House of Commons Hansard #114 of the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was region.
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
Mr. Speaker, despite the government's rhetoric, Canadians are starting to realize that when it comes to the economy, Tory times are tough times.
Our economy shrank by a third of a per cent. A majority of Canadians say we are headed for a recession. Thirty thousand manufacturing jobs vanished in the first four months and 2,000 Air Canada jobs today.
How can the Prime Minister ignore all these warning signs, look these unemployed Canadians in the eye and tell them that they never had it so good?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, we recognized the economic challenges this country would be facing a year ago. That is why we took action in the fall. That is why when I travel internationally, most G-8 leaders wish they had the kind of economy that Canada has.
Mr. Speaker, let me tell you something. Those guys can call in the Auditor General; they can call in the RCMP; they can call in whomever they want, but when they try and claim a new tax is revenue neutral, nobody is going to buy it.
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government does not care about good hard-working Canadians losing their jobs. In the first four months of this year, Statistics Canada reported that 30,000 jobs were lost from the manufacturing sector. That does not even take into account the 2,600 jobs cut at GM and now the 2,000 jobs cut at Air Canada.
Canadians have a right to know what the Conservative government is going to do about this crisis. Is this what the finance minister meant when he said that we have strong financial fundamentals?
Jim Flaherty ConservativeMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, it is not only what I meant when I said we have strong economic fundamentals, it is what the OECD said last week when it looked at the Canadian economy.
Who said this? Let us just see. “You need to have stimulus for the economy”. We had stimulus for the economy. We had 1.4% of GDP and we put money into people's pockets. Who said this? “To really stimulate the economy, you need to put money directly into people's pockets”. My goodness, that was the member for Markham—Unionville.
The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken
Order, please. The hon. member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine has the floor.
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
The OECD, Mr. Speaker, also said that we are heading for a recession and ours is the only G-8 economy that shrank.
More and more workers are losing their jobs and all the government can find to do is to be on the attack.
Why does the government not have any solutions for Canadians who are losing their jobs? What concrete actions will the government take? Is the Minister of Finance expecting these laid off workers to believe that everything is just fine in this, the best of all possible worlds?
Jim Flaherty ConservativeMinister of Finance
Once again, Mr. Speaker, the Liberal member ought to check her facts. In fact, we saw a rebound in manufacturing jobs, not only in Ontario but also in Quebec in the month of May. Those are the facts and that is what happened in the month of May in Canada.
Let us look at what the OECD said about this economy, about the economic fundamentals that we have right: the job growth, the lower interest rates and the future that we have because we have a plan called “Advantage Canada” that we are implementing. The plan the Liberals have is for a huge new carbon tax, a new tax on fuel oil for Canadians, on gasoline, on a whole--
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, today we have learned that Julie Couillard's mother, Diane Bellemare, was appointed for a three-year mandate as chairperson of Saint-Jérôme's Board of Referees. This political appointment came on August 1, 2007, when Ms. Couillard was dating the then minister of industry.
Can the Prime Minister tell us if the member for Beauce, then the minister of industry, was present when the name of Ms. Bellemare, the mother of his girlfriend at the time, was submitted to cabinet for the position?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, Diane Bellemare was appointed in 2007. She had previously been employed by the Fondation de l'Hôpital régional de Saint-Jérôme. She was responsible for managing and coordinating fundraising activities and communications. All government appointees are qualified, as is the case with Ms. Bellemare.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, that was not the question. We already knew what he just said. The question is whether or not the minister of industry was at the meeting when Ms. Bellemare was appointed.
Was the member for Beauce there when this partisan appointment was made—yes or no? The question is very clear.
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, all government appointments are fully qualified. In the case of appointees for positions, such as the EI chairperson, which, in the case of Madam Bellemare, was her appointment, they are required to demonstrate knowledge of employment insurance, as well as knowledge of the geographic area to which they are appointed, which, in her case, was St. Jérôme. In her case, she matched those qualifications. She has a record in the area of several hospitals where she has worked, the St. Jérôme hospital foundation and the St-Eustache Hospital foundation. As in the case of all our nominations, she is qualified.
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Speaker, if we understand correctly, the industry minister at the time was present at the cabinet meeting when Ms. Bellemare was appointed.
Diane Bellemare was appointed as chairperson of the boards of referees for the Saint-Jérôme district. The minister's office says that the candidate was subject to a security check. That check must have discovered that this women is the former partner of a man convicted of growing marijuana and is the mother of Julie Couillard, whose shady past is known to the RCMP.
Will the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, who is responsible for these appointments, admit that this looks suspiciously like a case of favouritism at the expense of the public interest?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, all appointments are subject to security checks.
All appointments to the Employment Insurance Board are the subject of rigorous security checks and this was the case with Madam Bellemare.
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Speaker, if the checks were so rigorous, they must have discovered her past.
Julie Couillard was in possession of sensitive documents for weeks. She tried to win a contract for Kevlar while in a relationship with an advisor to Michael Fortier. She did everything she could to get access to Conservatives and airport security services, and her mother got a job that was actually a partisan appointment.
Is this not abundant evidence that the Couillard affair is a matter of public interest and that the Prime Minister is concealing a number of things from us?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, I heard nothing in the question from the hon. member that suggested anything untoward about Madam Bellemare herself. I heard a lot of comments about other people but nothing about her.
I will point out that members of the Employment Insurance Board of Referees work typically about two days per month. It is a part time job and on those two or three days a month they hold hearings with regard to their regions for those who are making appeals related to employment insurance claims.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, if the Liberals are so concerned about all of these lost jobs, lost jobs in the thousands, we have to ask ourselves why they allowed confidence motions to pass in this House 43 different times to allow the government to stay in power.
The tar sands have an impact on our environment, the economy, wildlife and vegetation and human health, especially the health of aboriginal communities.
Instead of stepping up the development of the tar sands, as he is doing with the Kearl project, will the Prime Minister stop issuing new permits for new tar sands projects, yes or no?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the government has received a report but has not yet made a decision.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, that is an interesting answer. All the investors are under the impression that the Kearl project is going ahead. If the Prime Minister is saying here on the floor today that he is finally willing to agree with the grassroots organizations coming forward, the environmentalists, the businesses, the mayors, the councillors, the labour unions and now the NDP who are saying that there should be no new approvals in the tar sands, I would like him to stand and say so because it would be the right thing to do, given the consequences of the development right now.
John Baird ConservativeMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, this government is committed to doing the right thing. We have strong environmental statutes in this country. We are going to ensure that these rigorous standards are fully utilized to ensure we do the right thing for the environment.
What has gone on for far too long is uninhibited development up in the oil sands, which is why, for the first time in Canadian history, we are bringing in national regulations to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, something the previous government failed to do. We are also tackling the issue of smog and air quality, again, something that has lacked national leadership under successive Liberal governments.
Ujjal Dosanjh Liberal Vancouver South, BC
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security is examining the matter of the ex-foreign minister and Ms. Julie Couillard, which deals with missing secret documents, RCMP contradictions, a federal appointment for Ms. Couillard's mother, government contracts and much more.
The committee must be able to do its work. Will the government today consent to passing a motion in the House for warrants for the member for Beauce and Julie Couillard to appear before the public safety committee?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Vancouver South has characterized his inquiry at the public safety committee about Madam Couillard as being about finding out who else she has relationships with because he would like to know. I am not sure the House of Commons should be issuing warrants for that but I will leave that to the House.
From the government's perspective, we have chosen to pursue this matter in a much more serious fashion through a review by the Department of Foreign Affairs, which has the ability to draw upon the relevant resources and agencies of government to do so.
Ujjal Dosanjh Liberal Vancouver South, BC
Mr. Speaker, while the unanswered questions are piling up, the government refuses to cooperate with the public safety committee, refuses to take expert advice that a foreign affairs review will not be enough, refuses to answer legitimate questions on national security and refuses to call a public inquiry.
Will the government finally act and call the public inquiry today or does the Prime Minister have something else to hide?