Debates of Dec. 11th, 2007

The Environment

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canada and its Minister of the Environment have become the object of ridicule, singled out as the greatest obstacle to progress in Bali. No one believes the government is negotiating with clean hands. This domestic plan has been rejected by every single independent observer. It will allow Canada's emissions to rise for decades. Nobody believes the government at home. Nobody believes it at Bali.

Why does the minister not just come home and finish up his Christmas shopping? Does the Prime Minister not have anyone, anyone at all, to send abroad to represent the will of Canadians?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, that is from the member who did not get it done. I have a great quote: the Kyoto protocol is “too bureaucratic”, and its shortcomings must be addressed to eventually draw the United States into a new climate-change deal.

Do members know who said that? The leader of the Liberal Party.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the whole world is criticizing the Minister of the Environment, his inaction plan for the environment and his hypocritical position during negotiations in Bali.

And how does the minister respond? By attacking environmentalists. The minister said that, by demanding perfection, environmentalists are in fact proving to be the enemies of good measures.

Will the parliamentary secretary apologize for having rudely belittled Canada's defenders of the environment?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, one of the delegates with the Canadian delegation to Indonesia is the minister of environment from Quebec. She said that “we believe that mandatory targets must be imposed upon everyone, and that is, yes, countries must participate in the fight against climate change, including the United States and emerging economies like China and India”.

She is absolutely right. We all need to put our oars in the water and we all need to start fighting against climate change.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I understand that the parliamentary secretary does not speak French, but I thought the parliamentary translation service was working just fine. He did not answer the question.

We know that this minister has very little respect for Canada's environmental community. In fact, the minister has so little consideration for environmentalists that he did not invite any environmental groups to join his delegation to Bali.

Will the government admit that it prevented Canadian environmentalists from participating because the minister is desperately trying to avoid an agreement in Bali and does not want Canadians to know?

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, the opposition Liberals continue to engage in smears against the minister. Yesterday the member for Ajax—Pickering was still doing it with regard to the Ottawa mayor's affair and the minister has made it clear repeatedly that he has no involvement in that.

I thought it was timely to draw attention to something the Liberals have ignored. It prompted the OPP to issue a news release on that issue about the Minister of the Environment, which states, “At this time, the OPP is not considering further investigation into the matter”. It states that “the OPP has no plan to share its file on this matter with the RCMP”.

I would like the Liberal Party members who have engaged in that questioning in the past to apologize now for their repeated smears.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Canada is increasingly isolated at the Bali conference. The chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, has called the Conservatives a government of skeptics, whereas Mr. de Boer has said it would be hypocritical to set no binding targets. The environment ministers of Quebec and Ontario are demanding that the Prime Minister show leadership.

Are we to conclude from the government's attitude in Bali that Canada has decided to give priority to the economy at the expense of the environment?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that without all the major emitters participating and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, emissions will continue to rise. That is why Canada has taken the leadership role of requiring a mandatory regulatory framework that reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2020 and by 60% to 70% by 2050. That is a historic low. We are on the right track. Mr. Steiner says our approach is the right approach.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, censure is not coming solely from other countries. The National Assembly of Quebec, in marking the 10th anniversary of the Kyoto protocol, unanimously renewed its commitment to reduce Quebec's greenhouse gas emissions by 6% with respect to 1990 levels by 2012 and reaffirmed that it disagrees with the position of the Government of Canada.

If the government is really serious about wanting to respect Quebec as a nation, why does it not adopt the territorial approach and transfer funding to Quebec City, which wants to make the Kyoto protocol a success, not a failure?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

This government has set a mandatory target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2020. If the Government of Quebec wants stricter targets, that is its right. Under our plan, that is its right.

But I do not understand why the Bloc Québécois is taking the position that China and other countries, which are the world's largest emitters, should not have targets. Emissions would double with such a policy.

Securities

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, the finance ministers will meet here in Ottawa. On this occasion, the federal Minister of Finance wants to explore, yet again, his idea of having a centralized securities commission. That idea does not respect the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces and has been decried by the National Assembly, l'Autorité des marchés financiers and the Montreal Stock Exchange.

Instead of trying to impose his hare-brained ideas, would the Minister of Finance not be better off taking firm and immediate action to help the manufacturing sector, which is in a crisis?

[Jim Flaherty, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his question.

As stated in the Speech from the Throne, we respect the jurisdictions of Canada's governments.

I also congratulate the Montreal Exchange and the Toronto Stock Exchange for enhancing the capital markets in Canada by the agreement they reached earlier this week.

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when the New York Stock Exchange merged with Euronext, each institution kept its regulatory framework. The merger did not result in the creation of a single regulatory body. According to the World Bank and the OECD, the current system is working quite well and studies show that a centralized system would be more expensive.

In light of these facts, will the Minister of Finance admit that his true objective is to centralize all financial activities in Toronto in order to benefit his friends on Bay Street?

[Jim Flaherty, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, that suggestion is absolute nonsense. What we have been talking about, as recommended by the Crawford committee, is a common securities regulator in Canada, not a federal regulator and not an Ontario oriented or Toronto oriented regulator.

I say for the member opposite, look at the challenges that we have in enforcement in Canada with respect to securities, the frauds perpetrated on seniors and the frauds perpetrated on investors. I ask him seriously whether he thinks we can have enforcement that is effective without the presence of the national government.

Electoral Reform

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to read for members a quote from the Ontario legislature:

We believe that every voter in Canada and every voter in Ontario should have an equally weighted vote when they vote for their MPP or their MP.

Who said that? It was Conservative Norm Sterling, whose entire caucus voted unanimously in urging the government to ensure fairness for Ontario.

Why does the Minister for Democratic Reform want to pass a law that even his provincial cousins cannot support? Does he think that Norm Sterling is a small man of Confederation too?

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to comment on Mr. Sterling's hype. People can draw their own conclusions on that.

The reality is that the statement by Mr. Sterling makes clear their unhappiness that Mr. McGuinty is practising one set of politics in his own province, where he has wiped out rep by pop in the legislature, and then is asking for something else entirely different on the national stage.

The real question for the hon. member is this: what is the position of the Liberal Party? Is it the position of Ontario Liberals that they should have more seats in Ontario or is it the position of Quebec Liberals that they should have less seats and not have more seats in Ontario? I want to know what the real position of the Liberal Party is on this.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we want what is right for Ontario.

Yesterday the Ontario provincial legislature passed a unanimous motion calling on the government to amend Bill C-22. The Premiers of Quebec and Manitoba both agree that this bill is unfair. Editorials from papers such as The Toronto Star, The Globe and Mail and Montreal's Gazette agree that this legislation must be fixed.

What will it take for the minister to admit that he made a mistake, fix this legislation and ensure fairness for all Canadians?

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, the Premier of Quebec does not want the existing law changed. He wants it to stay the way it is. The Premier of Ontario wants it changed but he does not think we are going far enough. He wants us to go further and completely eliminate the guarantee that currently exists for Quebec.

I would like to know, since she is quoting people on opposite ends of the spectrum, which side she comes down on, or does she believe that our middle, moderate path, which will help Ontario to get more seats and Alberta and B.C. to get better representation by population, is the best approach? I have not heard any approach from the Liberal Party other than to criticize anybody trying to correct the inequities that exist.

Wireless Industry

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, we know that Brian Mulroney lobbied the former industry minister and that he arranged a meeting between the minister and Pierre Karl Péladeau.

The Lobbyist Registration Act states that individuals who, for payment, arrange a meeting with a public office holder and any other person in respect to government policy are required to register.

Did the Prime Minister know that Brian Mulroney was never registered as a lobbyist while he was lobbying the government?

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, yet again I would point out, for the benefit of my hon. friend, that the alleged facts to which he refers are not germane to the spectrum decision that was made. The spectrum decision was made by myself, as the Minister of Industry, following a process that I have outlined in considerable detail in the House and publicly.

It is the right decision. I would encourage my friend to support more choice for consumers, better service and the prospect of lower prices. That is what he should be supporting in the House.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is sounding a little bit like Alexander Haig.

On Thursday, the Leader of the Opposition asked the Prime Minister, “Has the Prime Minister ever discussed the wireless spectrum with Brian Mulroney?” The Prime Minister refused to answer.

Why did it take two hours for the PMO to answer a simple question? Either the Prime Minister spoke to Mr. Mulroney about wireless or not.

During those two hours, did the Prime Minister's Office speak with Brian Mulroney or his representatives just to get their stories straight?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, absolutely not. All of these are complete fishing questions where the opposition has no facts of any kind.

The fact is that Mr. Mulroney has not lobbied me nor has he tried to influence my opinion on a government decision either on this matter or on any other matter since we took office.

The Environment

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canada recognizes the need to take a complete approach to address climate change and air pollution.

The world is moving to address climate change and the environment and Canada intends to lead the effort at home and abroad.

Today, a software program for businesses, which assesses the viability of clean energy options, was announced. A lot of pollution is happening over here on this side of the House.

Could the Minister of Natural Resources tell the House how our government is ensuring that Canada is at the leading edge of clean technologies to reduce emissions and adapt to environmental change?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Peter Milliken]

Order, please. I would remind hon. members that it is Tuesday, not Wednesday. Perhaps we can calm down a little and get into the Christmas spirit a bit.

The hon. Minister of Natural Resources has the floor and we will have some order, please.