House of Commons Hansard #150 of the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was loans.

Topics

AfghanistanOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

Order. The right hon. Prime Minister has the floor.

AfghanistanOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Calgary Southwest Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I think it would be inappropriate for me to completely ignore the remark that was made by the hon. member in talking about the Minister of National Defence as an arms dealer, a man who served his country in uniform for 30 years.

That is the kind of language that the other side uses toward the men and women who wear the uniform of the Canadian Forces. It is unacceptable. If the member will not withdraw it, his leader should make him withdraw it.

AfghanistanOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, with their defence minister often muzzled in the House, Conservatives have confirmed to Canadians the total mismanagement of the Kandahar mission from top to bottom, with detainees botched and bungled, defence and foreign affairs at war with each other through the press, blackouts and secrecy instead of real information on the mission, and a defence minister who is usually benched. I am sorry, but that is true.

When will the Conservatives show some real loyalty to the troops and name a defence minister who can actually do this job?

AfghanistanOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency

Mr. Speaker, what absolute rubbish is coming from members opposite. This government has been decisive in its action with respect to the issue of detainees. We now have an enhanced agreement in place that protects Canada's interests as well as those of detainees.

We have taken decisive action to give the men and women of the armed forces the equipment they need. They have support, at least on the government side, with respect to the important mission that is taking place in Afghanistan.

We have millions of dollars in aid and in the reconstruction that is happening to help elevate the lives of the Afghan people. We can ask men and women in Afghanistan if they want Canada's participation. They will say yes, regardless of what the opposition is saying.

AfghanistanOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, again we have heard from the wrong minister.

The bungles continue because the defence minister is not doing a full job. What Conservatives do not realize is that civilian military control is an important principle of democracy. Do Canadians not deserve a real defence minister, one who asks questions and can actually answer them?

How can Canadians have confidence in the government to manage the combat mission when its defence minister is so clearly a political dead man walking?

AfghanistanOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency

Mr. Speaker, I dare say that in our country's history never have we had a Minister of National Defence with a more in-depth working knowledge of the Canadian armed forces.

In addition, what we have undertaken in Afghanistan is to help assist the people of Afghanistan build a functioning country, securing their borders, building infrastructure, building vocational programs and building good governance practices. This is a whole government approach that is working.

We are there under a UN mandated NATO mission, making a huge difference in elevating the lives of the people of Afghanistan.

Corporate TakeoversOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Paule Brunelle Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

Mr. Speaker, over the past few months, several large Canadian corporations have been taken over, or are about to be, by foreign companies. Nearly all these take-overs have been in the natural resources sector. This trend could seriously jeopardize our economic development and even Bay Street is concerned.

What does the government intend to do to ensure that Canada does not become a branch plant economy?

Corporate TakeoversOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Beauce Québec

Conservative

Maxime Bernier ConservativeMinister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind my hon. colleague about a recent study by Competitiveness and Prosperity. The study confirms that foreign acquisition of Canadian companies translates into more head offices and more jobs created right here in Canada. Therefore, if my hon. colleague is concerned about the fact that this creates jobs and generates wealth in this country, I would remind her that foreign investment is healthy and that it must comply with Canadian legislation. We have legislation in place that ensures a good bottom line for Canada anytime a foreign investment is made here.

Corporate TakeoversOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Paule Brunelle Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would point out to the minister that this is not the case when it comes to the regions. This foreign ownership of our natural resources means that they are processed elsewhere, which undermines the manufacturing sector a little more, with disastrous consequences for employment and the resource regions.

Will the minister finally show that he cares about employment?

Corporate TakeoversOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Beauce Québec

Conservative

Maxime Bernier ConservativeMinister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, here on this side of the House, we care about employment and future investments in this country. The Bloc Québécois has done nothing about either in the past 13 years. It is important to point out that, in 13 years, the Bloc Québécois has achieved nothing concrete for Quebeckers.

Speaking of foreign investments, I would like to remind my Bloc Québécois colleague that direct investment abroad by Canadians is greater than foreign investment in Canada, by $74 billion. What does this mean? This means that, in Canada, we have first-rate businesses, businesses that are able to invest abroad, around the globe, and generate wealth.

Pesticide ManagementOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

Mr. Speaker, according to the Pest Management Regulatory Agency, the Conservative government is about to increase the acceptable chemical residue limits on hundreds of fruits and vegetables sold in Canada. In fact, the government will decide to lower our standards to match those of the Americans.

Does the Minister of Health think it is right and acceptable to lower the criteria for pesticides at the expense of the population?

Pesticide ManagementOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka Ontario

Conservative

Tony Clement ConservativeMinister of Health and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario

Mr. Speaker, this is not the case at all. This government will protect the health of all Canadians. On the contrary, our decisions are based on science, on scientific, not political, data. We will not lower the level of safety of Canadians if discussions lead to an agreement. I give the House my word.

Pesticide ManagementOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

Mr. Speaker, environmental experts confirm that such changes to pesticide regulations are unacceptable.

Can the minister explain why he accepts these new standards, which put trade interests ahead of health? This is what it boils down to: making our American friends happy, and too bad for everyone's health.

Pesticide ManagementOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka Ontario

Conservative

Tony Clement ConservativeMinister of Health and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario

Mr. Speaker, there is no agreement, no changes, nor any such discussion within our government. Our government will protect Canadians and the situation in our country. If there is an agreement with the Americans or anyone else, the agreement will protect the health of Canadians.

TaxationOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON

Mr. Speaker, the ill-fated plan to kill interest deductibility was a fundamental multi-billion dollar mistake from the very beginning by an incompetent finance minister.

Weeks after the budget, the minister said he needed to spend some time on the issue. Yesterday he said that this is a difficult and complex issue.

Clearly the minister does not know what he is doing, and he wrote the budget. He simply is not up to the job. Should Canadians not have a finance minister who knows what he is doing?

TaxationOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Calgary Nose Hill Alberta

Conservative

Diane Ablonczy ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, it is kind of interesting how sensitive the Liberals are to perceived incompetence on the front benches. I guess they experienced a lot of that in their years in government.

The fact of the matter is that our finance minister made it very clear that he was going to address tax loopholes and improper tax avoidance. He is doing that. I wonder why the Liberals think that getting the same deduction for only one expense, getting a deduction twice, is a good thing. How do they defend that?

TaxationOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON

Mr. Speaker, the minister and his parliamentary secretary are so incompetent they do not even know they are incompetent.

This is about a minister whose approach to economic policy can be summed up in three words: ready, fire, aim. The minister's own estimates for the cost of this measure was off by 2,500%. If that is not incompetent, what is? His mistake will cripple Canadian industries and cost more jobs to hard-working Canadians.

When will the incompetent minister retract this disastrous policy?

TaxationOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Calgary Nose Hill Alberta

Conservative

Diane Ablonczy ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friend's manufactured outrage, but the fact of the matter is that our government does not think that two deductions for one expense are appropriate. We are going to address that. I hope that a little bit of the outrage on the other side will be designed to make our tax system more fair, because that is what all Canadians want.

Softwood LumberOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

Navdeep Bains Liberal Mississauga—Brampton South, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of International Trade claimed the softwood lumber agreement was “far better than litigation”.

The U.S. has criticized our domestic softwood lumber policies. We have had one consultation meeting and it is clearly apparent that we are going to arbitration, in other words, back to court.

The government sold out our softwood lumber industry by leaving over $1 billion on the table, agreeing to a restrictive quota system and abandoning our past NAFTA and WTO litigation victories.

When will the minister acknowledge he signed a flawed deal and it sold us out to the U.S.?

Softwood LumberOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Vancouver Kingsway B.C.

Conservative

David Emerson ConservativeMinister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics

Mr. Speaker, I am a little surprised that the hon. critic is taking lessons out of the NDP book on sellouts.

I can tell the hon. member that if we did not have the softwood lumber agreement in place today, we would be facing NAFTA chapter 19 litigation. We would be facing duties of 30% to 40%.

The softwood lumber agreement brings stability. It brings a process and a positive, constructive way to deal with these kinds of disputes.

Softwood LumberOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

Anthony Rota Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is quite surprising that the minister continues to support his softwood lumber agreement. We were told that we would have seven years of peace, that it was the best agreement in decades, and that the agreement was preferable to going to court.

The reality is that the industry is facing a court battle financed by the $500 million that the Conservative government left in the hands of the American softwood industry.

This agreement is a farce. How can the minister continue to support it?

Softwood LumberOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Vancouver Kingsway B.C.

Conservative

David Emerson ConservativeMinister of International Trade and Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics

Mr. Speaker, if there is a farce here, it is the intellect of the hon. member. That is a complete farce.

Does the hon. member recognize that our industry got over $5 billion to build and strengthen the Canadian softwood lumber industry? Does the hon. member realize that we have a positive, constructive process to resolve our disputes?

Shame on the hon. member.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Conservative

Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON

Mr. Speaker, today is a smog day in most of southern Ontario and it is only the beginning of May.

Sadly, the Liberal leader does not think that we have a problem. He has said that our air is one of the cleanest to be found in a developed country. Tell that to my constituents in Lambton—Kent—Middlesex in southwestern Ontario.

Could the Minister of the Environment tell the House about the detrimental changes by the Liberal Party to Bill C-30 when it comes to clean air?

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean Ontario

Conservative

John Baird ConservativeMinister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, it is very common to name hurricanes and tornadoes so we are going to call today smog day Dion.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!