House of Commons Hansard #97 of the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was sentence.
Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—La Prairie, QC
Mr. Speaker, I cross the Champlain bridge in Montreal several times a week. It is a major thoroughfare in my riding. The government has come up with a program to patch it up over a ten-year period. Ten years. And it just recently awarded a million dollar contract that reeks of corruption.
When will the government stop thinking only of what it stands to gain and start thinking about maintaining this critical piece of infrastructure?
Christian Paradis ConservativeMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the member that in our budget—which she herself supported—we allocated $212 million to the Champlain bridge. An independent corporation—The Jacques Cartier and Champlain Bridges Incorporated—took it from there and issued a fair, open and transparent call for tenders. There was no political interference, and no minister's office was involved.
Christian Paradis Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
If the opposition members find that so funny, they should level their accusations outside of the House.
Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—La Prairie, QC
Mr. Speaker, a senator got his hands dirty. Instead of punishing him, the government removed all traces of dirt from its website and pretended that nothing ever happened.
Why is the government spending its time politicking instead of governing?
Christian Paradis ConservativeMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, that is unbelievable. Finally there is a government showing some political leadership with respect to the Champlain bridge. The government rolled up its sleeves and said it would take care of things. The opposition is trying to undermine our work with all kinds of baseless accusations. Once again, I dare the opposition to raise these accusations outside of the House.
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, the CINAR affair is one of the largest financial scandals in Canadian history. But even though CINAR acknowledged that it lied regarding its actual participation in the Robinson Sucroe series, in a document filed with the court of appeal on September 25, the government refuses to recover the money fraudulently obtained by the company.
How can the Prime Minister claim to be going after white-collar crime, and yet refuse to recover the money fraudulently obtained by CINAR?
Rob Nicholson ConservativeMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is talking about something that happened under the Liberal watch. I have indicated on a number of occasions that we are committed to transparency and accountability. I urge the hon. member that if he has any information of any criminal or other wrongdoing, he should turn it over to the appropriate authorities.
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, I just gave him the information. That was filed with the court of appeal on September 25.
But, like the Liberals, the Conservatives refuse to go after white-collar crime and tax havens. On the contrary, they even recently signed an agreement to ease trade barriers with Panama, a notorious tax haven. This is a perfect example of the Conservatives talking out of both sides of their mouths. On the one hand, they hold a press conference, putting on a big show, to say that they are getting tough on white-collar crime, and on the other hand, they are signing agreements that make this crime easier.
Why claim to go after white-collar crime, when in reality, they are doing quite the opposite?
Stockwell Day ConservativeMinister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway
Mr. Speaker, we will continue to sign free trade agreements with other countries because we want to continue to create opportunities for Canadian workers, investors and businesses. That is in our plan.
Our economy will continue to grow because we will be signing free trade agreements with many more countries.
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Mr. Speaker, by voting yesterday against the Bloc Québécois motion for emergency assistance for the forestry sector, the Conservatives demonstrated that they have no intention of helping the workers of that industry, like those in Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, and in my region, which has been going through a major crisis for several years now.
Will the government respect the decision of this House and implement emergency measures for the forestry industry and its workers, as called for by the majority of parliamentarians in this House?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)
Mr. Speaker, our government is very proud of what it has done to support the forestry industry throughout Canada. We recently put together a Canada-Quebec task force. I would remind the House that the committee, formed last spring, has achieved some excellent results, which have been commended by the forestry industry throughout Quebec. In the coming weeks, we will announce what has come out of the committee's work. We will continue to keep our promises.
Claude Guimond Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois and a majority of parliamentarians are calling for an assistance plan for the forest industry similar to the funding provided to the auto sector, which is concentrated in Ontario. For example, we are proposing assistance for private woodlot owners, many of whom are concentrated in the Lower St. Lawrence and south shore regions. A majority of parliamentarians supported the Bloc Québécois motion for private woodlot owners.
Does the government plan to adopt those measures as quickly as possible?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)
Mr. Speaker, I have had the pleasure of meeting with representatives of Quebec's private woodlots on many occasions. As a result of the committee's work last spring, we and the Government of Quebec have invested $30 million in Quebec's private woodlots for silviculture and forest resources management.
We will continue to work with that government. Everyone is familiar with the tactic of trying to win votes on the backs of workers who are unfortunately affected by the forestry crisis. We will continue to work for them and represent them.
Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, the incompetence of the government is stunning. The issue of detainees brought down the last minister of defence. Now we are supposed to believe that, after watching his colleague be demoted, the new minister did not bother to be briefed on something as serious as allegations of torture.
When will the minister come up with an answer that has even a shred of credibility?
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway
Mr. Speaker, unlike the member opposite and her government, our government acted decisively. We improved a transfer agreement that would ensure visits. In fact, as recently as today I understand there have been 175 visits to Afghan prisons with respect to ensuring that conditions are proper.
We have invested in its justice system, in policing, in correction facilities. In fact, we met last night to talk about Afghanistan and there is now a program to train female Afghan prison guards.
These are the steps that we took two and a half years ago to improve the human rights situation in that country, something her government failed to do abysmally.
Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Another avoidance, Mr. Speaker.
After the previous defence minister lost his job over this issue, surely someone would have ensured that the current minister was well briefed so he did not follow the same path. Therefore, why does the minister keep avoiding the question?
Who got Mr. Colvin's reports, what was in those reports and when did the minister first hear about them? Those are clear questions.
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway
And clear answers, Mr. Speaker. We received thousands of documents with respect to many files and, as a result, we acted. We took decisive action to improve the situation in Afghanistan. We have plused up our ability to go and visit these detention facilities. We have improved our ability to work with police, to mentor corrections officers. We have invested over $132 million in improving the justice system of the country. These are things that her government failed to do.
We can be very proud of the work of CIDA, the Department of Foreign Affairs and particularly the hard work of the men and women of the Canadian Forces.
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence just said that he was not aware of Richard Colvin's reports on the questionable treatment of the Afghan detainees. He said that these reports were among thousands of others. Honestly.
Would he have us believe that a report presented by a Canadian diplomat and containing such dramatic revelations was not brought to the minister's attention?
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway
One thing we know for sure, Mr. Speaker, that member has no idea what is in any of those reports. On the contrary, we receive these reports, we act responsibly as a result—
The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken
We will have some order, please. The Minister of National Defence has the floor.
Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS
Mr. Speaker, as I said, we receive thousands of documents with respect to the treatment of detainees. We act responsibly. We improve conditions within prisons. We invest in its justice system. We continue to train prison officials, including women prison guards in the country.
These are the important actions that began over two and a half years ago. These are the actions that have improved the human rights situation in Afghanistan. Those members continue to just stir the pot, and try to cast aspersions. There is nothing there.
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Mr. Speaker, the minister just said he did not receive the reports. It was one report among thousands of others. If he does not know what is in the report, how is the opposition supposed to know? That is the question. When did those reports get to that minister, what is in those reports and why is the minister denying ever having seen them?
The chief of defence staff knew what was in the report. General Hillier would have attended cabinet meetings. When did the Conservatives know, what—