House of Commons Hansard #89 of the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was home.
Laurie Hawn ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, these complaints are before a tribunal. It is a matter before the courts. The government takes very seriously all these allegations. The government has had confirmed by the Federal Court that the Military Police Complaints Commission is limited to matters of military police investigations.
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Mr. Speaker, if Afghanistan is ever to become a stable and secure state, it is our duty to ensure that the Canadian Forces lead by example. The honour and dignity of the men and women who serve under our flag is at stake. Any doubts raised must be met with just and transparent measures, not stonewalling by the government.
Why will the Conservatives not allow Richard Colvin to testify before the Military Police Complaints Commission? What are they trying to cover up?
Laurie Hawn ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, this government has been co-operating with the Military Police Complaints Commission all along, and that is not going to change.
We are, however, committed to co-operating with the commission within its mandate, which the Federal Court has recently confirmed was limited to military police matters. To suggest that the Canadian Forces or this government do not take seriously the type of allegations, allegations only, that have come forward is obnoxious and the member should be ashamed of herself.
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are engaging in a public relations exercise about employment insurance at the expense of the unemployed, with announcements that do not meet their needs or the needs of Quebec. The latest announcement is about introducing parental leave for self-employed workers, which Quebec has had since 2006. Just like Bill C-50, which excludes forestry workers, seasonal workers, vulnerable workers and victims of intermittent layoffs, this bill leaves Quebec in the lurch.
When will the Conservative government understand that what is needed is comprehensive reform that meets the needs of the unemployed and of Quebec?
Christian Paradis ConservativeMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, clearly it is the Bloc members who are engaging in a public relations exercise. We have a bill before this House to extend the benefit period for long-tenured workers. Having added five weeks of benefits, now we want to extend the benefit period by 20 weeks. This is good news for workers in Quebec, but the Bloc is voting against that.
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc voted against it because, unlike the NDP, we cannot sanction the Conservatives' inaction, especially since the solutions are known and widely supported: set a 360-hour eligibility threshold, increase benefits to 60% of insurable earnings, abolish the waiting period and make self-employed workers eligible for regular EI benefits.
Instead of playing petty politics like the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, when will the government proceed with comprehensive reform of employment insurance, something everyone in Quebec is calling for?
Christian Paradis ConservativeMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, all that is coming from the other side is hot air. We have proposed real reform: extended benefits for long-tenured workers, which they have been waiting for for a long time. It is incredible to hear that.
We have also increased access to training for long-tenured workers, and we are continuing along those lines. What are those people doing? They are supporting the Liberals' attempt to trigger a needless election no one wants. It is shameful. It is time to take care of our economy and our own people. That is what we are doing, while they just blow hot air.
Josée Beaudin Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government is getting ready to offer parental leave for self-employed workers as part of the EI system. But this will not give Quebec anything more, because the Government of Quebec introduced this sort of leave in 2006.
Will the federal government promise to compensate Quebec, which already offers such leave for self-employed workers?
Christian Paradis ConservativeMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, once again, I would remind the House that yesterday, the Bloc supported the Liberals in an attempt to bring down the government and plunge the country into an election no one wants. Let us look at the facts. There is a bill before the House to help long-tenured workers who are in distress.
Christian Paradis Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
They are against everything.
The opposition should support this measure to help long-tenured workers. That is what they need to do.
Nicole Demers Bloc Laval, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Labour is confusing the right to refuse to work with preventive withdrawal. Under the Quebec system, women have a 90% salary replacement whereas women working in a federal jurisdiction in Quebec are not entitled to anything.
Rather than leaving these Quebec women to fend for themselves, will the Conservative government take action and come to an agreement with the Quebec government to allow these women to be covered under the Quebec preventive withdrawal program?
Rona Ambrose ConservativeMinister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear.
If the health and safety of a woman's unborn child is at risk because of a health issue, including H1N1, under the law she has the right to refuse to go to work and she will continue to be paid until a decision is made.
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, next July if an unemployed woman in Vancouver goes to JJ Bean for coffee in the morning, ding, it will cost 7% more. If she needs a haircut for a job interview, add 7%. If her car breaks down and she needs a tow, 7% more. If she takes a taxi to the job interview, 7% more. I could go on.
Will the minister explain to the people of B.C. why they need an unfair tax increase when times are already so tough?
John Baird ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, the decision on whether or not to harmonize the sales tax is a decision of the province.
I find it most interesting to see the member for Vancouver East now becoming the newest tax fighter in Canada. We welcome her new-found interest in cutting taxes and keeping taxes low.
Where was she when this government needed her support to cut the GST? She was not just missing in action, she was voting to keep taxes high. That is something she will have to explain to that same woman she spoke about.
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, HST started with this government.
And the story continues. After a job interview, if the woman in my riding buys a morning newspaper, it will cost 7% more. Then she opens the paper and reads about yet another $8 billion in corporate tax cuts that the minister has engineered. She feels pretty outraged, just like everybody else in B.C. and Ontario.
Why is the government slapping an unfair tax increase on families while cutting taxes for Canada's most profitable corporations?
John Baird ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, the same woman went to fill out her income tax and got some good news, that this government cut her income tax. The member will have to explain to that same constituent, that same woman whom she professes to care so much about, why, if the member had her way, the woman would have to pay higher income taxes.
The woman for the last two years has been paying a lower GST. Why? Because the Prime Minister and this government stood up for that woman so she could pay less tax, so she could invest in her community, so she could provide services and supports for her family.
This government is concerned about that woman. Where has the member for Vancouver East been when we have been trying to help that woman for all of these years?
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, I have to tell the minister that my constituent and thousands of others have already figured out that the government is shifting the tax burden from big businesses to families.
In B.C. alone, the HST amounts to a $4 billion tax hike. Each year the average B.C. family will pay an estimated $828 more. A senior couple will pay $883 more. A single mom will pay $522 more. Canada's most profitable corporations will be paying $8 billion less.
Again, will the minister explain to British Columbians why they should pay so much more?
John Baird ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, in British Columbia tax freedom day, the day when individuals, British Columbians, start to earn money for themselves, is now some two or three weeks earlier, thanks to the efforts of this government.
If the NDP had its way and if the member for Vancouver East had her way, the woman would be working an extra 21 days to support big government rather than to support her family. Those of us on this side of the House think that is unfair.
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I advised the House that the Minister of Natural Resources had used a registered lobbyist as the chief organizer for her political fundraiser on September 24. In response to the minister's apparent conflict of interest and breach of the code of conduct for ministers, the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities said, “That practice is wrong. It is totally unacceptable and it is totally inappropriate...”.
If that is the government's conclusion, what is the Prime Minister going to do about it?
John Baird ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, the member for Mississauga South brought forward allegations with respect to an individual who is employed by the Toronto Port Authority, an arm's-length body of the government, and who was using resources of the port authority for fundraising purposes. I said at the time and I will say again that was wrong and it is unacceptable. I understand the Toronto Port Authority is taking the matter seriously.
Let me be very clear. Government resources should not be used for political fundraising, period.
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
Mr. Speaker, a breach of conduct but no consequences.
Michael McSweeney is a registered lobbyist for the Cement Association of Canada, who has lobbied the government eight times in the past eight months, including lobbying the Minister of Natural Resources. Mr. McSweeney also improperly served as the chief organizer for the minister's political fundraising on September 24. Mr. McSweeney appears to be in violation of rule 8 of the Lobbyists Registration Act and the minister is obviously implicated.
Will the Minister of Industry, who is responsible for that act, immediately call for a full investigation by the Commissioner of Lobbying?
John Baird ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, if the member for Mississauga South reads the morning papers, he will see that the Ethics Commissioner has been asked to look into it. We will allow the Ethics Commissioner, who is a quasi-judicial agent of this place, to look into the matter and report back to the House.
Martha Hall Findlay Liberal Willowdale, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have a very simple question for the President of the Treasury Board given that he is the minister responsible for the government communications file. It is a very simple question.
Could he tell us what the national colours of Canada are?
John Baird ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite has gone from trolling the Internet in the middle of the night on Monday to becoming a couch potato and watching government advertisements on TV on Tuesday, and now she is trying to become a game show host by asking spot questions.
Obviously, we are committed to communicating with Canadians. We are committed to doing our part to ensure that we report back to Canadians on the economic resources and economic prospects for our country. That is an important responsibility and one which we take seriously.