Debates of Feb. 5th, 2008

Manufacturing Industry

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, this government has continued to work with the auto industry, with labour, to ensure that Canadians succeed at what we have always succeeded at, which is being one of the best countries in the world at auto assembly.

The question that I put to the hon. member opposite is why, in the time when her party was in government, did it not deal with the competitiveness issues?

Why did the Liberals not deal with the Detroit-Windsor bridge crossing? Why did they not harmonize fuel standards with the United States? Why did they not deal with regulatory standards? Because they were not on the job. They were not serving the interests of the auto industry in Canada.

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we were working and we were doing a lot of things which the Conservatives have taken up, but only in small measure.

This government needs a—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

Order. Now the hon. member for Sudbury has the floor and is asking a question. Ministers have to be able to hear the question. The hon. member for Sudbury has the floor and we will have a little order.

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the truth hurts.

This government needs a plan. Hundreds of factories are closing their doors while this government sits back, smug and immobile in its laissez-faire, do-nothing attitude.

The manufacturing sector is still waiting for a plan to move forward. Where is that plan? Does the government have a plan?

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the admission of the hon. member that the truth hurts is a rare display of graciousness on the part of the members opposite. I would like to assure the House that I feel their pain.

However, we will do what we have committed to do, which is to continue to work with industry, addressing the issues that affect competitiveness.

Last week I went to northern Ontario to the community of Lindsay. I met there with workers and management who have taken over the Great Lakes recreational vehicle plant. They are making a success of it. They have optimism and faith in Canada that the Liberal Party does not have.

Government Accountability

[Ken Epp, Conservative, Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB]

Mr. Speaker, two years ago Canadians voted against Liberal scandal and corruption and they voted for a government that would bring accountability back to Ottawa. Canadian voters do not want to go back.

In his response to the Liberal sponsorship scandal, Justice Gomery outlined the need for tougher rules. Can the President of the Treasury Board tell us what the government has done to respond to Justice Gomery's recommendations?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Vic Toews, Conservative, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the enthusiastic response of the opposition.

The government responded to the Gomery commission recommendations in a detailed public letter from the Prime Minister.

The government's response to Liberal corruption was the accountability act, the most sweeping anti-corruption legislation in Canadian history. What did it bring? An independent Ethics Commissioner, a new lobbying act, a stronger Auditor General, tougher rules for political financing and real protection for whistleblowers, something that the party opposite would never do.

Public Safety

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the appalling conditions at the Kasabonika Lake first nation are unfortunately the day to day reality for police working in the Nishnawbe Aski territory. Communities have no police protection after two in the morning. Seventy-five per cent of the officers are working without backup in remote and isolated fly-in communities, and police detachments look little better than a shanty shack in a barrio.

I would like to ask the Minister of Public Safety what immediate steps will he take to immediately address this horrific double standard in public safety?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, a number of working arrangements are in place to make sure that proper policing is there. The various first nations groups apply for and work in a collaborative way to establish what levels of policing they would like and what levels can be delivered.

This particular situation is of concern to us and is being looked at by a variety of people at a number of levels. We want to make sure that the things they ask for and the things they contracted for are in fact delivered.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the collaborative approach where the minister's government has left police infrastructure dollars at zero for a region that covers two-thirds of Ontario. Police officers and our communities are at risk as a result of this policy.

Two years ago I attended the funeral of the two young men who burned to death in a makeshift jail cell in Kashechewan, and they died in conditions that would not be acceptable in any community in this country.

I will ask the minister again, why is he continuing to perpetuate a two tier standard for public safety in our communities?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, the person posing the question obviously has no understanding of the fact that these agreements work at a local level. They involve the province and they involve the federal government. They involve requests by those who are in the particular area.

The member obviously is clearly unaware of the amount of resources that we have increased across the board for policing, not just for arrangements like these, but in other types of situations also.

This is something that has been neglected in the past, that we have looked at and we are funding in a more aggressive way. This particular situation is no exception. We are going to continue to work on that.

Chalk River Nuclear Facilities

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Europe's leading isotope suppliers were willing and able to help develop a contingency plan to prevent the medical isotope shortage. MDS Nordion Canada refused to cooperate.

It seems that instead of doing his job protecting the health and safety of all Canadians, the Minister of Health favoured the interests of a private company to whom Brian Mulroney had given this dangerous monopoly.

Will the minister admit that he put the commercial interests of one company ahead of the health and safety of all Canadians?

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

No, Mr. Speaker, in fact it is quite the opposite.

When this government learned of the situation, which was a serious situation affecting the health and safety of Canadians and other citizens worldwide, we acted. We put a bill before Parliament to do the best thing and the quickest thing and the most effective thing to restore isotopes which was to get the Chalk River reactor open again. The member's party voted for it.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we voted for it because we had been misled.

The Canadian Medical Association Journal exposed that while MDS Nordion refused to play ball, the minister misled Canadians by claiming he was combing the globe in order to find isotopes and that the only answer was to restart the reactor.

Will the minister table the phone calls he made in order to solve this crisis, or will he resign?

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

Mr. Speaker, the last refuge for scoundrels is to say that they have been misled.

All of the information that has been put before this House has been fair, has been accurate, and has been borne out by the facts. We were acting for the health and safety of Canadians. Clearly those on the other side of the House were acting in a partisan political way and that is shocking.

If anyone should be resigning or saying sorry, it should be the hon. member and those members of the House because they were not acting in the best interests of Canadians.

Afghanistan

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we witnessed another pathetic performance from the worst Minister of Foreign Affairs that Canada has seen since the current Minister of National Defence. Once again, he misled the House. Contrary to what he said yesterday, his Defence buddy told us that David Mulroney, the Associate Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, was looking at the possibility of building a Canadian wing inside an Afghan prison.

Why does he not have the courage to tell us that his government wants to create a Canadian Guantanamo in Pul-e-Charkhi, in Kabul?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I have the courage to confirm what I said yesterday in the House. The Government of Canada will not build prisons in Afghanistan. The Government of Canada will not manage prisons in Afghanistan. We are there with the international community to help the Afghan people develop their own institutions and to help them prosper safely in their country.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government keeps talking about an open and honest debate, but every answer we get from it seems to be misleading or simply incorrect.

This is very simple. C'est facile. Écoutez bien là. Canadians deserve to know the truth. Is the government planning to build a Canadian wing inside the prison of Pul-e-Charkhi in Kabul? Is the government planning a Canadian Guantanamo, yes or no?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

No, Mr. Speaker. What we are doing is very simple, and that is helping the Afghan government to be there and to succeed in security. We want the Afghan people to live in peace and security in their country.

Why is the member opposite against an open and transparent debate on the Manley report? If the Liberals believe in the Afghan mission, they must be open to a full debate on that.

Omar Khadr

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Omar Khadr, a young Canadian held in Guantanamo since he was 15, is accused of killing a U.S. soldier. He could be given a life sentence. His lawyers are asking that all charges in violation of international treaties that protect child soldiers be dismissed. The former French minister of justice, Robert Badinter, stated that this trial is contrary to international law, an opinion shared by 18 of the most distinguished jurists in the world, including the chairman of the UN International Law Commission.

For Mr. Khadr to be given a just and fair trial—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

The hon. Secretary of State (Foreign Affairs and International Trade).

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Secretary of State (Foreign Affairs and International Trade) (Sport)]

Mr. Speaker, we must remember that Mr. Khadr faces some very serious murder charges for allegedly killing an allied medic. However, I can assure the hon. member that we have sought and received assurances that Mr. Khadr is being treated humanely. Our consular officials have carried out several welfare visits.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister does not acknowledge that Mr. Khadr was a child when imprisoned. He is a child soldier.

To follow up the response of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, it seems that soldiers do not build prisons. Also, they do not transfer them to Afghans.

What do they do with them? Do they send them to the moon?