Debates of Feb. 15th, 2008

National Flag of Canada

[Guy Lauzon, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on this day 43 years ago, the red and white maple leaf flag was first raised on Parliament Hill, across Canada and at Canadian embassies around the world.

The bright maple leaf that adorns our flag is surely its more remarkable element.

Today, our red and white maple leaf flag is beloved by all Canadians and admired around the world because it is a symbol of freedom, democracy, the rule of law, and human rights.

Recognizing and celebrating Canada's significant events and symbols is integral to the foundation of our historical memory and contributes to the identity, cohesion and sense of belonging of Canadians.

I encourage Canadians to join together to celebrate this treasured symbol. National Flag of Canada Day is a perfect opportunity to embrace our shared identity and to reflect on our good fortune to live in the greatest country in the world.

[Albina Guarnieri, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today Canadians celebrate National Flag of Canada Day. Forty-three years ago the maple leaf flew for the first time over this Parliament and the nation it represents.

Today presents an opportunity for all Canadians to reflect on what our flag represents.

As we all share this iconic symbol, the national treasures and common values it signifies are shared with all of us. We all feel the respect and friendship the maple leaf attracts when we travel abroad. We all cherish the universal education and health systems that we share at home. And we all honour the current and future veterans whose sacrifice gives future generations the freedom and privilege that comes with life under the maple leaf.

On this National Flag of Canada Day, I ask all my colleagues to join me in celebrating our past achievements, as well as looking ahead toward an exciting future that we will share under our common flag.

Tackling Violent Crime Act

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, 78 days ago the tackling violent crime act was sent to the Senate for consideration. Ever since it arrived in the Liberal dominated Senate, it has been held up from passage.

As a father I am concerned about the delay tactics that may jeopardize the passage of these important measures that will better protect my family.

This week, while opposing the tackling violent crime act, Liberal Senator Sharon Carstairs expressed her desire to legalize youth prostitution. I would like to remind the Liberal senator that youth prostitution is already illegal. The age of consent is 18 years where sexual activity involves exploitative activity such as prostitution.

Our bill is about protecting children from the most vile and horrific crimes that can be committed. As a father I call on the Liberal senators to stop their delay and to quickly pass this piece of legislation that will help protect the children of Canada.

Health Care

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Mr. Speaker, public health care is in crisis. There is a shortage of staff and beds, and millions of Canadians are without doctors.

In Sault Ste. Marie, 12 emergency physicians have warned they will withdraw their services as of April 1, citing unsafe patient conditions and too few doctors. The hospital CEO calls it the worst situation he has seen. This is happening coast to coast to coast.

Our party has campaigned for long term care and home care programs to help alleviate this hospital crisis. We have called for innovative solutions: a health care training fund to add 16,000 practitioners as quickly as possible; a national tracking and assessment authority; multidisciplinary teams, including nurse practitioners; retaining health care professionals; accommodating foreign trained workers; and helping students with financial relief.

Let us stop giving big business the corporate tax breaks that do not help Canadians and let us spend the money on health care.

Government Policies

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

Mr. Speaker, my constituents of Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca have a few questions for the Conservative government.

Why have the Conservatives not implemented a national plan to address our health care workforce crisis, implement a national head start day care program for children, or roll out a plan to protect Canadian jobs and our economy from the storm clouds ahead?

Why has the government massively overspent, bringing our country to the edge of a deficit? Why has it shafted our navy, robbed pensioners of their hard-earned savings through the income trust fiasco, which is causing a massive sell-off of Canadian firms to foreign buyers?

Where is its plan to address substance abuse, or tackle organized crime, or remove interprovincial trade barriers, or in my riding provide the resources for the E&N Railway to run effectively, or for Victoria to have a light rail transit system?

Why has the new Conservative dictatorship trampled on the pillars of our democracy in Canada?

My electors in Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, indeed all Canadians, want to know.

Official Languages

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are systematically obstructing the work of the official languages committee in order to prevent the committee from inviting the minister to appear.

This counterproductive strategy is an affront to the principle of ministerial responsibility. Disrespectful comments made by the Conservatives to opposition members in order to delay a motion to invite once again demonstrate this party's ideology when it comes to respect for procedure. We are ready to discuss the renewal of the action plan for official languages and the committee needs to hear from the minister.

This coalition of Reform, Alliance, Progressive Conservative and failed Liberal members is letting spite get in the way of its committee work. Not all that long ago, the Conservatives were cancelling meetings to prevent debate of the court challenges program. Refusing to invite the minister to discuss the renewal of the action plan is just more of the same; it is obstruction.

Basketball Tournament

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Nechako Valley Vikings of Vanderhoof, British Columbia, won the 27th annual New Waterford Coal Bowl Classic basketball tournament final at Breton Education Centre in New Waterford.

This year's Coal Bowl was another great success thanks to the many volunteers and sponsors. The New Waterford Coal Bowl Classic is a premiere national invitational boy's high school basketball tournament, but it is more than that. It is a celebration of culture, academics and, of course, sportsmanship.

This year 10 teams in attendance from across Canada volunteered in a local grocery store to raise money for the families of the seven members of the Bathurst High School Phantoms basketball team who were killed in a tragic motor vehicle accident last month. I am pleased to report that the teams raised over $2,000 for the Boys in Red memorial fund established after the tragic accident.

Congratulations to all for a job well done.

Infrastructure

[Joe Preston, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are listening. We have listened to the provinces and the territories. We have listened to the municipalities and their desire to have long term, flexible and predictable funding for infrastructure needs.

We delivered the building Canada fund, world class action to provide world class infrastructure for this country.

We must work together to correct the infrastructure deficit left by the previous Liberal government. Building Canada is a $33 billion seven year plan, with $17.6 billion going directly to the municipalities via the GST rebate and the gas tax fund.

Working together, building Canada means a partnership. Municipalities asked us to extend the gas tax fund and in budget 2007 we acted. We extended it to 2014 and raised it to $2 billion a year.

The previous Liberal government left this issue on the back burner. Our menu is clear: building a better, stronger Canada.

Afghanistan

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, does the government agree that Canada's mission in Kandahar, which must change to one of training, reconstruction and development in February 2009, must also have a clear end date in February 2011, not a vague approximation around 2011 and not just a review date, but a clear end date in February 2011? Does the government agree with that?

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

Mr. Speaker, throughout the process of working on developing our Canadian position on the future of our mission in Afghanistan, we have been trying to build a bipartisan consensus through the work of the Manley panel headed up by a former Liberal deputy prime minister.

We put a motion on the table. We sought input on that and we have since had input from the Liberal Party. We are very pleased to see there is a considerable amount of common ground between the parties.

We now have what I think can be truly called not a Liberal position or a Conservative position but a Canadian consensus. Part of that consensus is a view that the mission should end in 2011.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the House will begin a debate on Afghanistan a week from Monday. It must follow an open and transparent process. It must be serious, thoughtful and substantive.

I would ask the government House leader how many days of debate is the government prepared to devote to this vital topic beyond the two days that have now been scheduled and what exactly will the House be debating?

Will the government accept the terms of the Liberal amendment?

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

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the latter part of the question, we were very pleased to see the input from the Liberal Party and the position that was provided in its motion earlier this week.

As I indicated, there is considerable common ground on the most fundamental questions about the future of the mission in Afghanistan. Of course, the most fundamental of those questions is, do we wish to see the military mission in Afghanistan continue beyond 2009? On that issue there is common ground between the two major parties in the House of Commons.

The other parties, the Bloc Québécois and the NDP, have a different view. That is fine. That is fair, but the important part is that we have worked toward a consensus. We will debate that in the House, but the most important thing is to arrive at a Canadian position that honours the commitments we have made in Afghanistan.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the existing commitments run until 2009. It is important to know the change that will occur after 2009.

The government left discussions with NATO about new and additional troops to the very last minute and now there is a mad scramble.

Specifically, which NATO allies have been approached bilaterally so far? Specifically, which ones? What clear commitments have been made to date, if any? When will we know for sure? Parliament needs full disclosure of what the government knows or does not know.

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

Mr. Speaker, there have, as the Minister of National Defence and the Prime Minister have reported in the past, been ongoing dialogues and bilateral discussions with our NATO allies at NATO meetings over the years.

The Afghan mission is of course one of our most important commitments and our commitment to our NATO partners is obviously our most important military and security alliance that we enjoy. We continue to do that.

The Prime Minister has regularly reported publicly and to the House on his discussions with other national leaders like the prime minister of Great Britain, the president of France, the prime minister of Germany and the like. We will continue to do that.

What is important though is that we do have an element of burden sharing from our allies. That is something I know that the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party have in common.

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Liberals believe that the key to success in the Afghan mission is honesty and clarity with Canadians. That is a very different approach from what we have seen so far from the government.

Our amended motion calls on the government to provide more frank and more frequent reporting to Canadians about the mission.

Will the Prime Minister commit his government to this kind of transparency about the mission to Canadians?

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

Mr. Speaker, we are very committed to transparency and openness on this mission. We always have been. I believe there have been 10 technical briefings on the mission in Afghanistan and I believe nine of them have been under this government. We have now instituted that.

We will have those briefings on a very regular basis, so that we can provide, in a very technical and open fashion, away from the political debate, in a realm where people are hearing from the individuals who are involved on the ground and running the mission in Afghanistan and elsewhere, the kind of information that the Canadian public would like to hear. That is something that--

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

The hon. member for Kitchener Centre.

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today, Canadians have had only secrecy and cover-up from the government when it comes to the Afghanistan mission.

The issue of detainee abuse and torture is a very good example. Canadians' faith in the Afghan mission is undermined when troubling reports of abuse in the Afghan prisons emerged. What was the response from the government? It was batten down the hatches and mum is the word.

Will the Prime Minister guarantee Canadians that this reign of secrecy about the Afghan mission is over and that he will operate with transparency and openness, both to Parliament and to Canadians?

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

Mr. Speaker, one of the most encouraging elements of common ground between the leader of the Liberal Party and this government on the future of the mission in Afghanistan was his statement earlier this week that he did not believe politicians should be dictating operational decisions to our soldiers in the field.

That has been the government's position on the question of Taliban prisoners and those who have been taken by our soldiers in the field.

I am glad to see that the leader of the Liberal Party now agrees with us on the importance of those decisions and what information is disclosed being an operational question for the armed forces. I think that is an important piece of common ground that we have arrived at.

The Environment

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, according to a report by Environmental Defence, the development of Alberta's tar sands is the most destructive project on Earth. According to the agency, the pollutants from this project could cancel out all efforts made elsewhere in Canada to reduce greenhouse gases. The main reason for this disaster is the Conservatives' flawed plan that rejects the Kyoto protocol.

Instead of catering to its friends in the oil patch to the detriment of the environment and future generations, will the government finally come up with a real plan to address global warming? Time is of the essence.

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

Mr. Speaker, the government does have a plan. It is the turning the corner plan. It is the first time in Canadian history where we have a plan that has mandatory targets and it includes all industries. All the major polluters and emitters of greenhouse gas emissions will need to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, and that includes the oil sands.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary should know that a real plan to address global warming contains absolute targets for reducing greenhouse gases and not the current intensity targets that will allow the tar sands industry to practically double its emissions by 2020.

Does the Prime Minister not understand that to stop this environmental disaster, his government must comply with the Kyoto protocol and adopt a plan with absolute targets?

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

Mr. Speaker, the member is wrong. The turning the corner plan is absolute reductions and those reductions are 20% by 2020. That is the toughest plan in Canadian history.

The big question is why the Bloc is opposed to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. In reality, it has never done anything to help the environment.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, The Conservatives are finally adopting some of the Bloc Québécois recommendations on reducing phosphates to deal with the blue-green algae problem. Nonetheless, a report prepared by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment indicates that nitrogen oxides can be just as bad in the spread of the algae.

Will the Minister of the Environment again admit that the Bloc Québécois is right and go back to the drawing board in order to come up with a truly effective plan for reducing nitrogen oxide emissions?

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

Mr. Speaker, blue-green algae is a very serious problem in Canada. I look forward to an announcement that will be made today and I encourage the member to wait. It will be a good announcement. It is another example of this government getting things done and cleaning up an environmental mess left by the previous government.