Debates of Oct. 21st, 2009

Government spending

[Michael Ignatieff, Liberal, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, for once I agree with the minister. The figures are incontrovertible. I have another example. Sixty-six per cent of recreational infrastructure projects in this country have been allocated to Conservative ridings and the minister in charge directly opposite gets the lion's share of the projects.

Therefore, if people vote Conservative, they get the rink. A lot of Canadians think that is wrong. When will the Prime Minister begin to understand that it is wrong and will he put a stop to it?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, for the Leader of the Opposition, who aspires to be prime minister one day, to get his facts so wrong is, quite frankly, shocking.

In Ontario, 29 out of the 57 $1 million maximum allocation went to projects in opposition ridings, while 28 went to government-held ridings. Of the total of 136 eligible projects, the city of Toronto received 118 of them, which is 86%.

We are being fair to all ridings and to all Canadians. That is what people would like us to do and that is exactly what we are doing.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Mr. Speaker, the ethics commissioner has opened at least 50 investigations into the conduct of the Conservative members of Parliament who tried to pass off taxpayer dollars as gifts of the Conservative Party. What is worse, the phony cheques themselves were produced using taxpayer money.

With over one-third of the Conservative caucus now under investigation, how can the Prime Minister claim that the cheque scandal did not come from his office?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, we are focused on something that very clearly Canadians want. They want a government that is focused on the economy, on more jobs, on more economic recovery, and on helping those most in need. That is what we are focused on.

We are focused on economic stimulus measures that are being shared across the country to make sure that everyone has an equal opportunity to get out of this recession to have a more prosperous country. That is what we are focused on. Members opposite should focus on the same thing.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Mr. Speaker, what Canadians want is a government that focuses on the truth.

Not only does the Conservative government like to use taxpayers' money as Conservative gifts, it is also wasting untold millions on propaganda. The Conservatives replace doorknobs, install humidifiers, change drain pans, all as an excuse to put up Conservative signs that cost more than the actual repairs themselves.

Could the Prime Minister tell us how many taxpayers' dollars he is wasting to advertise routine maintenance?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, we are working with our municipal and provincial counterparts in the hon. member's province and every province in this country, whether it is a Conservative government, a Liberal government or an NDP government. We are working with them to make sure that stimulus works in their province, works in their territory, and works in every one of their municipalities.

I defy the hon. member to say that somehow there was some closed cabal somewhere in her province, where we sat down with the provincial government, to allocate money only to Conservative ridings. That simply did not happen. We are there for each province. We are there for the country because it is simply the right thing to do.

Justice

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, with the government's proposed new legislation to eliminate conditional sentences, an individual found guilty of perjury, for example—which is unfortunately what happened to Guy Lafleur—would be required to serve his sentence in prison, regardless of the circumstances, unless the sentence were suspended.

In his ideological stubbornness, does the Prime Minister realize that he is removing any leeway judges have to impose fair, humane sentences that reflect the circumstances of the case?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, the crimes committed by white-collar criminals are outrageous. People have had enough. This is very serious. As a government, we decided to finally tackle this issue, and we hope that the Bloc will support us. There is nothing outrageous about the legislator deciding to draw a line, show leadership and say that enough is enough.

If the opposition members go out and talk to the victims, they will see that everyone has had enough. We are going to face the situation and deal with the problem.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I talked about conditional sentences, but he did not respond, and I know why.

Now, the minister is talking about economic crimes. In fact, we have talked to the victims.

The Conservatives are saying that they want to eliminate parole after one-sixth of a sentence has been served. But as for the two-year minimum sentence he is proposing for fraud over $1 million, the minister has not been able to cite a single case, because there are none. That is not the problem. The problem is offenders who get parole after serving one-sixth of their sentence.

I challenge him to include parole after one-sixth of a sentence in his bill. Otherwise, it is all talk and no action.

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, we know what the Bloc's opposition to conditional sentences means. It means that when a serious crime such as theft or fraud over $5,000 is committed, the criminal can serve his sentence at home, in the comfort of his living room. That is the Bloc's approach to crime.

We now have a bill that tackles white-collar crime. Victims called on us to take action so that this never happens again. That is what we are doing. I hope that finally, for once, the Bloc will walk the talk and support us.

As for release after one-sixth of a sentence has been served, we will not propose an ad hoc, ill-considered reform.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice's bill on white-collar crime is an exercise in futility. This bill will only hide the government's lack of action. If the government's real intention is to force white-collar criminals to serve their sentence, he need only abolish the measure that allows criminals to be released after serving one-sixth of their sentences.

If the government wants to prove that it is serious about fighting white-collar crime, why not have the bill include the outright abolition of release after serving one-sixth of the sentence?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, we are aware of the extent and the seriousness of this situation. We know that the Bloc members went out one morning, checked which way the wind was blowing and decided to come back with an ad hoc and ill-considered measure.

There is nothing new about wanting to change the one-sixth of the sentence provision. Our government has always said that it is an aberration and we are working on it.

Reform will be introduced shortly but we will not be proposing measures based on magical thinking, as our colleagues opposite have just done.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this has been part of the Bloc Québécois platform since 2007. There is no need for magic; all they have to do is introduce a bill in this House and we will vote for it.

If people like Vincent Lacroix take risks it is because there are tax havens where they can hide their money and get away with it. They know that after serving one-sixth of their sentence they are free to recover their loot.

The government says that it wants criminals to make restitution to investors but does it realize that as long as there are tax havens the likelihood of this happening is virtually nil?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, I can say that we announced good news yesterday. There were victims present. The public in general is very pleased with what was announced: minimum sentences of two years for fraud over $1 million, no matter the number of victims. I challenge the opposition members to look the victims in the eyes and tell them that they will oppose the bill because it goes against their narrow ideology to impose minimum sentences. That is shameful. It gives inappropriate and undesirable results, as we have just seen.

The Environment

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the climate change crisis is the greatest challenge humanity has ever faced. For the past three years, the bill to ensure Canada assumes its responsibilities with respect to climate change has been slowly making its way through Parliament. It got as far as the Senate, but the election put it right back at square one. The bill has been with the committee since April. It proposes aggressive science-based targets.

Does the Prime Minister realize how urgent it is that we take action?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, our position is very clear on this matter.

It is important for Canada to go to Copenhagen to the International Conference on Climate Change. We are working obviously with all of our international partners, including the United States of America, and also China, India and other major emitters to make sure that we have a comprehensive climate change policy for the entire world.

That is what my hon. colleague, the Minister of the Environment, is doing, and that is why it is important for the NDP to get onside with what we can accomplish for not only Canada but the rest of the world as well.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are less than 50 days away from the global conference on climate change in Copenhagen and the government is proposing to go empty-handed. It is an irresponsible position.

There are no clear objectives. There are no firm targets and the uncertainty is stalling the green investments that we could be taking advantage of. It is preventing Canada from becoming a leader on the green technologies of the future.

Instead of counting on another flip-flop from the Liberal Party to stop progress on the climate change crisis, why will the Prime Minister not have the courage to take the climate change accountability legislation to Copenhagen and say we are ready to be world leaders?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the important thing is to have a coherent position going into Copenhagen, which we do have. We are working with the United States on a comprehensive North American approach to this issue as well.

The hon. member mentioned green investment. The Prime Minister last week was in Edmonton to announce an investment of hundreds of millions of dollars in the province of Alberta for carbon capture and storage. We are also involved in investments in renewables. We are also involved in investments in cleaner energy and hydrocarbons as well.

That is our position. We are not only talking about it in Parliament, we are actually doing it for the people of Canada.

Pensions

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I was just outside with pensioners, long-term disabled employees and former Nortel employees. They are calling on the federal government to act by changing our bankruptcy laws to help them. They have lost their pensions. They have lost their severance pay, their disability pensions, and their medical payments.

They want justice and they want action from the government now. They have worked hard. They played by the rules, the way they were supposed to. They built wealth in a company that was then squandered by the people who were running it, and they got cheated by the system.

Is the Prime Minister content to stand by and say this is what the provinces should take care of, or is he willing to roll up his sleeves and take action for the Nortel workers and the other pensioners who are losing their--

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

The hon. Minister of Industry.

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, there is no question that the economic turmoil around the world has put enormous pressure on all kinds of pension plans and all kinds of investors. Nortel pensioners have had the particularly cruel situation of their entire company being put into bankruptcy.

The fact of the matter is though that these pensions were registered with the province of Ontario. The province of Ontario is the only body that has the right and responsibility to cover those pensions.

On the other hand, the finance minister and I are working with the provinces to make sure that we have better pension systems in this country in the future.

Infrastructure

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, clearly there is no limit to the depths to which the Conservatives will sink in order to buy-off taxpayers with their own money. Kids playing hockey in Ontario are being denied improvements to their rinks simply because they do not live in Conservative ridings.

Could the Prime Minister explain why two-thirds of all RInC funds will only help the one-third of Canadians who voted Conservative?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I really do not know where the hon. member gets her facts.

The city of Mississauga submitted seven projects and six were approved. The city of Windsor submitted seven projects and six were approved. The city of Ottawa submitted 34 applications and 25 were approved. The city of Toronto submitted 136 eligible projects and 118 were approved. We are doing this for all of Ontario and for all of Canada. The statistics are the same across the entire country.

If the hon. member has evidence that I conspired with Liberal cabinet minister George Smitherman to make sure all of the money in Ontario went to Conservative ridings, she should table that right now.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the minister buys his own propaganda.

The Prime Minister falsely claimed that nearly half of all projects, including the largest one in the RInC fund, have gone to opposition ridings. Yet, the government's own propaganda shows that this is simply not true. In fact, the top five ridings that received infrastructure funding are held by, guess who, the Conservatives.

Is this discrimination what the Prime Minister meant in Sault Ste. Marie when he said he was going to teach Canadians a lesson?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I would really encourage Liberal researchers to do their research a little bit better.

Actually, the number one riding in Ontario that received the most, 67 projects totalling $13 million, was the NDP held riding of Trinity—Spadina. Those are the facts.

If the hon. member has evidence that the member for Trinity—Spadina has suddenly become a Conservative MP, she should table that information in the House as well.