Debates of June 20th, 2007

Child Care

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that Sheila Copps not long ago pointed out that the previous government did not create a single child care space with its plan.

I point to the commitments in provincial budgets this spring where provinces say they are going to use that money that we are providing them to create spaces. But more than that, upon coming to office this government provided families with $2.4 billion a year through the universal child care benefit, which is helping families who want choice, something the leader of the Liberal Party said he would take away. I do not understand it.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, a report from the minister's own expert panel on drinking water for first nations said the government's plan “may even put drinking water safety at risk by diverting badly needed resources into regulatory frameworks and compliance costs”. The truth is that the minister has only half a plan. Canadians deserve answers and it is time for the Conservative government to tell the truth.

When will the minister put money where his mouth is? When will he tell the truth?

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians]

Mr. Speaker, we are supporting the delivery of drinking water to first nations communities, but let us talk about human rights because for 21 years first nations women on reserve in this country have not had access to matrimonial property rights. For 30 years first nations women on reserve in this country have not had access to Canada's human rights legislation. The member, together with the Liberal Party, is supporting that sad state of affairs by blocking Bill C-44.

Yesterday in committee she said, “It doesn't matter whether first nations women's rights are postponed for six months, eight months or a year. It makes no difference to them”.

Securities Industry

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

Mr. Speaker, after meeting with his Quebec and provincial counterparts to discuss the creation of a Canada-wide securities commission, the Minister of Finance indicated that he plans to form an independent expert panel to advise on possible securities regulation. The Quebec finance minister, however, specified that the passport system would remain her priority. In fact, no one but Ontario wants any other arrangement.

Can the Minister of Finance explain what he is doing in this area of jurisdiction that is none of his business, unless he hopes to give his friends on Bay Street another handout?

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as the member mentioned yesterday, there was a good exchange of views on this issue of securities regulation with provincial counterparts. It was a good meeting. The discussion centred around the need for better access to capital by Canadian companies, a more competitive cost of capital, increased investment choices for Canadians and, of course, this would create more jobs for Canadians.

We are within the federal jurisdiction and we will be preparing a paper on this issue, and I hope the hon. member will read it.

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

Mr. Speaker, does the minister realize that, by failing to respect the will of Quebec, he is violating the civil code of Quebec and ignoring the national character of Quebec? In actual fact, the openness that his government is so proud of is reserved only for Ontario, to the detriment of Quebec and the other provinces.

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the member knows that is nonsense. I know he likes to fan these flames, but that is completely and utterly untrue.

The fact of the matter is that all provinces are involved in these discussions. They are important discussions for Canada. They are discussions which the International Monetary Fund urged Canada to undertake and to get into, and we are doing that in an appropriate, responsible and collegial way.

Agriculture and Agri-Food

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the dairy, poultry and egg sectors sounded the alarm on the federal government's inaction at the current round of WTO negotiations. Quebec's agriculture minister and the president of the UPA said the following in a press conference: “The Government of Canada is responsible for the WTO negotiations and their subsequent results. Those results will be deemed positive if, and only if, producers under supply management come out as winners in this negotiation”.

Does the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food intend to carry out this mandate?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Secretary of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, I want to remind the hon. member that for the past 14 months, unprecedented measures have been taken in defence of supply management. As a result, it is obvious that the Government of Canada will continue to support and defend supply management. Those were our instructions. The motion put forward in this House specifies that we must defend supply management and not touch the tariffs and quotas. That is what we will do.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food said that he is currently not negotiating at the WTO. To say they are defending supply management is nothing but fine words if there is nothing concrete to back them up. All the countries at the WTO are currently positioning themselves and presenting their points of view, expect for Canada, according to the federal minister himself.

Will he stop shamelessly shifting the blame for his inaction to the GO5 coalition and start fulfilling his responsibilities by emphasizing the vulnerability of the sectors under supply management?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Secretary of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member can say what he wants, but one thing is certain: the coalition's instructions were to defend supply management and not to touch tariffs and quotas.

The minister has said so time and time again in this House. This has been repeated over and over again. Again, what language should I say this in? This government will defend supply management.

Income Trusts

[Garth Turner, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, taxpayers showed up in Waterloo, Ontario last Monday, as they did in Burlington last week, and as they will in Whitby next week and in scores of other cities.

Income trust investors are asking for one thing above all, proof that the government was justified in decimating their savings with a new tax and a broken promise.

Canadians deserve answers, not blacked out pages, not moody arrogance from the Minister of Finance. It is time he told us the truth, so let us have it.

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

Mr. Speaker, that is a question from the member who used to campaign in favour of income splitting and then voted against it when it came to the budget.

Yesterday we heard a call from the Liberal Party to hold byelections quickly. I know that the member said that he thought anyone who crosses the floor should go back to the people for ratification. The opportunity is coming. The time is coming. The member should get in line. We will give him what he wants and help him keep his promise.

The Environment

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Speaker, all credible scientists, economists and environmentalists unanimously agree: This government's climate change plan will see greenhouse gas emissions increase over the next 50 years. Canadians deserve some answers. It is time for this government to tell the truth.

When will the Prime Minister admit that his ecofraud has not fooled anyone? When will he adopt the clean air act?

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is very interesting to note that the Liberals are doing everything they possibly can rather than talk about their record. Why do they not quote Professor Mark Jaccard?

Professor Mark Jaccard last year wrote a report on the Liberals' record on climate change. The report was entitled, “Burning Our Money to Warm the Planet: Canada's Ineffective Efforts to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions”. It said that the leader of the Liberal Party's promise would lead to an increase of 50% in harmful greenhouse gas emissions.

We will cut greenhouse gas emissions by an absolute 20%. That is our commitment. That is our promise.

Ministerial Expenses

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Mr. Speaker, hearing the Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and Canadian Identity boast of taking more than 100 trips to perform outreach, it is logical to wonder how much it all cost.

Despite Treasury Board guidelines that require such expenses to be posted, not a single disclosure has been made since April 2006. There is not one trip reported. For the Minister of Canadian Heritage there are no disclosures at all.

The government has again broken its promise on transparency again. In fact, if that promise was in NASCAR, it would have flown off the road and erupted in flames at every race it ever entered.

When will the government tell the truth and disclose these expenses?

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

Mr. Speaker, we are proud of our track record of cabinet ministers' expense spending, because it is a fraction of what the Liberal ministers spent. We care about the taxpayers' dollars.

While the Senate is over there refusing to do its job on all our bills, it is worth noting that the Senate government leader under the Liberals spent almost 4,000 times in expenses in their last year what our Senate leader spent.

As for NASCAR, we are proud to be sponsoring a car at NASCAR, not like the Liberal member for Bourassa who said that he finds NASCAR bizarre. We find it exciting and so do a lot of other Canadians.

Health

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, during the last election the Conservatives promised to implement a wait times guarantee for all Canadians. Eighteen months later, Canadians are still waiting and their health care is being put at risk.

Stop the smoke and mirrors. Canadians deserve answers and it is time for the government to tell the truth.

When will the Conservatives establish a wait times guarantee, which they specifically promised well over a year ago?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Health and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the hon. member missed the press conference, but indeed, the Prime Minister and I were able to announce that we have in each and every province and territory a patient wait times guarantee, at least one in many of the provinces and moving ahead with more.

We have kept that promise. We are moving to reduce wait times. We are moving to increase accessibility in our health care system.

After 13 years in which the wait times in this country doubled, we are moving to act.

Democratic Reform

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this spring the House of Commons has been very busy. There were 29 bills sent to the Senate, including all of the government's priority bills such as the budget, and bills to make our streets and communities safer.

However, the Liberal dominated Senate continues to obstruct and delay bills like Bill C-10, which institutes mandatory sentences for gun crimes.

I heard the Liberal dominated Senate is now refusing to do its job on democratic reform and refuses to vote on a bill that will democratize the Senate by limiting senators' terms to eight years instead of 45.

Could the Prime Minister please tell me if the Liberal dominated Senate is really refusing to do its job?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I have to point out that in rejecting terms of less than 45 years, the Liberal Senate has not merely defied the government, it has defied its own leader here in the House. It has defied its former leader in the Senate and of course defied public opinion and all common sense.

Liberal senators will not stop Senate reform. They will only ensure that they are not part of the reform that is coming, because reform is inevitable, because the public will not stomach any longer an institution that functions like that.

Consumer Affairs

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there has been tainted carrot juice, spinach laced with e-coli, dog food that leads to severe health issues and death. Now we find that ordinary Canadians have been exposed to counterfeit toothpaste and other personal hygiene items. Canadians are quickly losing confidence in imported foods and personal items.

With bad trade deals and understaffed inspectors, the government does not seem to grasp the severity of the issue. Releasing warnings to the media is not enough.

Why has the minister not taken the Consumer Products Association's advice and made importers responsible for the contents of their goods?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Health and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario]

Mr. Speaker, this is indeed a serious situation. The hon. member is talking about the possibility of tainted toothpaste which has been available in the marketplace.

I can tell the hon. member that in fact we do have inspectors and investigators who are on the scene and who are busy analyzing the products to see whether there is any kind of health hazard. That is what we do. We are responding to this situation. Indeed, we do have staff who are involved in the counterfeit situation as well. They monitor to ensure that we have a response if counterfeit products do appear on our shelves.

The best advice I can give until that investigation is complete is buyer beware.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, that is not good enough. The health of our children is being put at risk.

Why is it only the responsibility of those who sell the tainted goods and not also the responsibility of those who import the tainted goods?

If the minister believes the current regulations are adequate, would he be confident eating an entire meal or using personal products that are not regulated?

How many more tainted products do Canadians need to be exposed to before the minister makes real change?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Health and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is absolutely incorrect. In this case the importer has in fact acted to remove the products from the shelves. That is what a responsible importer would do.

The hon. member should be aware that we do have an enforcement mechanism. We do have a monitoring system. Can it catch everything? Obviously not, because that is why we are faced with this situation. We are going to continue to monitor and continue to enforce.

The fact of the matter is if there is a problem in our food supply, we will do everything that we can do and that a government should do, but also, people should take care. The fact of the matter is we get what we pay for. In this particular case, what has happened is not acceptable.