Debates of Nov. 26th, 2009

The Environment

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, here we have another lecture from the Liberal Party, the party of Kyoto, the party of the carbon tax, the party of European targets superimposed on a continental North American cap and trade system. I do not think so.

I would ask the hon. member this. He said a few weeks ago, “We need to hear more about the American position before we decide”. He has now heard the American position. It is identical to the Canadian position. Why will he not adopt it? Why does he insist on a position that will isolate Canada?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the minister can duck and hide, he can bob and weave, he can say whatever pops into his head, but the fact is he has no plan. After four years and three ministers, Canada has no plan. We are entering the most important negotiations ever and our businesses, our provinces and our municipalities have been left to fend for themselves.

Now that the Prime Minister has been reeled out of his corner and done an about-face on Copenhagen, will he now show just a smidgen, just a bit of leadership and order the minister to do his job and get a plan for Canada?

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I think Canadians know the only ones really fending for themselves are those in the Liberal Party and it is not going so well with their on-again, off-again carbon tax.

Our domestic policies will be harmonized on a continental basis, integrated with an international treaty that we are currently negotiating at Copenhagen. One thing the Conservative government will never do is fly over to Copenhagen, pull a target out of the air that is ill-suited to our industrial base, to our geography and agree to damage the Canadian economy. That will not happen on our watch.

Conservative Party of Canada

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the saddest thing about the comments from the member for South Shore—St. Margaret's is that they were not totally surprising, given the history of smears by Conservatives. The member called the unemployed no good. The member for Nepean—Carleton has suggested that aboriginals need to develop the values of hard work. The member for Saskatoon—Wanuskewin makes offence toward women and their right of choice. The member for Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre has his legendary list of As and Bs.

How can the Prime Minister sit quietly and allow these comments to go without an apology? Is his continued silence an indication that he actually agrees with these outrageous comments?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Mr. Speaker, I think what is truly disturbing is the level of smears that have been coming from the party opposite. I was a victim of that myself earlier this week by the hon. member himself.

Recently, the Liberal Party has been sending out flyers to homes that have been smearing our good men and women serving in our armed forces, smearing their credibility, smearing their integrity. Those members should be ashamed of that.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Mr. Speaker, our country is shedding jobs, food bank use is skyrocketing, people are worried and the government offers insults.

The Prime Minister's failure to stand up and apologize for comments made by his MPs, comments that offend women, the poor, the homeless, the unemployed, aboriginals, homosexuals, can only mean he agrees with them. Or is the reason he will not stand up his own sorry record, his smear when he referred to Atlantic Canadians as having a culture of defeat? Is that the reason the Prime Minister will not stand up and apologize for those outrageous comments?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Mr. Speaker, I have to wonder if the hon. member thinks that sending out flyers that smear the integrity and the good name of our great men and women who serve in our armed forces, so the party opposite can try to raise funds off of that for its own partisan purposes, is acceptable. Does he think that is the decent thing to do? Because if he does, that explains why he is sitting there.

Justice

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect that when serious crime is committed, the individual responsible for the crime actually should face the appropriate sentence. Canadians are rightly concerned when they perceive the rights of criminals being placed ahead of the rights of law-abiding citizens.

Could the Minister of Justice remind the members of the House just how this government's legislation to amend the Transfer of Offenders Act will help protect Canadians?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I would be glad to. Our government believes that those who commit serious crime must face serious consequences. That is why, today, the Minister of Public Safety has introduced legislation to provide additional factors that the minister can consider when making a decision on the transfer of a criminal to Canada.

Under this legislation, the government commits to making the protection of society a guiding principle in decisions affecting the corrections system. This legislation would do that by emphasizing offender responsibility when assessing requests for transfer from other countries.

We are putting public safety first. I hope this has the support of all hon. members of the House.

Consumer Product Safety

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian families with newborns cannot test all of the products for safety. They rely on the government to protect them.

Three entrapments and 43 incident reports should be enough to set off all the alarm bells in the department and to give lots of warning to Canadians. We took the government at its word when it said a year ago that it had tightened its complaint protocol, but the government knew about unsafe cribs for 14 long years.

Could the minister have lived with herself if one of our children had died because the warnings came too late?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, every complaint that is filed by consumers to us in regard to any product is investigated. Once the full scope of the problem is determined, necessary actions are taken.

The legislation we have right now is currently not adequate under the surveillance. The surveillance system is very weak. Under the current legislation, we also have to negotiate a voluntary recall with a company whenever we discover a product is unsafe. This is unacceptable to Canadians and that is why the Liberal senators need to pass the Canada consumer products safety act.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, we have complaints about crib safety going back 14 years. Canadians are wondering if the list of safety complaints not acted on by Health Canada now really goes back 40 years. For 40 years, the government has had the tools to protect Canadians, to investigate complaints, to issue warnings and advisories. Yet after 43 incidents and dozens of complaints, it failed to use those tools. Canadians are wondering what other dangerous products the Conservatives know about but are not telling them.

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, again, our current legislation is not adequate under surveillance. The surveillance system is weak. There is no mandatory reporting from the industry to us whenever there is an incident with any product that it sells.

We rely on consumers to provide information to us when incidents happen. We investigate every one of those incidents and make a determination on how to respond, which is why we recognize it is not adequate. This is why we introduced Bill C-6. This is why the Liberal senators need to pass that legislation so we can protect the health and—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

The hon. member for Jeanne-Le Ber.

Citizenship and Immigration

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in his brief to the Federal Court, the Deputy Attorney General of Canada takes issue with the use of French in immigration court. The Deputy Attorney General says, in writing, that he is acting on behalf of the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism.

Does the minister realize that he can no longer hide behind the independence of the IRB and that he is directly responsible for the legal system's guerrilla warfare against the use of French in Montreal?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Minister of Citizenship]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should calm down. A hearing was started in English at the IRB and then, for some reason, the lawyer decided to switch and demanded a hearing in French, even though the client was not francophone. The IRB agreed to proceed in French, but the lawyer now wants all the documents from the Canada Border Services Agency to be translated into French even though they were originally accepted by the lawyer in the language of the IRB hearing.

This is not an Official Languages Act matter.

Aboriginal Peoples

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, for the past two years, Innu communities in Quebec have been asking for a meeting with the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development to present their grievances, but without success. Their request has never even been acknowledged.

The chiefs of five Innu communities in Quebec are in Ottawa today. Will the minister have the decency to meet with them?

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, we continue to have good success with the three Innu communities on the coast. We are working with the Quebec government and negotiations are proceeding well.

We are prepared at all times to meet with members of the Mamuitun Tribal Council to discuss ways that we could move forward with them in some sort of agreement as well. That offer stands and, of course, we would be delighted.

In one of those communities, I am very pleased today to announce the completion of the water system that was built over the last year. That is evidence that we can work together.

Election Expenses

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, two elections ago, the Conservatives tried unsuccessfully to pass off national expenses as local expenses.

The Conservatives are the only ones to have used this strategy. The proof is that they were the only ones to have their headquarters searched by the RCMP.

Their arguments are so weak that only the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister has the audacity to use them in public. Does this not speak volumes about their credibility?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member poses a question about party financing. Unfortunately, I have in my hands a letter that the Liberal Party is using to fill its party war chest. It is a letter that raises money on the backs of our soldiers who are sacrificing so much to serve our country abroad.

My hon. Liberal friend would increase her own credibility on matters of party financing if she would now rise and apologize on behalf of the Liberal Party.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, repeating a falsehood, as the member does over and over again, does not make it the truth, and Canadians want the truth.

We have Conservative candidates admitting to electoral wrongdoing and apologizing for it. We have a federal agency doing its job in bringing this to light, and yet we have a government that thinks it is above the law.

The Conservatives should simply do the right thing. When will the Prime Minister order his party to stop wasting taxpayer dollars, respect Elections Canada and co-operate with real electoral reform?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to give the Liberal Party a second chance to apologize for this very important letter. This is a letter that seeks to raise money off the backs of the reputation of our soldiers, at the great expense to the morale of our men and women in uniform. This is not the way the party should be raising funding.

We accept their right to pose questions about Taliban prisoners but I ask that they please do not raise money on the backs of our soldiers.

Human Rights

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Uganda's anti-homosexuality bill is reprehensible, vile and hateful. It violates human rights by imposing life in prison on gays and lesbians and a death sentence for those who are gay and have AIDS. It will jail anyone who fails to report people they know to be gay.

At the Commonwealth meeting, will the Prime Minister meet face to face with Uganda's prime minister to help stop this bill, and will he make gay, lesbian and trans rights essential to development and educational work supported by Canadian foreign aid in Uganda and elsewhere?

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the current legislation before Uganda's parliament is vile, abhorrent, offensive and it offends Canadian values and decency.

We strongly condemn that and the Prime Minister will make that strong condemnation as well.

Foreign Affairs

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian citizen, Huseyin Celil, has been imprisoned in China on trumped up charges since 2006.

Before the Prime Minister heads to China, I want to remind him of his own words on the Celil case. The Prime Minister said:

--I don't think Canadians want us to sell out important Canadian values.... They don't want us to sell that out to the almighty dollar.

Canadians agree.

Will the Prime Minister use this trip to China to do what he knows Canadians expect and ask for the release of Mr. Celil?