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.

Topics

The House resumed from October 18 consideration of the motion for an address to Her Excellency the Governor General in reply to her speech at the opening of the session.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:05 a.m.

Beauce Québec

Conservative

Maxime Bernier ConservativeMinister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, as you know, Tuesday's Speech from the Throne addressed a number of issues, including the need for Canada to strengthen its presence on the world stage.

The speech emphasized the fact that “in our own neighbourhood...Canada is back playing an active role.” I would like to discuss this for a few minutes.

In July, while he was travelling around the regions, Prime Minister Harper provided an overview of our priorities. Our goals are to increase prosperity, enhance safety, and promote our fundamental values—Canadian values that are also universal values: freedom, democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law.

We must sustain the momentum achieved by the Prime Minister's trip. We have to develop and implement a results-oriented strategy that promotes Canadian interests. That means doing three things.

First, Canada is committed to building relationships with the rest of the Americas that will serve our common interests. We will strive to enhance security on this continent and to solidify safer, more secure relationships with our neighbours. We will also work to make our economies stronger and more sustainable by promoting free trade agreements.

Second, we will ensure that Canada plays a leadership role in North America. We will work with our partners to strengthen and promote the basic Canadian values I just mentioned.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the hon. member for Durham.

I will continue, and thank you for allowing me to share my time.

Third, what does a strategy for the Americas mean? It means that our government is determined to carry on with its long-term commitment in Haiti. As you know, Canada has had a long-standing commitment to Haitians. We have contributed unprecedented human, financial and political resources to help ensure the success of the efforts of the international community in Haiti. Lastly, we have ensured that the UN mandate will be renewed for another year, and that the UN intervention force will continue its development work in Haiti.

Let me focus on our trade agenda in the Americas for a moment. As members know, Canadians themselves are engaged in the region. Canada is now the third largest investor in the region. Last year Canadians took more than 2.5 million trips to the Americas and the Caribbean. Now when Canadians visit the regions, they can be confident that Canada is back and playing an active role.

Trade and investment translates into jobs, jobs both in the hemisphere and here at home. Our government wants to ensure that Canadian businesses have continued access to this growing market. This summer we launched free trade negotiations with Peru, Colombia and the Dominican Republic, as well as with CARICOM, made up of 15 Caribbean countries.

We also hope to complete ongoing negotiations with the Central American four, comprising El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala and Nicaragua. I hope these negotiations will be a success in the near future.

The NAFTA agreement helped Canada strengthen our already close ties with Mexico. This economic arrangement was an important catalyst and I am confident this success can be repeated. Yes, we can repeat the NAFTA success and that is why it is important to have good relationships with the countries in the Americas in order to have other free trade agreements.

Our goal is to promote enhanced market access and a level playing field for Canadian businesses in the Americas and increase opportunities for Canadian entrepreneurs.

Crime and drugs from the region find their way onto our streets. Security in neighbourhoods equals safety at home. We, therefore, need to help strengthen security and the rule of law in the hemisphere.

We are committed to working with our hemispheric partners to address pandemics and emergency preparedness. It is very important for our population and also for our neighbours in the hemisphere.

As the Prime Minister pointed out, Canada is a model of constitutional democracy and economic openness, which is combined with social safety nets, equitable wealth creation and sharing across regions.

Canada plays a dynamic role in strengthening and promoting our fundamental values. All Canadians win when our neighbours subscribe to our country's fundamental values: freedom, democracy, respect for the law, justice and the rule of law.

As the Minister of Foreign Affairs, I am determined to make this priority a success. I would also like to speak to the House about what I have done to date to ensure that our foreign policy in the hemispheres is effective and noble. I recently had intense discussions at the UN with the leaders of countries in the Americas.

One of my first acts as Minister of Foreign Affairs was to meet with the Mexican foreign minister. I also met with the leaders of the Central American Four countries, which I listed earlier, as well as the foreign ministers from the Rio Group countries. I also had the opportunity to meet with the President of Haiti, Mr. Aristide. During all those meetings, I promoted the values cherished by Canadians and I insisted that those countries must be able to have a democratic society like ours. I can assure this House that the discussions with my colleagues were very fruitful.

Achieving Canada's objectives in the region will require a government-wide commitment. I would like to give a few examples of how our cabinet is investing heavily in this approach. Our government and its various departments are taking a comprehensive approach.

The hon. Bev Oda, the Minister of International Cooperation, has just returned from a visit to Haiti and Jamaica. She told me recently that her visit to Haiti served to demonstrate our ongoing support for reconstruction efforts in that country. In Jamaica, Minister Oda met with the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Her travels served to reinforce Canada's determination to play a role in the region. Together, we are promoting prosperity, good democratic governance and regional security.

My colleague, the hon. Tony Clement, Minister of Health, just signed an important declaration with the pan-American security organization to promote the adoption of a joint action plan to address health issues in the Americas.

These are all important initiatives led by our government. I am very pleased with the initiatives undertaken by my colleagues and I remain fully available to speak with my colleagues in this House about—

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:15 a.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Bill Blaikie

Order. I am sorry to interrupt the Minister of Foreign Affairs but time has expired. I did not interrupt him at the time but the minister did refer to members of the House by their names, rather than their ridings, so perhaps some chastisement of the speech writers might be in order.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Ottawa Centre.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:15 a.m.

NDP

Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the minister's comments. I am not sure if I missed it through translation but he might want to look at who the President of Haiti is at this point. I think he might have made an error.

However, I will get into the substance of his comments. It is interesting that we have a government now that is looking at free trade with the Americas. At the very same time that we are entering into free trade with the Americas we have human rights abuses going on in Colombia. To the extent that, and I am not sure whether the minister is aware of this, the American Congress has suspended free trade talks with the government of Colombia. Why? Because of the human rights abuses going on.

I would like the minister to explain to the House and to Canadians why it is that human rights are going to be trumped by profit-gaining from corporations both here in Canada and by corporations around the world. Why is it that the government claims to be supporting human rights abroad, yet we see trade deals that will be going on which undermine human rights?

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

Maxime Bernier Conservative Beauce, QC

I fully appreciate my hon. colleague's question, Mr. Speaker. We know that international trade allows our entrepreneurs in Canada to sell their goods and services to other countries in the Americas and vice versa. That is the beginning of economic prosperity.

We know that Canada was built on economic freedom. Some 100 years ago, markets started to open. We believe that market openness is beneficial to nations in allowing various nations to increase their wealth. In turn, this wealth gives them access to better education and social services.

We therefore believe that it is important to enter into such free trade agreements, as this will bring prosperity to these countries while fostering prosperity for our Canadian businesses. At the same time, we are promoting fundamental freedoms, universal freedoms, Canadian freedoms and Canadian values entrenched in the UN Charter, with which everyone is familiar, and in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

As a country, we are part of the United Nations. As I said earlier, we have values to share: freedom, democracy and the rule of law. These are values that we share. In our discussions with other countries, we make sure to promote these values, and I am honoured to do so on behalf of my country.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:15 a.m.

Bloc

Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC

Mr. Speaker, the writer and philosopher Voltaire often said, “When you lie long enough, the lie becomes the truth.” At times we have the impression that this is the government's communications strategy with respect to federal spending power, a power that this government is presenting as a brand new item, a historic step forward.

However, if we carefully examine the details of what is said in the throne speech, it is not the same as what was in the social union agreement that the Government of Quebec rejected and that the National Assembly unanimously rejected in 1998.

The social union agreement provided for the right to withdraw with financial compensation from all programs in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction. The Speech from the Throne refers only to shared-cost programs. It just so happens that in recent years, for all practical purposes, there have been no new shared-cost programs.

Therefore, as political analyst Michel David said, it is a scam. We have been offered a prize that really does not exist, and we are a far cry from what was discussed in the Meech Lake accord and in the social union agreement.

Therefore, it is not a historic step forward that is being offered by this government since it is far less than what we had in the past and all opposed.

The question I would like to ask the minister, if he really is serious, is the following: What are these programs—

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:20 a.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Bill Blaikie

The Minister of Foreign Affairs, please.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Maxime Bernier Conservative Beauce, QC

Mr. Speaker, today we are discussing Canada's position in the Americas and its international role. I understand that my Bloc Québécois colleague may have a specific question about a specific issue, and we will discuss this a bit later in the House.

With regard to the commitments we made in the throne speech—both our international commitment and the government's commitment to place formal limits on spending power—I can tell him that this is a position we had decided to take. The Prime Minister said so when he spoke a few months ago in Quebec City.

In my opinion, this reflects our federalism of openness. The Bloc Québécois will never be able to do anything to ensure that we have the sort of federalism that complies with the Canadian constitution. Our country is a federation that we respect, and on the international scene we—

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:20 a.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Bill Blaikie

I am sorry to have to interrupt the hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs. The hon. Minister of International Cooperation has the floor.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:20 a.m.

Durham Ontario

Conservative

Bev Oda ConservativeMinister of International Cooperation

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Minister of Foreign Affairs for sharing his time with me.

I am proud to speak to the Speech from the Throne, not only as the member for Durham but as the Minister for International Cooperation.

My constituents in Durham know that our government is delivering a better Canada for them and their families. They want the government to continue to govern. They want broad based tax relief for their families and businesses, a real plan for further carbon emission reductions and they want a justice system that will fight crime and make our communities safer.

I know they recognize that they enjoy many qualities of life that others around the world do not. They want a government that will do its part as a member of the global community and bring peace, freedom and the values we cherish to all peoples.

I am privileged to be part of a government that will fulfill its duties, not only here in Canada but around the world. We have a duty to our international reputation, to our partners on the global front to fight poverty, hunger and human injustices. That is why we are supporting the international effort in Afghanistan.

Canada chose to be in Afghanistan because it was the right thing to do, not just the easiest thing to do. We are in Afghanistan because we have an obligation to the international community working in Afghanistan, the development workers and the members of the military who have sacrificed so much to this noble cause.

Having just returned from my first visit to Afghanistan, I can say that I saw a determined, noble and resilient people, a people who can see a difference in their lives after decades of conflict and chaos. I saw how they were rebuilding their infrastructure, preserving their culture and pursuing their livelihoods, whether it was a small vegetable stall, producing hand-made goods for sale or working a small plot of land to grow vegetables or raise livestock.

I want to particularly point out that there were deeply embedded inequities facing Afghan women under the Taliban. They had no human rights, no protection under the law, no access to education and no rights to participate in a democratic process. Today, girls are being educated and women are generating incomes for their families, they voted in the democratic election and are active in their parliament.

With CIDA supported microfinancing programs, over 380,000 people have started their own businesses and more than two-thirds of them are women.

Today, over 80% of Afghans are receiving basic health care. The infant mortality rate has been reduced by 22% and children are now receiving polio vaccinations.

I saw real progress being made and that is why all Canadians should be proud of what is being accomplished in Afghanistan. I met with aid workers, the president and members of the Afghan government and in every case they expressed their gratitude to Canada. We are one of the top donors to the Afghan mission. In fact, Canada has committed to support the Afghan people with $1.2 billion by the year 2011.

The Afghan people are now taking hold of their own lives. We cannot let terrorism again take root in Afghanistan. Our goal, in fact the goal of the democratically elected government in Afghanistan, is to strengthen the country, its institutions, its economy and its own confidence in its future.

I ask all members of Parliament to support the Speech from the Throne and ensure that the progress made in Afghanistan can continue.

Canada is doing its part in other regions of the world and our development efforts are growing. In Budget 2007, our government committed to doubling its international assistance by 2011 from our 2002 level. In that commitment, at the recent G-8 summit our Prime Minister committed to doubling its aid in Africa.

During his trip to South America and the Caribbean, he also made a commitment to increase our focus on the Americas.

In addition, the Prime Minister increased Canada's commitment in Haiti to $555 million over five years.

Earlier this fall, I had an opportunity to see just how important Canadian aid is to the Haitian government and to the agencies working to improve roads, schools and clinics there.

In Jamaica, I saw how Canada's response to the needs of Jamaicans after hurricane Dean was so gratefully appreciated. I saw Canadians at work, bringing education, training and infrastructure improvement to that country as well.

Canada is committed to playing a bigger role in the Americas and to do so for the long term. The Prime Minister, on his trip to Latin America, made this clear. I am pleased that we will be advancing peace, security and development through a wide variety of instruments in this hemisphere. I can assure Canadians that the government will do so with greater focus and effectiveness. We will sustain our efforts so that they will have impact and make a difference in the lives of people in need.

With a government and a leader with a strong commitment, a clear moral purpose and compassion, Canada will fulfill its role in international aid and development.

As the throne speech and our actions show, the government is committed to restoring Canada's place in the word as one of the more generous and committed nations and to improving the global quality of life. As the Prime Minister said on Wednesday, we are all ordinary human beings who just want to live in peace, give their families hope and build a future in their communities. The vision outlined in the throne speech offers a new and confident vision of Canada's place among nations.

It is not only my responsibility as the member for the fine riding of Durham, but also my responsibility as the Minister of International Cooperation. I am very proud to be part of a government that has made its commitment to the international world, to those in need around the world and to do it in a way that will deliver value for the dollars that Canadians work hard to contribute to this global effort.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

Michael Savage Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the minister and I thought she spoke quite well about a number of issues in which Canada is involved.

Canada is a wealthy nation. We are more wealthy now, conceivably, than we ever have been with the surpluses that we have racked up. I want to ask her about a specific private member's bill that has passed the House and has gone to the Senate, Bill C-293, the ODA act, the purpose of which is to make poverty the focus of overseas development assistance.

Many other nations in the world have gone this route. It seems like a no-brainer to many Canadians. It has the support of all kinds of NGOs and organizations that think Canada could do a lot more and that we actually should be hitting some of our millennium development goals. There are people who believe, as I do, that we should hit the 0.7% of GNI for overseas development assistance.

I want to ask the minister specifically whether she thinks that Bill C-293, the purpose of which is to make poverty the focus of overseas development assistance, is a bill that she could encourage her government to support. Is there something wrong with that bill? Does she believe that Canada should hit our 0.7% target out of the millennium development goals?

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Bev Oda Conservative Durham, ON

Mr. Speaker, we are monitoring the progress of Bill C-293 closely. We understand its intent and its principles. Those principles and the intent reflect the intentions and the commitment of the government.

As I articulated in my presentation, the government has committed to doubling its foreign aid over the course of the next couple of years. We have committed to doubling our aid to Africa. We have enhanced our commitment to the Caribbean and to the western hemisphere.

Just as important, we want to make sure that the commitment of Canadian support in tax dollars is going to be done effectively and efficiently. We want to make sure those dollars are not just announcements of large figures; we want to make sure those dollars are going to help the people they are intended to help.

We have a three-pronged program, which we articulated in budget 2007: to ensure that we enhance our international aid and development support with focus, to ensure that it be more effective and efficient, and to ensure that it is done accountably so that we can report to Canadians the good work the government is doing on the international front.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:30 a.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Bill Blaikie

There are many people rising. I cannot recognize everybody, but just to prove that I do have peripheral vision on my left, I recognize the hon. member for Kitchener--Conestoga.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON

Mr. Speaker, it does not surprise me that you have peripheral vision to your left, but I hope you will also have it to your right.

I listened with interest as my colleague articulated some of the advancements that we have been able to see in Afghanistan. This summer I had the privilege of hosting a town hall meeting in my riding, where Lieutenant-Commander Albert Wong presented some of the advancements that have been made in Afghanistan. Indeed, I have heard some personal stories of what has happened there.

The best part of this for me this fall was to participate in a Thanksgiving Day parade on King Street in Kitchener as we were supporting the efforts of our troops in Afghanistan. Sometimes our colleagues on that side of the House would make us believe that Canadians want us to get out. I want to tell our minister that the kind of support I experienced as we supported our troops that day was incredible. As we approached, people inevitably would stand and applaud. I wonder if the minister has experienced that same kind of response in her riding of Durham.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Bev Oda Conservative Durham, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his support for the mission in Afghanistan and the work that Canadians and our government are doing. I certainly have experienced that same kind of support. I am privileged to have met a number of distinguished members of the military who have returned from their missions in Afghanistan and they speak so highly of the work they do.

I have to relay to the House my experience during my trip to Afghanistan in talking with those who every day are facing a very challenging situation. They have told me they want to be there. They see a clear purpose in being there. I met Canadians who were civilians doing work in Afghanistan. I met a woman who voluntarily took a sabbatical from her company in order to return to Afghanistan for another six months. These are the stories that Canadians should hear about.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Robert Thibault Liberal West Nova, NS

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise in this House and comment on the throne speech.

After listening to the Speech from the Throne and reading it in detail subsequently, I was encouraged by a lot of what was stated in it. Like many Canadians, I was disappointed that I did not see all that I would have liked to have seen. In a minority government it is my responsibility as a member of the opposition to work to make Parliament work and to try to encourage the government to bring forward some of the things that were missing from the Speech from the Throne.

It is also my responsibility as a member of the opposition to see that the application of the principles outlined in the Speech from the Throne meet the full interests of Canadians and do not cater to some partisan right wing ideology. That is my fear with regard to the Speech from the Throne, because it can be taken both ways. A lot of these things can be taken in many ways. I will try to outline a few of those matters and point out some of the things that could be improved.

One thing that was very much missing was the whole question of health care in Canada. This continues to be the major preoccupation of Canadians and one of our great weaknesses, both perceived and realistic, as seen by Canadians. We see that wait times are not coming down. The Fraser Institute has stated that in many areas wait times have been increasing over the last year.

That is disappointing, because the federal government made a commitment in its electoral campaign to have specific programs to reduce wait times. I do not necessarily agree with these programs, but I would be willing to work with the government and look at what had been put forward by the Liberal government previously and what is being asked for by the provinces. We could also look at what is being brought forward by the medical community and the patient community to improve the situation in Canada.

We could look at how to get more physicians, more nursing staff and more health professionals into the system and how to find innovative approaches to health care delivery in order to make it more efficient. I have not seen any of that. I would be willing to work with the government, through Parliament, to try to improve these things.

There is also the whole area of infectious diseases. When we look at our health care system we can see that infectious diseases continue to be a health threat. A lot of these diseases are coming out of the hospitals and are either difficult to treat or untreatable using current technologies. They are resistant to drugs. This is very costly to our system and a great risk for our population.

There is also the question of pharmacare. The cost of some drugs can put people into poverty. We had committed to working with the provinces with respect to resolving this issue. I do not see any advances being made with respect to this and I think it is very necessary. We all know people who are suffering from chronic diseases. The cost of medication for those people, both prescription and non-prescription medication, can take them into poverty. We have the wealth in this country and I think that if we work together federally and provincially we can resolve these situations.

I neglected to say that I will be splitting my time with the member for Dartmouth—Cole Harbour.

The other question, of course, that is of great concern to me is the question of the Atlantic accord. The government misled Atlantic Canadians, Nova Scotians and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador in particular. The government said it would honour the accord but it has not. A Conservative member was kicked out of his caucus for defending Nova Scotians. We have seen a side deal being struck by the premier of Nova Scotia that in no way meets the full intent of the accord.

The accord was to be revenue for Nova Scotia based on its petroleum production, above and beyond any other programs of the day. What we have seen is that the Prime Minister bullied a weak premier into taking a deal that is an either/or situation. It may improve the situation as it exists now five or 10 years down the line, but in no way does it meet the commitment of the accord, which was to be an economic development benefit for Nova Scotia, above and beyond.

It is the deal the Prime Minister presented which the premier refused when he spoke to the Senate. It is the deal that the member for Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley was kicked out of caucus for refusing to accept this spring. I think that is a shame. We have to make sure that we continue to fight to restore the full intent of the deal for Nova Scotians. The member for Cape Breton—Canso has been leading the charge on behalf of Nova Scotians. He has been doing a lot of work out of the limelight. I thank him for that.

In my riding, there is the question of transportation. I was very pleased to see in the Speech from the Throne a commitment to the Pacific and Atlantic gateways. Part of the gateway is traffic going to the northeastern United States and the United States as a whole from my area of Nova Scotia through the Digby ferry, whether it be tourism or the $200 million-plus worth of fishery products annually that go across on that ferry, which is at risk. The ferry is on a short term reprieve from the federal and provincial governments, but we need a long term commitment. I encourage the Minister of Transport to be very supportive and to come forward as quickly as possible with the long term fix. The business community has to make a long term commitment. It has to market its products. It has to market the area. It cannot be done every six months or every two years. It has to be done in the long term.

It is the same for the Port of Digby. The federal government has had the arbitrator's report for two years, a report which indicates that it is Transport Canada's contract that was weak in the privatization of that port. I encourage the minister to take action. I have discussed it with him many times and he is very supportive, but I encourage him to take quick action and resolve this issue. He has had the report in his hands for nearly two years now. I believe that is too long.

Air transport out of western Nova Scotia continues to be a great problem. I encourage the Department of Transport to work with the provincial government and local municipalities for the long term maintenance of the Yarmouth International Airport and its marketing to private carriers.

I was disappointed to see that although the fishery is mentioned there was no commitment as to what the government will do to assist the long term survival and development of the fishery. There was no commitment to small craft harbours, as had been committed to in the Conservative election campaign. The Minister of Fisheries committed to this when he was chairing the fisheries committee of the House of Commons. I have been working with him in a dialogue to try to improve the position he has taken on the preservation of the independence of the inshore fleet.

I think he has the right principle and is trying to do the right thing. Some modifications have to be made because a lot of people are getting hurt and are caught in the trap and should not be. I will continue to work with the minister on that.

On the question of agriculture, in Nova Scotia the pork and beef industries are in dire straits. The pork industry is disappearing as quickly as we can watch. The beef industry is in grave turmoil. We need some innovative and imaginative support from the federal government, working with the province and the agricultural community, to maintain its survival. It is a question of food security for Nova Scotia. A different solution is needed in Nova Scotia compared to western Canada, where there are huge amounts of production mostly for export. In Atlantic Canada, the production is for the local domestic market and it requires a different solution.

The question of Afghanistan is always a subject of debate in my riding. It will be remembered that when there was a debate and a vote in the House on the extension of our mission in Afghanistan, I spoke in favour and supported an extension. But what I opposed then and what I oppose now is using Parliament as a rubber stamp for a government initiative. I can accept that the government makes a decision on military deployment. I can accept that the government makes the decision and takes the responsibility for it, because the government cannot share with Parliament in an open forum some of the information used to make that decision. The government cannot put our military people and our allies at risk. Some of that information must remain secret.

However, if the government wants the support of the House and a debate in the House, it has to be with full disclosure. It cannot be limited to a three hour debate with no information presented. We can strike a special committee of this House. We can swear in members as privy councillors; many members already are. We can swear in new privy councillors in order to evaluate information that may otherwise not be made public. We can see if we have the confidence, yes or no, that we can in a combat mission achieve the goals that we are seeking and if we can do it in the short term. In all cases I think we have to have long term support for the people of Afghanistan. We have to work toward diplomacy and also toward development and security.

On a more positive note, I want to thank the government for promising to implement phase 2 of the Dion plan. This is very important to official language minority communities.

I am glad the Conservatives recognized the value of the Liberal platform, and I will work with them on this. I encourage the government to continue taking action in this area by providing long-term funding and support for official language minority communities across the country.

One of the areas that is now of great concern in my riding, in all of Nova Scotia and probably all of Canada is the question of labour market training. It always comes to a crunch, when right before the quotas are to start the funding is not there. There is a scramble to find funding for a few students. Again, there is no long term planning. There should be a program whereby we permit people receiving EI to follow these labour market forces and make themselves more available for work.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:45 a.m.

Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo B.C.

Conservative

Betty Hinton ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs

Mr. Speaker, as always I listen very carefully when a member of the opposition stands to speak and on something as important as the throne speech, I am even more diligent. I found a few comments rather offensive, but that oftentimes happens in the House of Commons.

The suggestion was made that somehow our government misled people regarding the Atlantic accord. I remind the hon. member that if it were not for this government, when it was on the opposition benches, pushing as hard as we did on the former government, there would be no Atlantic accord.

We have a situation where there is some misinterpretation and we are correcting that very quickly. A couple of premiers are onside already and one more to go.

The member opposite was the minister of fisheries. When he talks about things such as the problems he outlined in agriculture, aquaculture, transportation, labour market, I remind him that the economy is better now than it has ever been.

What did he do as a former minister, when his party was the government, to solve all of these problems, the problems that were there for years and years and went unheeded?

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:45 a.m.

Liberal

Robert Thibault Liberal West Nova, NS

Mr. Speaker, the reason why Canada's economy is doing better now than it has in generations, if not ever, is that we have seized the opportunities that presented themselves. We have invested in research and development as well as in our universities. We have dealt with the annual deficits created by the Conservative government. We have put the country back on the right track.

We must now look at the country's current situation. It is different from what it was in 1993, 1995 or 2005. Canada's economy is doing well right now, but that is not necessarily uniformly true across the country; as a result, some regions, and perhaps all regions of Canada, are at risk.

The Canadian dollar is now at par with the U.S. dollar. While some regions are experiencing strong economic growth, other regions, or sectors such as the manufacturing sector, are experiencing a decline and are struggling. Solutions are needed today for today's problems. We have dealt with the problems facing us; now, we are asking that this government do the same.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:45 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my hon. colleague's speech, however, I have to confess that it did remind me of watching a man desperately trying to tread water.

When he says he was encouraged and yet disappointed that there were things that could be taken both ways, I do not know if he read the same throne speech I read. The throne speech I read said that the government would kill the Wheat Board. That cannot be taken both ways.

The throne speech said that our international obligations to Kyoto were dead. That cannot be read both ways. Conservatives will put off any action until 2040 when we are all pushing up daisies. I think that is fairly clear.

It says that we will not be in Kandahar until 2009; we will be there until 2011. That cannot be taken both ways.

When we have such clear issues, such wrong-headed issues, and such a divisive path for our country, how can he sit there, and he probably will sit when the vote comes, and say that he is encouraged and yet disappointed?

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:50 a.m.

Liberal

Robert Thibault Liberal West Nova, NS

Mr. Speaker, perhaps I could give the member one example. I see in the throne speech that the federal government is willing to look at the question of EI and EI reform, and that is very positive. There is the elimination of wait periods and also the extension of EI to people who are suffering from chronic diseases, who are out of the workforce for cancer treatment or things of that nature, for a year or so, as brought forward in a private member's bill by our members for Cape Breton—Canso, for Sydney—Victoria.

I can also see improving processing times. Currently unemployed people wait for their first benefits for five or six weeks. I can see improvements for people who are receiving EI but not in full time work. They will be able to take labour job training programs and continue receiving their EI in the off period, which is not possible now.

There are a lot of good things that can be done. Then it can be a complete right-wing agenda to cut back on the benefits being received by people in temporary and seasonal employment and that would be negative. Therefore, in that sense it can be taken both ways.

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:50 a.m.

Liberal

Michael Savage Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take the back end of the ship with my colleague from West Nova. His speech reminded me of a time when Nova Scotia had a regional minister who actually stood up for our interests and put Nova Scotia's interests ahead of Canadians' interests.

I want to talk about the Speech from the Throne. Some of the things that my colleague spoke about I may touch on, but for me it was a disappointing document, a leaflet really, more for what is not in it than for what is in it.

We just had a question from a western Canadian about the Atlantic accord saying that there was a lot of miscommunication. I remember when I was in the House back in the spring when it was apparent to most people in Canada, and certainly to all people in Nova Scotia, that the Atlantic accord was torched. A member from Ontario asked a question saying that it had not been torched and it was still there. That was obviously not the case. I pointed out to the member at the time that he would not know the difference between the Atlantic accord and a Honda Accord, and that is still the case. There is a lot of confusion.

The Atlantic accord is gone. If it were not gone, we would not have seen the scrambling to try to fix it. The fix is not a fix that Nova Scotians would stand up and give any resounding approval to. It is not a fix at all. If it were, the member for Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley would be back on that side of the House from where he was kicked out not too long ago.

It is one issue that all Nova Scotians, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will stand up to be heard on.

Last week I had a public meeting in my community. I invited people to tell me as their member of Parliament what they wanted to see in the throne speech. The government had prorogued Parliament and would bring in a throne speech. Whether I agreed or disagreed, we discussed a number of things. We discussed poverty, Afghanistan, the Atlantic accord, as we might expect, students, seniors and veterans.

One issue that came forward, as one would expect, was the issue of crime. In my community of Dartmouth—Cole Harbour we have had more than our share of violent crime, which is a big concern.

At that meeting, two people whom I had not known before spoke at that meeting in a very personal way about their experiences with two sons from two different families. They had been beaten up and bullied and they did not feel safe in their community. They came with an open mind about what could be done, but they wanted to see changes in the Youth Criminal Justice Act to address their specific case.

When members of Parliament hear these stories, they want to do the right thing. In Nova Scotia last December Justice Merlin Nunn came forward with a report on youth crime in response to a specific incident in Nova Scotia, which was quite appalling. The report was long, detailed, well thought out, well argued and well presented.

When the Minister of Justice came to Halifax, he referenced the Nunn Commission report. All members should go to www.Nunncommission.ca and have a look at this report. In the report it refers to problems with the Youth Criminal Justice Act. It indicates particularly that repeat offenders are not dealt with effectively enough and makes recommendations. It also suggests that the Youth Criminal Justice Act is sound legislation and that we should not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

When the Minister of Justice refers to the Nunn Commission report, I hope he does not just take a little piece of it, on which I agree with him, but looks at the who report in context and adds into that the need for mental health services for kids in our community, boys and girls clubs, breakfast programs and stay in school programs as well, which will also do more to reduce crime.

Yesterday the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development spoke on the throne speech. He was one of the first government speakers. It was an amazing spectacle. He gave a 20 minute speech without talking about human resources. He talked about one specific issue, and that was the crime issue, which the government is pounding away trying to get people to believe that its members are the only people who want to act on it.

The Minister of Human Resources and Social Development stood in the House of Common, and he is a good guy, but he did not talk about human resources. Why? Because there is nothing in the throne speech on human resources of which to speak. We heard about employment insurance. It states:

Our Government will also take measures to improve the governance and management of the Employment Insurance Account.

There are people across Atlantic Canada whose knees are shaking when they read that piece. Does that mean the government will make it better, as my colleague from West Nova optimistically points out?

If the government wants to make it better, it could look at some private members' bills that have come from all parties in this Parliament: Bill C-269, Bill C-265 or Bill C-278 that my colleague from West Nova referenced, which would extend sick benefits under EI from 15 weeks to 50 weeks. Who could oppose that?

It is a reaction to a very significant issue in Canada, which is that people who used to die of heart attacks, strokes and cancer in a lot of cases now are surviving. That is good news. The bad news is they cannot go right back to work and the EI system is the perfect way to address that need.

I want to applaud the member for Sydney—Victoria, who brought forward Bill C-278, costed it and did a lot of work on it. He got the Heart and Stroke Foundation and the Cancer Society to say that it was the kind of legislation we needed, and the government refused a royal recommendation.

This document has one very brief mention about education, saying families worry about the rising costs of higher education. That is not a stunning revelation. They do. We all hear that as well. We need to help them. One does not tax cut one's way to a better education. One invests, particularly for low income Canadians, persons with disabilities and aboriginal Canadians. We should be investing.

In the late 1990s, when the government wrestled the deficit under control, we invested in things like the Millennium Scholarship Foundation, which is now at a precipice in terms of whether it can continue if it does not soon get a nod from the government that it will put money back into it, Canada access grants, learning bonds and a number of other things.

If we are to address productivity, there are a number of ways we should do it. We should be reducing taxes, not throwing $6 billion out the window on a GST cut, particularly for Canadians who need it the most. As a start, we should go back to the Liberal cut of the economic update of 2005, which the government reversed the following year. That is a start, raising the personal exemption.

I am fully in support of lowering corporate taxes. The countries in the OECD that have done that are doing very well. The lowest economic groups in those countries are doing very well also.

There are things that we can do, such as replenishing the Millennium Scholarship Foundation. The Canada summer jobs fiasco, which we dealt with last year, was pretty clear. It was a mistake by the government. It tried to rectify it. Some organizations, due to pressure from this side of the House, got their funding but many did not. There are things we can do now to ensure that fiasco does not happen again next year.

I want to talk about manufacturers and exporters. There is a crisis in manufacturing in Canada. We need to have mechanisms in the employment insurance system through Human Resources Canada to deal with that.

In my riding the Hershey Moirs plant announced in the spring that it would close in December. Six hundred people will be out of work. There is a program designed to help those people through Service Canada. I have been at transition team meetings with the union, which is working very hard. It is not happy about it at all, but realizes it has to now ask what it will do with the people. It is working with the plant and with Service Canada on a program that provides assistance to people who will lose their jobs.

Guess what? There is a limit of $100,000 per project. I asked Service Canada if it had implemented this project somewhere else and it said, yes, that it was great. I asked how many employees were affected and it said one. One person gets laid off and it can spend $100,000, 500 or 600 people get laid off and it can spend $100,000. Surely the funding should be by person, not by project.

I want to mention that I spoke directly to the minister about that. I appreciate the fact that he took the time to talk to me about this case. I am very hopeful he will intervene to make sure that what needs to be done gets done. However, there was no mention—

Resumption of Debate on Address in ReplySpeech from the Throne

10:55 a.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Bill Blaikie

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member. We have reached 11 o'clock and it is time for statements by members. The member has a minute and 30 seconds remaining in his 10 minute allocation.

Communities in BloomStatements By Members

11 a.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to extend congratulations on behalf of the Parliament of Canada to the City of Langley, which recently received the International Communities in Bloom Award. To win against international competitors from England, Scotland, France and Japan in the elite of all categories is akin to receiving a gold medal at the Olympics.

Not only did the City of Langley win the international category, it received special mention for its responsible environmental protection initiatives, mainly its attempt to become carbon neutral in the next 30 years. The City of Langley is planting about 30,000 trees over the next several years to reduce its carbon footprint.

I would like to congratulate the hard work of the Communities in Bloom committee under co-chairs Teresa Galbraith and Guy Martin, and the Nicomekl Enhancement Society, and the Langley Field Naturalists.

Each of us needs to follow the example of the City of Langley and re-green and beautify our communities. It makes our communities healthier and safer.

Air TransportationStatements By Members

11 a.m.

Liberal

Mario Silva Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, this month Canadians learned about the proposal by the Bush administration that would see their personal details transferred to the United States government when they travel.

The proposal, known as secure flight, would force Canadian air carriers that fly over American air space to provide the personal details of their passengers to American authorities.

That is a serious violation of Canadian travellers' right to privacy. Our government has a duty to protect Canadians from foreign governments making such excessive demands.

In light of the abuse suffered by Maher Arar, Canadians are worried, and rightly so, when information pertaining to them is provided to Washington.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs must act immediately to ensure that Canadians, and in fact all passengers, travelling on Canadian air carriers are protected from this overzealous and unnecessary intrusion.

Repentigny Saint Vincent de Paul SocietyStatements By Members

11 a.m.

Bloc

Raymond Gravel Bloc Repentigny, QC

Mr. Speaker, on October 13, at an event recognizing volunteer agencies in Repentigny, the Saint Vincent de Paul Society and its Ozanam house were named best volunteer agency of 2007.

This agency has been in Repentigny since 1982 and is known to be the most productive, most structured and most active of its kind in Quebec.

The Saint Vincent de Paul Society meets the daily needs of the less fortunate and provides critical assistance to victimized families. It is an enormous job that 132 volunteers do together for a common mission. Volunteer hours totalled 55,988 in 2006 and 2007. Furthermore, 427 people in need found support at the house and 64,722 clients walked through its doors.

The Ozanam store takes gently used items, cleans and repairs them and sells them at a modest price.

I am pleased to congratulate in this House the president of Ozanam, Margot Murphy, and the entire team of volunteers and workers who provide help and support to people who are often denied what they need.