Debates of Nov. 25th, 2008

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to start by saying how happy I am to begin my remarks in this House with the words “Madam Speaker”. I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Trois-Rivières. I would like to take advantage of this opportunity to thank the voters in the riding of Laval who resisted the siren song of my Conservative opponent, who was most loquacious, and placed their confidence in me for the third time.

I wanted to say a few words in the House today about the throne speech, but I do not have good things to say about it, nor am I happy with it, nor will I be voting for it. Those who know me well know how important women's issues are to me and to the members of the Bloc Québécois.

Yesterday, in her remarks, my colleague from Laurentides—Labelle referred to those who were left out of the throne speech. Today, I would like to spend some more time talking about those people, particularly women. I was not surprised to find no references to women in the throne speech.

The week before that, my colleagues from Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert and Gatineau and I were observers at the Conservative Party convention in Winnipeg. When I arrived in Winnipeg, I was excited and all fired up. I was eager to see what would happen, to hear what people had to say about various things, to see how people would use the meetings to set their party's agenda and priorities. I wanted to get some idea of what we would be talking about here in the House once we all came back.

I was surprised to find out that observers were not allowed to observe. I was surprised to learn that, as observers, we were relegated to a little coffee shop on the second floor and were not allowed access to any of the rooms in which meetings were being held. Even so, there were leaks. Even parties governed by a culture of secrecy are prone to leaks. Thanks to those leaks, we were kept up to date throughout the day about decisions made during the meetings.

The first decision was made following a debate, and I was very disappointed to learn that it was about Resolution P-207, a resolution that reopened the abortion debate.

Then another resolution was passed and it stunned me completely. The resolution called for equal pay for equal value. It did not stipulate equal pay for work of equal value. What a giant step back for women.

All day long, we heard about similar kinds of resolutions. We could not believe it and wondered what was happening. We were anxious to see what was really happening and to get to the plenary meeting, which we were told we could attend.

When we left Winnipeg—I left on the Sunday morning—I knew this government would do no more for women than it has done over the past two and half years. The rights of women in Canada and Quebec have suffered a terrible setback.

This was confirmed last week when the World Economic Forum, which is based in Geneva, announced that Canada now ranks 31st out of 130 countries that were assessed based on whether the gender gap is increasing or narrowing. In 2006, we were ranked 15th. In 2007, we were 18th and now in 2008, 31st. It will not stop there. This is not surprising. We saw the cuts to Status of Women Canada; we saw the cuts to the court challenges program; we saw the changes to the Women's Program at Status of Women Canada, which made funding available. This will not stop here.

The United Nations commission charged with eliminating all forms of discrimination against women published a report indicating that Canada lags far behind and is struggling with serious problems of violence against women.

When all is said and done, the fact remains that, in last year's throne speech, the Prime Minister stated that there would be a plan for women, a specific and special plan of attack, which would advance the rights of Quebec and Canadian women. There is not a word about that in this throne speech. Evidently, because last time around nothing was accomplished. They only talked about it, nothing was done, they did not take action and things have not changed.

In times of economic uncertainty such as these, when we do not know what will happen in two or three months—because things are changing so quickly and there is a new surprise or disappointment every day, and something else turns up each day—a government must make investments that will yield the greatest return. It must invest in people, in infrastructure, invest in what will yield a return as quickly as possible.

This government could not be bothered to come up with a social housing plan, when there is $8 billion available in the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation fund. This government could not be bothered to make changes to employment insurance so that seniors who lose their jobs have access to a program that will help them transition into retirement after stopping work.

This government also could not be bothered to change the eligibility criteria for employment insurance. Yet there is currently $44 billion in the employment insurance fund, money that could be used to help the people who earned this money and invested it in an employment insurance fund, so they would have something to fall back on if they were to lose their jobs.

When we want the economy to run smoothly, we invest in infrastructure. Of course, the Prime Minister told us that he would invest in infrastructure, but between saying and doing, between talk and action, months go by and nothing is done. We have already thought about programs that should be put in place immediately, and not in three months come budget time.

The situation with the economy requires us to start thinking about people and the economy and to invest now where it is most important. Infrastructure projects are a source of many jobs and opportunities, and this would ensure some short-term jobs, which would get the economy rolling.

Furthermore, if a woman loses her job and is not eligible for employment insurance or welfare benefits because she has assets, then she is really out of luck.

The Speaker has informed me that I have only one minute remaining. I do not know which direction to take, because I have so much to say about what is lacking in this throne speech. There is so much to say about this government's lack of social conscience. The word “equality” was even removed from Conservative Party documents. They did this at their convention last week. This goes to show the ongoing contempt that this government has for women.

I am not wrapping up on a very encouraging note, but I certainly hope that the government will show some openness this time and try to go a bit further towards fixing the mistakes it has made in the past.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to congratulate you on your new position.

I have a simple question for my colleague that deals with health care. Her province has actually been quite innovative in health care and also in the provision of services for daycare. I wonder if she would join us as Canadians, as supporters of health care and the need for Canadian families to have access to daycare services, and support our efforts to convince the government that Canadians need a national daycare early learning program, and also that provinces across the country can in fact learn from the province of Quebec to look at the innovative tools that it has used so that many more of its citizens in Quebec can have timely access to quality health care when people need it and they are not hurt from it financially.

That is what we should be pursuing. That is what Canadians need. That is not what they are getting, and the government needs to get back on the page and begin to address the issues that are critical to the health and welfare of our citizens.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Madam Speaker, of course I would like all Canadian families to have access to day care services as good as those we have in Quebec. However, day care services fall within provincial jurisdiction. When the Liberal Party unveiled a program, it decided that Quebec could opt out of the agreement and receive the money needed to continue with its own program.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Madam Speaker, the people of Quebec have actually received a very large sum of money for the social programs they have. The member is quite correct that the responsibility does lie among the provinces, but it does not preclude the federal government from acting in leadership and in concert with its provincial counterparts across the country to deal with issues. While it is in the official area of responsibility of the provinces, it does not preclude the federal Minister of Health from calling her counterparts together to deal with these issues.

There is a crucial issue in health care that I want to talk about and that is the issue of access to medical professionals. We need in Canada a national medical workforce plan that is going to ensure that we have enough doctors, nurses and technicians to provide the medical care that we require. We are getting older. Our medical practitioners are getting older, too. The average age of a physician in Canada is over 50 and nurses are in the mid-40s. If we do not deal with this now we will not have the caregivers in our country to be able to provide for our citizens when they get ill.

Would the hon. member support us in working with the federal government to have and push for this national health care workforce strategy? And I hope the hon. member is feeling better.

[The Acting Speaker, NDP, Denise Savoie]

If the hon. member for Laval is able to reply, I will give her the floor.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Madam Speaker, please excuse me, I caught a cold when I was in Winnipeg. We had to go outside in order to return to our rooms; we could not get to our rooms from the inside. I thought I would be able to get to my room easily, so I did not wear a coat that morning. I had to go outside. It was very cold in Winnipeg and I caught a cold. Our good friends, the Conservatives, are responsible for my cold.

The federal government is having trouble meeting needs when it comes to its own responsibilities in terms of health care, particularly for veterans, aboriginal communities and communities in Nunavut. The federal government is not able to meet these needs. There are still problems that persist. How can the government meet the needs of people in the provinces when it does not know what the needs are and when it is so far away? It is an impossible task for the federal government.

Provinces and territories are responsible for health, not the federal government.

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to congratulate you today. As a woman and a parliamentarian, I am thrilled to see a woman occupy the chair, particularly a francophone from western Canada. You will hold office with all the dignity for which you are known.

I would like to thank the voters of Trois-Rivières for their trust and for electing me for a third consecutive term. I am very pleased to be here, in this chamber. I wish to congratulate all the members elected in the recent election. It is a pleasure to work together.

Three things, among others, stand out in this Speech from the Throne. It completely ignores the concerns of Quebeckers regarding the uncertain economic situation and the current financial crisis. This throne speech in no way defends the interests and values of the Quebec nation. We need only cite a few examples. The Conservative government intends to diminish Quebec's authority in the area of finance—with a national securities commission—and is following through with its young offender legislation. The Conservatives have not understood the message delivered by Quebec voters on October 14. The Conservatives continue to impose their right-wing political ideology.

As the natural resources critic, I wish to comment on the federal government's intention of promoting nuclear energy as clean and renewable energy. The throne speech illustrates this government's interest in developing Canada's nuclear industry. For this government, nuclear energy is as environmentally friendly as hydroelectricity or wind energy. Of course that is not true. Nuclear energy is quite dangerous and the consequences for the environment will be a burden for future generations.

Furthermore, the federal government supports and promotes this industry's development. We should remember that it is a shareholder in a company that builds nuclear power stations and at the same time it is the guardian of public and environmental safety. The government is responsible for the industry's safety regulations through the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Hence, the government currently finds itself in a difficult position, almost a conflict of interest. The Bloc Québécois believes that the government should not promote nuclear power. The previous minister of Natural Resources led us to believe that his government might provide financial assistance for the construction of a nuclear reactor in Ontario. This would mean that the government might help fund Ontario's electricity grid whereas it never supported Hydro-Québec.

Furthermore, in 2009, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization is supposed to submit a proposal for the selection of a community willing to take in and store nuclear waste. The Bloc Québécois will ensure that Quebec does not become Canada's garbage dump for radioactive waste. Quebec opted for hydroelectricity, a clean and renewable energy. Quebec has nothing to gain from the federal government's decision to promote nuclear energy.

In addition, regarding bulk water transfers, unlike the Conservatives, the Bloc Québécois maintains that water is not excluded from NAFTA and that strengthening federal legislation is not enough. This could jeopardize Quebec's water resources, despite the government's indication in the throne speech that it intends to bring in legislation to ban all bulk water transfers or exports from Canadian freshwater basins. I would also like to point out that water is a natural resource that falls under Quebec jurisdiction and that Quebec has its own regulations regarding water.

That is why the Bloc Québécois believes that the federal government must limit its legislative measures to the water over which it has jurisdiction and that a general legislative ban at the federal level could be disputed under NAFTA.

The federal government should exclude water from NAFTA and, therefore, the Speech from the Throne does not respond to the questions raised by this crucial issue.

During the last Parliament, I had the privilege of being our party's industry critic and I rose on many occasions in this House to express the concerns of all stakeholders in the manufacturing and forestry industries, including the workers and their families, as well as businesses and communities that depend on the forest. Everyone is worried about the difficult situation those sectors are facing. In particular, thousands of jobs have been lost in my riding of Trois-Rivières and in Mauricie. Trois-Rivières' economy was founded on pulp and paper, and the situation is serious. We believe the government must act.

With the throne speech, the government had the opportunity to demonstrate that it intends to help those sectors, but once again, it offers nothing for the manufacturing and forestry sectors. It does not offer a single concrete measure to help workers and businesses get through this crisis. There is nothing new for the forestry sector, which has been in a crisis situation for several years now.

Yet the Bloc Québécois had repeatedly suggested numerous ways to revive that sector. We suggested creating financial tools to encourage companies to invest and modernize, such as loan guarantees to help companies modernize. We suggested that the government provide better tax support for research, development and innovation by making R and D tax credits refundable so that businesses could benefit from them until they made a profit. We proposed paying special attention to the regions that are being particularly hard hit by the current crisis and desperately need to diversify their industrial base to counter the forestry crisis. We suggested creating a program to support the production of energy and ethanol fuels using forest waste. We proposed that the government move quickly to impose absolute targets for greenhouse gas reduction in order to promote the establishment of a carbon credit exchange market. We suggested using government procurement as an economic development lever. Most importantly, we said that the government had to support workers hit by the crisis, by making substantial improvements to the employment insurance program, increasing benefits, basing the benefit calculation on the best 12 weeks, eliminating the waiting period and reducing the minimum number of insurable hours needed to qualify for benefits to 360. We also proposed an income support program for older workers. Such a program would enable workers aged 55 to 64 who cannot be retrained and who are victims of massive layoffs to bridge the gap between employment insurance and their pension fund.

The Bloc Québécois has repeatedly proposed measures to help workers and companies in hard-hit industries. To us, the message Quebeckers sent on October 14 should have been clear. The forestry and manufacturing sectors are mainstays of Quebec's economy, and the Conservative government's laissez-faire attitude is no longer the best option in these troubled times. The government must work with the members elected under the banner of the Bloc Québécois and draw inspiration from our innovative ideas to spur economic development.

If the government should decide to go into deficit to resolve the crisis, it must not just take the often dogmatic approach of reducing taxes, as this has negative effects such as reducing flexibility during difficult economic times. The government needs to intervene in the economy in such a way that the forestry, manufacturing and other industries can weather the current economic and financial crisis. Right now, judging by the throne speech, the government seems to want to take advantage of the economic slowdown to impose its right-wing reforms on the machinery of government.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Madam Speaker, I want to ask my colleague about an issue that is critically important to all Canadians as they get older. That issue is poverty, particularly with respect to seniors. Madam Speaker, as you well know in your work, poverty is pervasive and incessantly undermines a certain segment of our population, people who struggle to meet their basic needs on a day-to-day basis.

One of the things we did in our green shift was to shift sums of money to the poorest individuals, particularly those who make less than $20,000 a year. People who make less than $20,000 a year actually pay tax. Someone making just shy of $20,000 would pay almost $2,000 in tax.

If the government were to implement a plan to ensure that Canadians who make less than $20,000 a year did not pay any federal tax, which can be done and I have a bill to that effect, the government would be doing a huge service to help those who are most impoverished in our society. Would my hon. colleague join us in pushing the government to implement a plan to ensure that those who make less than $20,000 a year do not pay federal tax? We should not be taxing the poorest in our country. They are having a hard enough time making ends meet.

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I thank my colleague for his question. We will certainly examine his bill with a great deal of interest.

I was first elected in 2004 and I remember clearly that was when they were saying that there would not be any more poor children in Canada. Yet there are more and more of them. We know that children are living in poverty because families are poor, and women in particular. Single mothers are the poorest in our society.

Action must be taken urgently. Yet in all these years, there has been no action. Instead of giving preferential treatment to oil companies through tax exemptions and all manner of fiscal advantages, the focus needs to be—and my colleague is right in this—on the poor people across Canada.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague for her amazing, and amazingly accurate, speech on the manufacturing sector.

I would like to know my colleague's take on the outline of the supplementary estimates the government wants to submit to the House for approval. What does she think of the additional $331 million it has found for Canada's military mission to Afghanistan, and the extra $261 million for salary adjustments, again for the Canadian armed forces? A bit more than half a billion has been found for National Defence services, but nothing for manufacturing and forest industry policies.

I would like to know what my colleague thinks about this money that has been found, and the fact that there is nothing for the manufacturing sector.

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his most pertinent question.

Indeed, that mission was to terminate in 2009. Contrary to the opinion of the Bloc Québécois and others, it is continuing until 2011. What is still more serious is that we note that Quebec is not getting its fair share of the economic trickle-down, particularly in the aerospace industry. One might wonder how this procurement is being done, how all this extra money is suddenly being found, with no defence strategy. We parliamentarians ought to be able to examine the various strategies in order to be in a position to decide where we are headed, where this money is spent, in order to ensure that purchases are legitimate and that we buy Canadian.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Minister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas)]

Madam Speaker, this being my initial appearance and my initial opportunity as a member of Parliament to rise in the House, I would first like to offer personal congratulations to you on your appointment to the chair, and to the Speaker of the House on his re-election, and to beg pre-emptively collective forbearance by the chair for rookie procedural gaffes.

My election to Parliament is fulfillment of an almost lifelong dream, and for that there are many to thank. First and foremost is Cilla, my bride of more than 27 years, who has supported me through the high moments and low--mostly high moments, I must admit--on my journey from the news desk to this privileged perch in the crucible of Canadian politics.

Thanks go as well to my daughter Trilby and her partner Daniel, who have cheered me on via any number of electronic technologies from overseas, regularly taking my side and covering my back in the dark and archaic recesses of the blogosphere. I owe great, sincere appreciation as well to my three sisters Susan, Adele and Norma, and to my brother Arthur, who have patiently watched their brother's erratic career path.

However, I recognize with the greatest humility that I would not be before you today had not the voters of Thornhill entrusted me with their votes and sent me here to join a Conservative government that in its first two and a half years of productive, pragmatic and principled government won those voters' trust and confidence that it would provide more of the same in these uncertain times.

In this period of global economic uncertainty Thornhillers, like all who live in and around Canada's metropolis, like all their fellow citizens from coast to coast, are rightly concerned about their individual and shared futures.

It is very clear that this concern is not limited to one sector of society or to one particular corner of this world. This global economic situation affects everyone, regardless of how much money one earns or where one lives. Most of us know loved ones who are feeling especially vulnerable in these uncertain economic times.

Yet in this period of worldwide economic challenge, there are many reasons for Canadians to have confidence in the future. Canada's economic fundamentals remain strong, and our banking system is the most solid in the world. True, we are navigating the stormy seas and shoals of an economic tempest not of our making, but Canada is well positioned to weather these gales and to emerge stronger than ever.

We have a strong leader in the Prime Minister, and Canadians have once again put their trust in a government that is committed to getting things done.

We also have a government that is willing to reach across the floor to consult and work with all members of the House, because the economy is far too important to be left to petty partisanship. We must move forward as a country. We are fortunate to have such strong and capable leadership.

Our recent Speech from the Throne is proof that this government understands the pressures placed on hard-working Canadians as a result of the uncertain global economic situation. I am proud to say that this government has been putting Canadians first. We will continue to move forward in the spirit of cooperation and openness. We will overcome these economic challenges and emerge stronger together.

Our government has wasted no time. The Prime Minister has already met with the first ministers to discuss the economic realities facing Canada at this time. Our government will continue to work with the provinces and the territories in order to find solutions that will help all Canadians. For example, our government recognizes the importance of a strong infrastructure program that will stimulate our economy while renovating or replacing or supplementing time-worn essentials of our modern society.

Our building Canada plan is the most ambitious infrastructure renewal effort in half a century. The federal government will work with the provinces to accelerate the $33 billion plan over the coming years to ensure a stronger, safer and better Canada.

Likewise we are committed to building a stronger financial system that will serve Canadians better now and in the future. We are the government that has cut taxes to lower costs for businesses and to help families. We are the government that has reduced the GST from 7% to 6% to 5%.

As well, our government is committed to ensuring that all Canadians can fully participate in the opportunities of this great land. As just one example, in 2007 our government announced that it will work with the provinces to make the recognition of foreign credentials a priority in order to attract the best and the brightest to Canada. A year later, there are now over 320 Service Canada centres across the country offering in-person foreign credential referral services to newcomers. This particular incentive helps many constituents in my home riding of Thornhill, as well as others across the country. Service Canada centres continue to help ensure a smooth integration for immigrants, which benefits newcomers and Canada economically and socially.

We must remember above all that our current economic troubles started beyond Canada's borders. As a result, these economic uncertainties must be addressed at their roots.

The Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance have met with their G-20 counterparts to both re-examine and renew the rules and institutions that underpin the global financial system. Our government is committed to working with our international partners to ensure that the global financial system is fixed and ready to withstand future trials of this nature.

Last week the Prime Minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of International Trade were in Peru to participate in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum. The event was an opportunity to engage with some of our partners in the Americas, notably with our Peruvian hosts.

At a time of economic instability, which brings with it new challenges to security and to democratic institutions in the hemisphere, it is clear to this government that Canada is seen as a valuable and trusted partner in the region. Our neighbourhood is the Americas. Our economic prosperity, our values of democracy and human rights, and our security are closely linked with those of our neighbours.

Canada has made a commitment to deepen our engagement in this region. We plan to be there for the long haul to achieve our vision, a vision based on three mutually reinforcing objectives: a more prosperous, a more secure and a more democratic hemisphere.

Canada will also continue to actively engage with its North American partners to promote our objectives and our vision for the region.

We are working to achieve strong and well-managed economies committed to open markets. We will do this by developing strong bilateral partnerships and an increasing web of economic and political agreements with our key partners in the Americas.

We are working to achieve transparent and accountable democracies that delivery social equity, prosperity, security and human rights. We will do this by actively engaging with multilateral institutions such as the Organization of American States, the Inter-American Development Bank and the Summit of the Americas in support of Canadian objectives, interests and values.

Finally, we are working to achieve enhanced regional stability and security by continuing to increase the promotion of development goals delivered through a non-partisan democracy promotion agency.

Last week in Peru, the Minister of International Trade signed a free trade agreement with Colombia. Earlier this year, we signed a free trade agreement with Peru. These agreements will create new business opportunities for Canadians and for our partners alike. They include very strong parallel agreements on labour and the environment that commit Canada and its partners to work together to ensure high levels of protection for workers and for the environment.

As we sign these agreements with our partners, we are funding programs to support law reform and enforcement in the Americas.

Canada is now moving forward with the negotiation of free trade agreements with Panama, the Dominican Republic, the Central America Four and the Caribbean.

However, prosperity is not only about free trade agreements. We are also increasing cooperation and exchanges in numerous other fields with key partners in the region.

To deliver on the security objective, Canada is working on numerous fronts. To combat crime and violence, which impacts citizens in the region and Canadians alike, we are allocating funds for training, equipment, and technical and legal expertise on issues such as counterterrorism capacity in the Caribbean and Central America.

To deliver on the democracy objective, we are working bilaterally and multilaterally to strengthen democratic institutions and processes in the region.

In February 2008, the Democracy Council organized a democracy dialogue on Canadian approaches to democracy support in the Americas, assembling members of the Canadian and international community to discuss challenges and opportunities for democratic development in the Americas.

One-third of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade's global democracy funding targets the Americas for support to democratic institutions and practices. Canada is actively engaged in supporting good and effective governance in the Americas. We are helping to train civil servants in such areas as public sector accountability, transparency, human rights, and modernization of the justice system.

Canada also continues to provide leadership in Haiti, where we have committed $555 million in reconstruction and development efforts over the five years spanning 2006-2011. Along with regional partners such as Brazil and Chile, we are strengthening Haiti's enforcement capacity and border management processes and supporting Haiti's efforts to support its prison and judicial system.

As we move forward, we will face new challenges and opportunities. In the context of a global economic slowdown, it is important that we continue to promote the importance of open markets, prudent regulations, appropriate framework policies and corporate social responsibility on the part of the private sector.

The current period of economic uncertainty beyond our borders and within has affected many of my constituents in Thornhill. Their concerns are shared with citizens across the country who are working to provide safe and secure housing for their families. They have saved for their children's education and they have invested for retirement. This government recognizes the challenges that must be overcome in the months and years ahead to create jobs for an economy that will recover, to protect nest eggs for those who worked a lifetime to provide for themselves, and yes, to assist those most vulnerable among us.

This throne speech holds the answers to those challenges. Canadians can be confident that in these difficult economic times, our government is committed to protecting and bolstering Canada's economic future. We will continue to build on the solid record we have established over the past several years in government.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, I welcome my colleague to the House.

A curious option has been raised in all the choices the government has been making over these last several weeks and months. When asked what economic analysis had been made of the various choices the government made, the Prime Minister celebrated the cutting of the GST, while every economist in the country derided it. Did my colleague's government at any point take a step back and make choices based on an assessment of the best investment to shore up Canada's economy, or was it simply politics over policy?

Did the government choose to say that offering a corporate tax cut to companies that were already profitable was a better choice than investing in small businesses or in the green economy that we need? When cutting the GST, did the government rely on any assessments that it is willing to make public?

That is my question for my dear colleague. Did the Department of Finance or his department or any other department conduct any assessment before making these enormous choices involving billions of dollars to the Canadian people, any assessment that can be offered up in this place so that we can have a fair and clear understanding of why some of these horrendous and politically motivated choices were made?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Madam Speaker, foresight is a precious commodity. While the government does not claim a monopoly on that commodity, we do claim to have anticipated and to have made tax cuts that began to stimulate the economy, tax cuts that are even now coming into effect.

As my colleagues opposite demand a plan to create stimulation, over the next couple of years this plan will continue to add billions of dollars of stimulation to the economy in the face of those who wish to impose new taxes at a time of economic crisis.

I would ask my colleagues to share in the offer made last week by the Prime Minister and the finance minister, which was for members to offer constructive criticism and ideas as we move forward to work together to address the crisis that faces the world, a crisis that will indeed touch on Canada.

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, first let me congratulate the member on his election. It is nice to have him in the House.

I have always believed that Canada has the ability to go out and get its share of the market. I am pleased with the assignment the hon. member has undertaken.

Having said that, I am concerned on behalf of my constituents as to why it took the Prime Minister almost three years to invite the premiers of our provinces and territories to come together to do the one thing for which I have always advocated, which is to bring down the trade barriers. If we are to go out and seek business for Canadian businesses, will he take a commitment to the cabinet table to bring down the trade barriers within Canada as soon as possible? Given the circumstances that our nation and other nations are experiencing, is he committed to work toward that?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for a prescient question. Yes, indeed, this government is committed to removing internal domestic trade barriers, and has been since our election in 2006.

It is true that we raised this issue again in the meeting with the first ministers. At the same time, we will continue to work to encourage our trading partners abroad to remove barriers and to open markets to free trade. We will continue to encourage the provinces and the territories to lower the barriers which impose an unfair burden on all Canadians and on the economy.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member and I share a common background in broadcasting. It is clear that he has a perfect face for television and I have a perfect face for radio.

Will the hon. member ensure that his government will not reduce funding for the CBC?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Madam Speaker, this government is encouraging all of our institutions and crown corporations and indeed all Canadians to approach the current uncertain economic times with the same sense of prudence and economy as they would with their own family budgets. While reviews are regularly taken of all of the institutions of government, there are at this time no plans to reduce.

[Rick Casson, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Welcome to the Chair, Madam Speaker.

I want to pose a question to my colleague. I certainly welcome him to the House. It is good to have him here. It seemed a long-time coming, but it is good to have him here.

His portfolio has to do with the Americas. Our government has seen the great potential to create trading alliances with countries in the Americas. I wonder if the member could elaborate on the plans he has going forward as a minister to engage the Americas not only in trade issues, but also in democracy and the rule of law, and to bring them more toward Canada's style of governance.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Madam Speaker, certainly we have mutual goals with our trading partners in our backyard, the Americas, which has been neglected for too long. It is our intention to promote free trade, which will offer opportunities and benefits to Canadians. At the same time we want to recognize that democratic governance, human rights recognition, and the process of law are tied directly to prosperity and the ability of governments to bolster and to strengthen their institutions.

We will work with those governments. The free trade agreements that have been signed recently recognize that these countries are democracies that share Canadian values. These agreements will allow them in the months and the years ahead to strengthen those institutions. For those governments in the Americas which may fall into the category of definitional problems of democracy, these agreements will demonstrate for them that by embracing democratic values and principles and the principles of free trade that there will be benefits not only for their governments but for the people of their countries.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Madam Speaker, I extend my compliments to you on being re-elected and chosen for the auspicious position of chair occupant.

I extend compliments as well to the member on his election and on getting into cabinet. Now he has a great responsibility. I am wondering whether he will exercise that responsibility on behalf of the electorate of Ontario and more specifically for the greater Toronto area. I am wondering whether he is going to use his influence around the cabinet table to talk about a plan to save the manufacturing sector specifically in southwestern Ontario but in all of Ontario in particular. Will he propose a strategy that calls for a continuing--

[The Acting Speaker, NDP, Denise Savoie]

We want to give the minister a chance to answer the question.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Madam Speaker, with an eye on the clock, I think the questions and answers in the next hour will more than adequately respond.

Indeed, I ran on a platform of adding a strong and effective voice from the greater Toronto region, albeit from the fringes of Canada's metropolis. This government is fully committed to assisting and promoting manufacturing and all of our industrial sectors that face challenging times in the months and years ahead.

Canadian Forces

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Congratulations, Madam Speaker, and to all my esteemed colleagues.

Please allow me to take this opportunity to thank the good citizens of Prince Edward--Hastings for electing me to represent them for the third time in this Parliament.

Today I wish to formally commend the passion and support exhibited by the municipality and the citizens of Tweed toward our Canadian soldiers.

Buses loaded with Canadian troops bound for Afghanistan have been passing through Tweed on their way from Petawawa to Trenton for departure, and each time they have received a huge farewell from the residents. I was honoured to join the hundreds of school children, moms, dads, grandparents, families, legion members and municipal officials who came out to pay their respects and wish them well. It was an extremely moving event to see such overwhelming and heartfelt support for our young military men and women.

Tweed residents, legion members, and the town's municipal leaders deserve our respect and congratulations for illustrating just what it means to be a proud and grateful Canadian.

Violence against Women

[Gurbax Malhi, Liberal, Bramalea—Gore—Malton, ON]

Madam Speaker, November 25 is the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women and the start of 16 days of activism against gender violence.

We must act. Studies have shown that the economic costs of violence against women range in the billions of dollars. It can also have generational impacts. Almost 40% of women assaulted by spouses said that their children witnessed the violence against them.

Internationally, violence against women is a barrier to women's equality.

Our country's success in combatting violence against women has stalled. Progress could be further undermined if the government does not get serious about women's equality.

I urge all members in the House to work to ensure all women can live their lives free of violence and free from the threat of violence.