doing that?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments from the NDP about the issue of poverty and of people's prosperity in Canada. In fact, we are very pleased with what we see under our government because today more Canadians have jobs in Canada than ever in Canadian history.
That does not change the fact that some people will be looking for protection in cases where they do lose their jobs and this is the bill that the hon. member references. As she well knows, we are in discussions about whether they are willing to deal with reinstatement of those bills. I am happy to continue those discussions with her.
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, the government House leader is not answering the question. I want to know why the government has such contempt for legislation that has been passed by this Parliament twice to protect workers from bankruptcy by protecting their wages. It is an absolute injustice that workers still do not have this protection. Millions of dollars have been lost in their wages because this bill has not been implemented.
Why will the government not give a clear commitment today that the bill, which everyone agrees to, will be reinstated so that workers can get the protection they need? It is long overdue.
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, the position of this government has been quite clear and the hon. member for Vancouver East knows it quite well. We want to get permission to reinstate all the bills that we had in the last session. We have asked her permission for that and if she is willing to give that, we would be very delighted.
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON
Mr. Speaker, an Ontario police officer, in a sworn statement, says that there is evidence that high level Conservative Party operatives were involved in discussions to bribe Ottawa mayoral candidate Terry Kilrea with a Parole Board appointment.
This week the government House leader himself admitted that somebody approached one of their ministers. Will the House leader tell us who that minister was?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, it is a matter of public record and I am quite happy to tell him. After the municipal election was over, Terry Kilrea phoned the Minister of the Environment and asked how his appointment was going. The Minister of the Environment told him that he had no idea what he was talking about. The reason he said that was because no offer ever came from this government and, as the member knows, since then no appointment has ever been made.
Only the Liberal Party considers the failure to make a patronage appointment a scandal. I see the Liberals have not given up that view since yesterday.
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON
Mr. Speaker, if it were not for the court documents that made it really clear, those guys would not tell us which minister was approached.
The reality is that the minister knows it is against the law and if he knows that and knows that he should not even be seen to have a discussion on this issue, why would he not cover his back and call the police right away and tell them that someone approached him with an inappropriate offer? What was he waiting for? it is a simple question and I need a simple answer.
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, I know members of the Liberal Party are used to ducking, covering and running when people complain that patronage appointments are not made because that is their base, upset that they are not doing what they think they are there for.
In our party it works very differently. The Minister of the Environment was quite open. He made no offer. No appointment was made by the government. No patronage appointment took place. I do not know what the member is complaining about.
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Mr. Speaker, this is no laughing matter. In May 2007, the Minister of the Environment told the police that Mr. Kilrea mentioned a job offer on the National Parole Board during a meeting on July 19, 2006. The minister also told the police that he would have had to personally approve any such appointment to a federal public position of that nature.
Does the minister have the courage to confirm these facts?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, I am very puzzled because, as I have said repeatedly, there was no appointment made. We were not in the business of doing that and no offer was ever made.
I know it might have been different had there been a Liberal government because the fellow who had an interest in it, Larry O'Brien, was actually appointed by former Prime Minister Chrétien to an advisory council and was a major fundraiser for the Liberals. In fact, he was even president of the Laurier Club for big donors.
If the Liberal Party were still in government I suspect perhaps that appointment might have been made because he would have been in a position to deliver.
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Kilrea's affidavit is at odds with what the environment minister told police. The minister said that Kilrea asked but Kilrea said that he did not raise the appointment directly with the minister because O'Brien told him not to. Mr. Kilrea swore this in his affidavit and took a polygraph test which he passed with flying colours.
My question is simple. Did the Minister of the Environment mislead the police and, if so, why?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, he certainly did not mislead the police. In fact, he was quite clear that no appointment was made, no offer was made and no appointment would be made. There is nothing coming from the government. All the folks who are involved have nothing to do with the government and, as I have seen, if we put any affiliation on them, they are Liberals.
Guy André Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
Mr. Speaker, more victims have succumbed to the forestry crisis. Following the definitive loss of more than 200 jobs yesterday in Saint-Michel-des-Saints, we learn today that another 200 jobs are being lost in Haute-Mauricie. Yet, no concrete measures were announced in the throne speech to support the workers, communities and families affected by this crisis. Instead of helping, the government is only adding to the crisis through its laissez-faire ideology.
Why does the government still refuse to introduce concrete measures?
Monte Solberg ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Social Development
Mr. Speaker, I come from a part of rural Canada so I understand how devastating this can be to communities. We are concerned about this, which is why we put in place the targeted initiative for older workers which is working in nine different places in Quebec.
We think these workers still have a tremendous amount to offer. We want to see them get the training they need to move on into other sectors and other jobs and continue to provide for their families.
Guy André Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
Mr. Speaker, this government must stop reflecting and start acting. I would remind the government that, since April 2005, 21,000 people whose livelihood depended on forestry are now unemployed in Québec.
Will this government continue to show indifference, as is the case with the manufacturing industry? Or will this government decide to finally take action to help and support the forest industry?
Monte Solberg ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Social Development
Mr. Speaker, it is hardly indifference to start a program like the targeted initiative and then to add on top a $3 billion program designed to assist the provinces in providing training over the next five years.
We are doing a tremendous amount to help workers across this country who are devastated by layoffs in some of these hard hit sectors. I am proud of that record. We are concerned for these workers and we are doing the best we can to assist them.
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC
Mr. Speaker, when Rio Tinto took over Alcan, the company agreed to Quebec's demands, but the federal minister was negligent and declined to use the powers available to him under the Investment Canada Act to ensure that the transaction would benefit Canada.
Would the minister acknowledge that if he really cared about the well-being of workers, he would have demanded that Rio Tinto guarantee the job level and commit to doing a certain amount of its aluminum processing right here?
