Debates of Oct. 9th, 2009

Employment Insurance

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services and to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, the measure for long-tenured workers, that is, an extra 5 to 20 weeks, will be available to those workers who need it. Fathers and mothers will need that money to pay for groceries, utilities and the mortgage, and the Bloc Québécois is about to vote against this measure and against Quebeckers.

[Josée Beaudin, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, for two weeks the minister has been unable to assess the impact of her bill on various industry sectors. Yet the Bloc Québécois is already able to say that forestry workers in Quebec are highly unlikely to benefit from Bill C-50, because they have been through a number of periods of intermittent unemployment, which excludes them from these new measures.

Why does the minister not acknowledge that her bill is designed for workers in the auto industry in Ontario?

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services and to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, all the Bloc thinks about is playing politics and voting systematically against all our measures to benefit Quebeckers and Canadians.

I invite the Bloc members to be more discerning, take their role as parliamentarians seriously and really represent Quebec's interests.

Tax Harmonization

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, as Canadians gather together this weekend in their homes to give thanks, why is it that the Conservative government is making it more expensive to put food on the table and buy that home in the first place?

According to the B.C. Real Estate Association, the government's HST rip-off will significantly increase the cost of buying a home. It says that the biggest losers will be consumers, and regardless of any rebate, the cost associated with buying any type of real estate will still increase.

Instead of making homes more affordable so hard-working people can put roofs over their heads, why is the government leaving them out in the cold?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as everyone in this House knows, that is a provincial issue. I would encourage the hon. member, when he goes home this weekend, to talk to members of his own legislative assembly.

There is a certain amount of hypocrisy in those questions because every time we have tried to reduce taxes for Canadians, NDP members have voted against it. The actions that we have taken have left $3,000 in the pockets of ordinary, four-member families. The NDP voted against that every time.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it was the government's brilliant idea to use taxpayers' money to bribe the provinces to raise taxes on those same taxpayers.

The bottom line is that the HST hurts families. Even minor hockey is being targeted. Yesterday, the Prince George Minor Hockey Association said that it has worked hard to keep costs down, but the so-called hockey-mom sales tax is going to hit parents with higher costs.

Why does the government hate hockey? Why will the government not let kids play Canada's game? Just let the kids play.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, that is more hypocrisy. In fact, I believe that the NDP voted against an initiative that we put in place to actually provide tax credits to families for their children to participate in sports. It is incredible that he and his party voted against that.

They stand in this House and proclaim to represent their constituents, yet they vote against tax reductions that leave more money in Canadians' pockets.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Mr. Speaker, to quote the Ontario Minor Hockey Association:

Parents who want to register their kids for minor hockey is just one group of many that will be negatively impacted by this tax.

Four Conservative leadership candidates in the province of Ontario said in a letter to the Minister of Finance, “This HST will cost Ontario taxpayers billions of dollars”.

If this is a provincial decision, why did these provincial Conservatives write a letter to the federal minister asking him to stop his plans for the HST?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, once again, all of the initiatives that we have put forward in reducing taxes and leaving more money in taxpayers' pockets have been fought by the NDP, whose members stand in this House, supposedly proudly, and vote against Canadians, against the home renovation tax credit, which has been incredibly successful across this country.

I would really like to be in the member's shoes when he goes home to his constituents for Thanksgiving weekend and says, “I voted against something that is good for all Canadians”.

Afghanistan

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Mr. Speaker, there is more and more confusion in this government about when Canadian troops will leave Afghanistan. Some Conservatives are saying that it may take another motion of the House to determine the fate of this mission.

Will the government abide by the resolution adopted in the House in March 2008, which says that the mission will end in 2011?

We want the truth and nothing but the truth.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, let me be very precise for my hard of listening friend across the way.

The government has been clear. The House of Commons was clear. The Prime Minister has been clear. The Minister of National Defence has been clear. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has been clear. I have been clear.

Let me be clear one more time. Our combat mission will end in 2011.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Mr. Speaker, clear as mud.

Why is it that the parliamentary secretary for foreign affairs tells committee members they will have their chance to debate the continuation of the mission? Why is it that the defence minister told the press that the mission remains as it is until such time as Parliament opens it up?

Will those members issue retractions? All Canadians and our brave troops want to know the truth.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I think my hon. friend should get the mud out of his ears.

I will say it one more time. Canada's combat mission will end in 2011. Please listen up.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, Richard Colvin was the first Canadian to see inside the Afghan prison system.

The government used to brag about the fact that he and others were there inspecting those facilities, finding out what was going on, and informing the government of those realities.

Now, Richard Colvin wants to testify before the Military Police Complaints Commission. He has already sent the commission his testimony in writing. He wants Canadians to know the truth.

Why has the government launched eight different legal manoeuvres to shut up Richard Colvin? Why that cover up?

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to individual witnesses, none have been prohibited from testifying.

The MPCC's list of witnesses was compiled before the Federal Court decided that the MPCC's mandate was limited to military policing matters only.

Mr. Colvin has submitted his affidavit to the MPCC. His affidavit is being reviewed under section 38 of the Canada Evidence Act to ensure that nothing would affect Canada's national security if released. This review is expected to be completed before his affidavit is discussed when the public interest hearing resumes on October 14.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it needs to be made clear that there is nothing here that questions the conduct of Canadian soldiers. They are not the problem. This is all about the wilful blindness of the Conservative government.

To stymie that complaints commission on torture in Afghanistan jails, the Conservatives are trying to get rid of the commission chair, Peter Tinsley. His term is up. The Conservatives will not extend it. The normal practice would be to extend the tenure of incumbent officials when their terms expire in the middle of incomplete proceedings.

What is the government so desperately covering up?

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, that is just nonsense. Mr. Tinsley, the current chairperson, has served in that position for the past four years. He has reached the end of his term. We appreciate his dedication to the position.

He has been advised he will not be reappointed to serve a further term of office. This is in keeping with previous chairpersons who also only served one term.

A new chairperson will be appointed following a public competition process. While a replacement is yet to be named, we have great faith in the commission's other designated officials who will continue to carry out their duties and the commission's mandate.

The Environment

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conference Board has just added its voice to those calling on this government to take concrete action on climate change. In the absence of clear rules, companies are reluctant to invest in reducing greenhouse gases.

Will this government listen to the Conference Board and the companies who are saying, “Stop talking, start doing something and give us the regulations.”?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, this government is taking leadership and real action to fight climate change.

I ask that member to support the plan which is a 20% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.

The United States Senate is now looking at very similar targets, a 20% reduction by 2020. Our international partners are following our lead on fighting climate change.

The Bloc needs to support those programs.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this government keeps making bad choices. Instead of putting a value on carbon, it is favouring its friends, the oil companies in western Canada that are exploiting the oil sands, by investing $120 million in carbon capture and storage, a technology whose effectiveness is disputed.

Will this government continue to turn a deaf ear to the calls of the investors who are demanding clear regulations and a carbon tax in order to be able to invest in the future?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the member ignores the fact that climate change is a global issue. It needs to have a global approach. It has to have a harmonized approach.

That is why we have been working hard with our international partners. That is why the clean energy dialogue is ongoing. That is why we are preparing for a new climate change pact.

The member needs to get on board, and not support a carbon tax that is being supported and proposed by the Liberals.

Agriculture and Agri-food

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, producers under supply management have cause to be worried as pressure is mounting for the Doha round to reach an agreement in 2010. This summer, the government agreed to sign the press release issued by the Cairns group calling for the negotiations to resume. This press release does not mention the need for a balanced trade approach nor does it propose improving the agreement that would weaken supply management.

Does the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food realize that his government's actions contradict his reassuring words, and do not calm the fears of Quebec workers, just like the Minister of International Trade who refused yesterday in committee to exclude supply management from free trade talks with the European Union?

[Gerald Keddy, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. The member was at committee yesterday where we discussed supply management in great detail. Our government has been very clear and very firm in support of supply management. Our negotiators on agriculture and our negotiators at the WTO have been very firm in protecting supply management.

As a matter of fact, the government has protected supply management to a degree that no other government in this place has ever done.

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, for the past two years, producers and processors have been asking the federal government for a program enabling them to deal with the unfair competition resulting from the new regulations on specified risk materials, or SRM, that are even stricter than those of the United States. The Quebec minister of agriculture, fisheries and food has said that the announcement of a $50 million program for the slaughter industry does not meet the needs of businesses governed by the SRM regulations.

What does the minister plan on doing to support producers and processors who bear the costs of managing specified risk materials?

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture]

Mr. Speaker, our Conservative government stands beside farmers. We work for farmers. We have implemented a number of funding programs, for example, to help our livestock and pork producers.

We have in place our business risk management model to help all farmers across the full spectrum, and we are working, in particular, for our farmers in Quebec.