This week, I changed much of the tech behind this site. If you see anything that looks like a bug, please let me know!

House of Commons Hansard #115 of the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was fisheries.

Topics

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Lucienne Robillard Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC

Fortunately we were here to prevent him from saying even more, Mr. Minister of Transport.

Will the Prime Minister apologize for what he dared to do in this House?

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Calgary Southwest Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, this Prime Minister has not had the opportunity to say anything because of the actions of the Liberal Party. I simply want to say that because of the actions of the Liberal Party caucus, we have put police investigations in danger with respect to the Air India case, the largest act of terrorism in Canadian history. Because of an irresponsible and inexplicable policy, where the Liberal Party decided in caucus to vote against its own—

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

The hon. member for Westmount—Ville-Marie.

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

Lucienne Robillard Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, all those who are watching this question period and those who will read the transcripts of this question period will know what the Prime Minister's intention was. It is very clear. This is unparliamentary.

Today he is trying to completely change the story. We even asked him, at first, how he could put his ideology ahead of judicial independence.

Then he made allegations about an hon. member of this House, who was democratically elected, and he is not even able to apologize—

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

The hon. Minister of Justice.

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Niagara Falls Ontario

Conservative

Rob Nicholson ConservativeMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, what is clear is that the Liberal Party has no intention of fulfilling the obligations it made to Canadians in the last election. It promised to get tough on crime and to support us on that but it has done absolutely nothing.

With respect to the Prime Minister, his job is to protect and defend Canadians and that is exactly what he is doing with this legislation.

Fisheries ActOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Conservative

Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB

Mr. Speaker, I am alarmed to hear that opposition parties are threatening to play political games to undermine the new fisheries bill, even though they have agreed that we need to modernize this 139 year old act or risk jeopardizing 21st century fisheries.

Could the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans assure the House that he remains committed to accountability, transparency and protecting Canadian fisheries and fish habitats?

Fisheries ActOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

St. John's South—Mount Pearl Newfoundland & Labrador

Conservative

Loyola Hearn ConservativeMinister of Fisheries and Oceans

Mr. Speaker, I have never been more committed to dealing with this act, which would replace the one that is 139 years old. The provinces want it, the industry wants it, the fishermen want it and their unions want it.

I hope, with the help of my colleagues, we will refine the act to make it the kind of act that everybody wants. We can do it in second reading and in committee. I am willing to work with them. If they do not want to do that, they can answer to their constituents.

Airline SecurityOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, Canada's aviation inspectors understand air safety better than anyone and they are telling the minister that his so-called SMS, self-serve safety, is a literal disaster waiting to happen.

These inspectors know what they are talking about. We need only look at what happened to railway safety and marine safety when oversight was handed over to the industries' CEOs. Accident rates rose and safety plummetted.

Will the minister listen to those who know best and stop his attempt to turn Canadian airline passengers into cannon fodder? Will he stop playing games with the safety of Canadians?

Airline SecurityOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Pontiac Québec

Conservative

Lawrence Cannon ConservativeMinister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, the facts are the following. We are putting in place a security management system that basically calls upon everybody who is involved in the industry to add on an additional layer in terms of security and safety to those who take our airlines.

In that sense, we are continuing to be the safest airways, not only in Canada but throughout the world. I call upon my colleague to support these actions. They are good actions for Canadians.

Airline SecurityOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, the fact is, the minister is promoting the reckless endangerment of Canadians.

Eighty per cent of Canada's inspectors say that the minister's self-serve safety will prevent them from correcting safety problems before they happen. Three-quarters of Canada's inspectors believe that a major accident will occur soon and that the public would lose confidence in aviation safety if they knew what reckless, feckless plans the minister has.

The minister is putting Canadian lives at risk. Why will he not listen to those who know aviation safety best?

Airline SecurityOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Pontiac Québec

Conservative

Lawrence Cannon ConservativeMinister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, surely it is not my hon. colleague who knows aviation safety the best.

We have been working extensively on this file. We are putting in new layers of protection. We are ensuring that our inspectors are doing the job.

Incidentally, we have just appointed a review panel to look at railway safety in the country. We are acting and that party is not doing anything.

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

Michael Ignatieff Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made two allegations in this House. The first one was against the character and integrity of a member and his family. The second one was the political insinuation that this side of the House would make its decisions on a matter of public policy in order to protect that member.

I would ask him to withdraw both of those allegations.

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Niagara Falls Ontario

Conservative

Rob Nicholson ConservativeMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, what is very disappointing is the Liberal position with respect to the Anti-terrorism Act. This was put in by a Liberal government five years ago. The police supported it, members of the Liberal party supported it and the Conservative Party and its antecedents supported it.

To make a change at this time, when police are counting on these weapons to fight terrorism in this country, I do not buy the Liberals' story that somehow the problem has gone away. We need it more today than we ever needed it and they should get behind it and support it.

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

Michael Ignatieff Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, a clear question was asked in this House about unsubstantiated allegations. The House deserves the respect of a clear answer to a question that relates to the integrity of a member.

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

Order, please. The government House leader has risen to answer the question raised by the hon. member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore and we will hear the answer.

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

York—Simcoe Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform

Mr. Speaker, we are getting into the realm of points of order here. I think the member may wish to raise those at the appropriate time.

I was in the House and I did not hear any allegation made. I know there was an effort to read an article. I often hear that being done by members on the other side.

However, the real question is why the member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore, with all the things he has said about the dangers of terrorism in this world and all the positions he has taken, which are far more aggressive than the Anti-terrorism Act, has now joined his leader in flip-flopping on this issue and wanting to oppose the Anti-terrorism Act protections that Canadians need to rely on.

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

Bill Graham Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise with considerable difficulty, given the decorum in the House today, but I believe it would be obvious to you and to all members what caused it.

I would add my voice to those who would ask our Prime Minister to speak with the voice of Canada, to speak with the decency of politics, to speak with the consideration that members of this House have always shown for one another and apologize and withdraw what clearly was going to be a drive-by smear against a young, hon. member of this House who is seeking to represent his constituents and his country.

Will he do the decent thing and speak up?

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

York—Simcoe Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform

Mr. Speaker, I respect what the hon. member said about decorum. It would be nice to have a little in the House so we could deal with these issues.

However, it is a very odd situation. We are being asked to apologize for something that was about to happen. I think the Liberals should apologize for what they are about to do in terms of the Anti-terrorism Act.

The problem that is facing Canadians is a very serious one and it is not a question of games in the House of Commons. It is not a question of who is calling each other names or that kind of thing. It is a question of the security of Canadians. It is a very serious and profound question. The Liberals may be trying to dodge and divert, but the fundamental issue remains.

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

February 21st, 2007 / 2:55 p.m.

Liberal

Bill Graham Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, that answer, unfortunately, seeks to move the question away.

What I am asking is that the Prime Minister restore civility in the House and restore the sense of dignity of politics in our country and to speak for all Canadians and for what Canada is about, which is decency and respect for one another as we seek to resolve essential issues of the day.

What we want is a Prime Minister for Canada, not for partisanship, every day in the House.

The Prime MinisterOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

York—Simcoe Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform

Mr. Speaker, there can be no less partisan issue in the House than the question of the extension of the Anti-terrorism Act provisions. Hundreds of Canadians have lost their lives in terrorist acts. All Canadians are at risk should these provisions not be extended.

The question is not the issue that the Liberals are trying to divert us to today. The question is why the Liberals will not look at reversing themselves on this. Why have they flip-flopped on it? Why are they willing to give up those protections? Canadians need that explained to them.

EqualizationOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, when he tabled his budget yesterday, Quebec's minister of finance made it abundantly clear that correcting the fiscal imbalance would involve changing the equalization formula, which must include all 10 provinces and all their revenue sources.

In his budget, will the Minister of Finance respond positively to this request, which reflects a unanimous consensus of all the parties in the National Assembly?

EqualizationOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Whitby—Oshawa Ontario

Conservative

Jim Flaherty ConservativeMinister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, as I am sure the member opposite is aware, I will not talk about what might or might not be in the budget.

We have had extensive consultations over the course of the past more than one year now with respect to that issue and other issues. We have reviewed all the studies. Certainly the finance ministers and the first ministers have had discussions. My colleague across the floor will have to wait until the budget, which will be March 19.

EqualizationOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, we are not asking the minister to divulge what is in his budget. The minister said that the solution he would propose to correct the fiscal imbalance would be based on clear principles.

What I am asking is whether these principles will include the 10-province rule and 100% of those provinces' revenues, including both renewable and non-renewable natural resources? That is what I am asking. It is a question of fairness.