House of Commons Hansard #13 of the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was budget.

Topics

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

5:55 p.m.

NDP

Claude Gravelle NDP Nickel Belt, ON

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate the hon. member for Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing on having delivered a speech that was dedicated to her riding, a speech that revealed, or perhaps did not reveal the values of the Liberal Party of Canada.

I know that the member for Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing has a lot of first nations people in her riding. I would like her to tell me what this budget fails to do for the first nations people in her riding.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

5:55 p.m.

NDP

Carol Hughes NDP Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

Madam Speaker, in my riding, as in other aboriginal communities, there is a lot of poverty and a lack of services. The Conservative government, like the Liberal governments that preceded it, has repeatedly failed to give aboriginal communities the support they deserve.

There is a significant shortage of funds, particularly for education. It is very difficult for them to find teachers who will agree to work for less money than they would earn working in a school that is not in an aboriginal community. It is disgusting that the Liberals and the Conservatives have allowed this kind of thing to go on.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

5:55 p.m.

NDP

Glenn Thibeault NDP Sudbury, ON

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the member a question relating to her comments on the RCMP. This past weekend in Sudbury I had the honour to attend the tri-force gala ball. All police forces were attending, celebrating and raising funds for some great community programs.

We all know the great work that police forces do right across the country and especially in our community. I had several conversations with RCMP officers who were in attendance at this event. They were expressing their outrage at not being recognized for the work they are doing.

I would like the member to comment on how the RCMP and the police forces in her riding are feeling about these wage rollbacks.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

5:55 p.m.

NDP

Carol Hughes NDP Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

Madam Speaker, it is extremely important we recognize the work that not only our RCMP officers are doing, but also the work of our soldiers are doing in defending our country.

It is shameful what the government has done with regard to reneging on collective agreements. It is awful. That is not the way to support our troops and that is not the way to support our RCMP brothers and sisters.

The government's pay equity attack is atrocious.

None of this has to do with economic stimulus. It is an attack on workers. It is an attack on families. It is an attack on children.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

5:55 p.m.

NDP

Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC

Madam Speaker, we have had the opportunity to see just how this budget contains certain provisions aimed at doing secretly what the Conservatives would never have the nerve to do publicly: deprive women of the right to institute legal proceedings, that is to say, to go before the courts in order to obtain equal pay for work of equal value.

I would like my hon. colleague to describe the reaction of women in her riding to the fact that the Conservatives, backed up in this by their Liberal accomplices, are preparing to take this fundamental right away from the women of Canada.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6 p.m.

NDP

Carol Hughes NDP Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. The women of my riding, and women all over Canada, are not pleased with what has gone on in this House this week and last with respect to pay equity.

It will soon be International Women's Day and I believe it will be a sombre celebration this year. I am very disappointed in our Liberal colleagues. Women who have fought for pay equity did not stand up, as the members for Newfoundland and Labrador did, to vote against this budget. In the meantime, the Liberals changed their minds and rose in support of it. That is really disgusting!

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6 p.m.

NDP

Bruce Hyer NDP Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON

Madam Speaker, I looked at the Conservative-Liberal alliance budget implementation bill and I was disappointed. I was disappointed to see little for Canadians and especially little for the citizens of communities in northwestern Ontario. I was equally saddened to see that the Leader of the Opposition had chosen to lead the Liberal Party, as his predecessor did, condemning the budget with one breath while rubber stamping it with the next.

Recently I held broad public consultations on the hoped-for budget in my riding and what was asked for is not in the budget. The budget implementation bill does not address the major issues my constituents brought up during those public consultations.

The things that were especially at the forefront of those consultations again and again, in 13 communities, by hundreds of people and dozens of organizations, were a fairer employment insurance system, support for our struggling forest industry and workers and real money for local infrastructure needs.

Employment insurance remains in desperate need of reform. Most workers who pay into it are not eligible for benefits. In Ontario almost 70% of the unemployed do not qualify even though they have paid into it. Paul Martin's Liberals gutted EI and the Conservatives have not fixed it. Nothing was done in the budget to make EI eligibility fairer. The program still maintains regional disparities, keeps the waiting period and there is still a clawback of severance pay.

Over half of the casework at my constituency office, the work of two people, is about EI problems and the failure to access EI fairly and efficiently, and it is growing by the week. Constituents often are unable to get through to the toll-free call centre and do not get the promised callback within 48 hours, or 84 hours, or sometimes weeks. Claims are delayed, deadlines are missed, appeals stretch out for months.

The system is not serving hardworking Canadians who have paid into it, sometimes for decades. This is simply not acceptable. We need a responsive EI system that works for workers laid off through fault of their own.

Thunder Bay—Superior North relies on the forestry sector. The industry has been just about done in by years of neglect by Liberal governments and now the Conservative government. The $170 million over two years announced for marketing is woefully and totally inadequate tor the needs of this industry, which has the potential to sustain northwestern Ontario and many northern Canada communities for many years and decades.

There was no mention of loan guarantees to help companies like Thunder Bay Fine Papers, Longlac Wood Industries and others. In northwestern Ontario and across Canada mills are shutting down and many are in danger of being scrapped. When will the Minister of Industry support the mills and workers in northwestern Ontario?

The AbitibiBowater plant recently announced shutdowns, affecting 1,100 workers in Thunder Bay. Just days ago the Thunder Bay Fine Papers mill narrowly avoided being sold for scrap metal. Three hundred and twenty direct workers and thousands of indirect jobs in Thunder Bay still face an uncertain future due to the credit crisis because the Minister of Industry will not act.

The Minister of Industry has done absolutely nothing. He has one more chance to help this mill survive and the citizens of Thunder Bay are praying that he will take that chance. I have asked him repeatedly and I implore him again. When value-added mills like these are closed, the capacity and workers may be gone for good.

On municipal infrastructure, the lack of vision and strategy is problematic as well. Alleged municipal infrastructure money is a rising tide of red ink and red tape.

There are glaring omissions in the government's implementation of the budget in that there is no preference for Canadian products or Canadian materials, even when billions are planned in stimulus spending, allegedly. What a waste of Canadian dollars to stimulate the economies of the U.S. and China.

Our domestic procurement policies were in the news recently with the buy America amendment to the stimulus bill that was before the U.S. senate. The U.S.A. already had strong domestic procurement rules in place since 1933 and even stronger in the last seven years. Most other industrialized countries have similar rules.

Canada sits alone among the G7 countries in failing to defend domestic jobs and industries with our own made in Canada government buying policy. Where direct federal procurements are somewhat constrained because of NAFTA and WTO agreements, federal transfers to provinces, or states or municipalities for infrastructure are not. All of our other trading partners have already figured this out.

Conservative and Liberal governments in Canada have ignored our rights to buy Canadian. This is a consistent failure of our governments to show courage and resolve in trade negotiations and disputes and to stand up for Canada.

Canada must pass an act mandating made in Canada requirements. Let us really stimulate the Canadian economy and not just the economies of the U.S., Mexico and China. Let us get the most value from hard-earned Canadian taxpayer dollars.

Abandoning key rights in the free market makes no more sense for our industrial strategy than it does for the banking industry. These measures will just bring us in line with other countries. For example, the buy American act has mandated 60% U.S. made products in federally supported transportation projects. The new buy American amendment would take that even further.

In Canada in the last three years we have had B.C. ferries purchased from Germany, York region buses purchased from Belgium, Vancouver sky train, the Canada line, sourced from Korea, just to name a few. Instead let us stimulate Canadian shipyards like the ones in Thunder Bay, vehicle assembly plants and rail production like Bombardier. Millions in tax revenue and spinoff jobs would be created in Canada for a change.

When will the Minister of Industry of the republican party of Canada buy into Canadian industries and stick up for our Canadian workers?

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member's enthusiasm. Canada is a trading nation and there are clear benefits to trade agreements. We have a number and we have just dealt with others.

All of a sudden, if the member follows through with the enthusiasm, the requirement would then be that people would start to do business in a manner which would not be prudent to the investors or the shareholders, or in the case of government procurement to the taxpayers. When one wants a Pontiac but has to get a Cadillac because it is all that is sold, it is not a good idea. Price issues become an issue and the economies of scale in the relationship.

Although I appreciate the enthusiasm, the wish to have a made in Canada requirement would tend to undermine the fundamental principles of good business sense and fair trade.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

Bruce Hyer NDP Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON

Madam Speaker, I have three small businesses. I do understand business principles.

I recently read with interest Pierre Berton's book, The National Dream. At that time, as now, the Liberal Party of Canada wanted to have the Americans build the international dream of the CPR to the west coast.

Interestingly, at that time, the leader of the Conservative Party, Sir John A. Macdonald stood up for Canadian industry and for Canadian provinces. What a shame that we have lost the Conservative Party of Canada. I hope we can get it back some day.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL

Madam Speaker, I share the concern of the member for Thunder Bay—Superior North about the forest industry. Abitibi just recently closed a mill in our province and, in fact, closed it early. It could not wait to close it because it saw the opportunity for support from the government, but it did not come.

A few moments ago, the member for Outremont talked about some poison pills in this budget implementation bill. There are a lot of them there but there is no bigger poison pill to me in this budget than the actions that were taken by changing the formula for the equalization payments, such that the promises under the Atlantic accord to compensate Newfoundland and Labrador were gutted to the tune of about $1.5 billion for that province. That is $3,000 per capita, which for Ontario would be $22 billion and $14 billion for Quebec. Here we are talking about a province with the highest rate of per capita debt of any province in the country.

Would the member care to comment on the kinds of poison pills that the government is prepared to insert into this budget's measures?

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

Bruce Hyer NDP Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON

Madam Speaker, I have been to Newfoundland many times on consulting business and recreation. You are the friendliest people in Canada and among the friendliest people in the world. You are also smart enough to have figured out—

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

The Acting Speaker NDP Denise Savoie

I would remind the member to make his comments directly to the Speaker. I am not from Newfoundland.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

Bruce Hyer NDP Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON

Madam Speaker, thank you for reminding me. Our friends from Newfoundland have been smart enough to figure out, as I commented a minute ago, that the great tradition of conservatism from well over a century ago has failed us. The Premier of Newfoundland has accurately identified that our Prime Minister is not a man to be trusted.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Madam Speaker, we are living in historic times and in these times the work of this House has never been more important. We parliamentarians are being called upon to meet this crisis with new ideas and bold action. We should be taking inspiration from moments of unprecedented, creative and unifying action in our history. We should be meeting the challenge to act with vision and purpose, to unite our country in this period of crisis and build the Canada that we want.

A budget is not just a set of numbers. A budget is a vision for the future. This budget, more than any other, has to meet the test of history.

We should look to history when we think about this budget. In Nova Scotia, a historical figure we celebrate is Joseph Howe. We celebrate him because he fought against patronage and corruption. He fought for democracy and he did it with style and grace. It was the approach as well as the outcomes that mattered for Joseph Howe.

One of the most famous stories about Joe Howe involves his writings against the Halifax elite in The Novascotian. Howe's opponents sought to silence him once and for all by challenging him to a duel. Joe Howe accepted the duel with the full knowledge that he might lose his life, but on that day in Halifax, his opponent shot and missed. In response, Howe raised his pistol and he fired into the air. He was able to rise above the violent and vindictive mentality of his opponents, presenting an honourable alternative through his actions. I am afraid that the government has little in common with Joseph Howe.

When it became clear that the crisis in the financial sector was spilling over into the real economy, the government used the circumstances to ram through its own regressive agenda, attacking the right of women for equal pay for work of equal value, selling off public assets at a bargain basement price, attacking workers through removing their right to strike, and silencing political opponents through the gutting of public financing that keeps our democracy fair.

We all know what happened next. The nature of the economic update forced opposition parties to set aside differences and do the work that government refused to do, namely, provide a stimulus package to protect jobs, help those who have lost them and create jobs for the future.

After a convenient prorogation, the government returned with a tremendous about-face, building up a budget that secures its own job but that does little to help save the jobs of average Canadians.

Joseph Howe could prove to be a positive role model for the current government, but where else can we look for examples of a vision for a greater Canada? Baldwin and LaFontaine had a vision of French and English working together. Under Macdonald, we built a rail system to join this great land. We united to bring about the strong social safety net that defined us in the 20th century, including medicare and employment insurance.

However, what have we seen in this budget? It is the opposite of a greater vision for Canada. We see the government once again using politics of division for its own gain. Just as when it was faced with defeat by a coalition of opposition members and pitted west against east and Canada against Quebec, it has now turned its sword to the Atlantic, dramatically adjusting the equalization formula. This adversely affects provinces such as Newfoundland and Labrador, which my colleague, the member for St. John's East, addressed earlier in this House.

Questionable activity by that party in the previous election also illustrates some of the divisive strategies that now appear in the budget. Sadly, the member for Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley was forced to rise in this House to defend his reputation because of this type of vindictive, obsessively partisan behaviour. The member, I should mention, exemplified the dignity of Joseph Howe in standing up to one of the government's previous failed budgets. For taking a stand for his province, he now sits alone, but he commands the respect of all Nova Scotians.

This divisive approach continues with this bill. Despite its cobbling together of some of the opposition's suggestions, it is fundamentally flawed. It is at odds with the approach that needs to be taken for Canada to be the great country that it is.

Our history has taught us time and time again that greatness in this country cannot be based on the type of strategies practised by the current Conservative government. For Canada to work, we must not pit one group against each other or single out particular groups or particular people for attack and derision just because we can.

In times like this, with a quarter of a million jobs lost in 90 days, the House should be rising to the call of history. Workers in all regions of our country are losing out and they need support to transition to the new economy, the one that is just waiting for a government with some vision, a green, new deal where we achieve prosperity and security for our planet as well as our people and our economy.

With dwindling fossil fuel supplies, sure to lead to higher energy costs for all Canadians in the future, we could have grasped this opportunity to build a less fossil fuel dependent economy, an economy that is more innovative and productive, creating new jobs throughout the country by becoming more efficient and harnessing the wind, water and solar resources that we have in abundance.

Instead, we see the government kneecapping the wind energy industry by cancelling an incentive program. We see that there is absolutely no understanding of the huge potential to save money and energy through energy efficiency programs. We see no funding for building the type of sustainable transportation infrastructure that is necessary to build a creative and knowledge-based advantage for Canada.

New energy efficient buildings are most needed in the affordable housing sector. We know this is the best way to move people off the streets and into better living conditions. It can create construction jobs, help our forestry sector and trigger innovation in green design technologies and techniques but we have a government that does not want to do this because of its ideological blinders.

There was an opportunity in the budget to provide immediate support by expanding employment insurance in all regions of the country. This has been shown to be the most effective form of stimulus because it gets money out quickly to the people who have been hurt by the recession and to the people who will spend it.

It is unfortunate that I have to remind the House, but employment insurance is a fund that is paid into by workers for exactly this reason, so that when times are tough they can be protected. For a government that talks so much about putting money back into the pockets of Canadians, why is it so reluctant to let workers access a fund that they built?

The government has not solved the regional inequalities that exist in this program. This could have united our country but instead we are left with divisions. When we have a minister who thinks that fixing the program makes it too lucrative, it does not give one much hope for the kind of action that is needed here.

On housing, there is plenty of language in the budget about social housing but when we look closely, there is no new money for people already on the street and there is a deliberate move to prevent anyone from confusing this with a national housing strategy. A national strategy is what has been called for by virtually every major housing and poverty advocate in the country. In the face of this housing crisis, the budget proposes tax credits for people who already own their homes to build backyard decks.

I want to return to my point about the politics of division. I regret to say that women remain a prime target in the budget, not a funding target, but a political one. The removal of a woman's right to fight for equal pay for work of equal value was one of the most audacious parts of the November economic statement. It survived the Conservatives manufactured political crisis and will pass through the House with the support of the Liberal Party. Not only that, the stimulus investments that are being made are predominantly in male dominated sectors. A woman who has a job and is not getting equal pay for equal work, well that is too bad, but if one is a woman looking for a job, the Conservative government will not help her.

The budget represents an attack and a neglect of women in Canada. This is not how we build a country. This is not how we unite people.

I have spoken about history and now I would like to speak about the future. Since the decisions we make at this pivotal time will greatly impact the future, it is worth thinking about. In a couple of years, when Canada goes to climate change conventions and other countries have prepared their economies for the transition by investing in renewables and energy efficiency, when home heating and gas prices are again heading skyward and becoming unaffordable, how will we justify the lack of action? Will we say that we are still dependent on fossil fuels but that we have created a lot of backyard decks?

In a couple of years, when other countries have used their strategic investments to reduce their rates of poverty and include a greater number of citizens in society, will we be saying that we did not really get that affordable housing stuff off the ground but we did build a lot of backyard decks? There is nothing wrong with building backyard decks but the budget will fail the test of history because it has failed to produce any vision for the type of country we want for the future. Instead, it deceives and divides.

Canadians do not deserve this. They deserve a vision for a country that will move them forward. In Canada, we move forward when we protect the vulnerable and respect minorities, whether based on ethnicity, gender, or economic status. We move forward when we present an economic alternative to the tired economics of yesterday. The budget and the conduct of the Conservative government takes us in a very different direction, in a direction that our history has shown is quite dangerous. This is why I voted against the budget and the government.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:20 p.m.

NDP

Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC

Madam Speaker, the member for Halifax made a very fine speech. She laid out very eloquently what is not in the budget, what is missing and why it is so disastrous.

The member for Halifax has the honour of having more post-secondary educational facilities in her riding than any other place in Canada. One of the nasty little poison pills that is in the budget is it brings in some new measures and rules that will be very punitive to students who access the Canada student loans program. I am sure as a new MP she is just beginning to learn what it is like when her office is flooded with students who are battling this archaic system of Canada student loans, the penalties they face and the problems they have with a system that is very inaccessible and creates huge amounts of student debt.

It is incredibly outrageous that in the budget which is supposedly there to help people, we see punitive measures that will impact students. Rather than helping students get ahead, making the system work better and making sure that loans are accessible and affordable, we are seeing more penalties being brought in.

I wonder if the member would comment on that, because I am sure it will have a big impact in her riding of Halifax.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:25 p.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Madam Speaker, Halifax does have the highest density of students per capita of any city in Canada. With all these post-secondary institutions, I have been visited by a lot of students in the riding.

The budget is a poison pill, absolutely. I want to know, what does disclosure or non-disclosure of certain documents have to do with a budget? What does a minister's power to extract information have to do with the current financial crisis?

This is about ideology. This is not about the budget or the economy. I would point out that we could pick our poison pill; if we are talking about equalization for Newfoundland, if we are talking about getting rid of pay equity, there are lots of them and they have absolutely nothing to do with the current financial situation.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:25 p.m.

NDP

Wayne Marston NDP Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON

Madam Speaker, I congratulate the member for Halifax on such an insightful speech. It is easy to see she spent a lot of time on this budget document.

Most of us in the House know that the families, the workers and the people of the Maritimes literally thrive on community spirit. What is the hon. member hearing about the way they feel about their national government slapping them in the face with the changes to equalization?

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:25 p.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Madam Speaker, admittedly in Nova Scotia, we have a different situation from what has happened in Newfoundland, because apparently there has been a side deal made with our premier.

My constituents are not talking to me about what is happening with Nova Scotia on equalization, but it is a community affair and Atlantic Canada is Atlantic Canada. We are certainly very concerned about the unfair treatment that Newfoundland is receiving as a result of the budget.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:25 p.m.

NDP

Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON

Madam Speaker, I was intrigued by the hon. member laying out how important it is that we build these backyard decks. I am wondering if she has done any research as to how many we will build.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:25 p.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Madam Speaker, that is a very interesting question. I have not done those calculations. Perhaps I should. I will not be building a deck because I do not own a home, although perhaps I could build one for somebody who does not have a home and that person could live on it.

That is some very good research that I will look into.

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:25 p.m.

NDP

John Rafferty NDP Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin with a quote:

There was a time in this fair land when the railroad did not run

When the wild majestic mountains stood alone against the sun

Long before the white man and long before the wheel

When the green dark forest was too silent to be real.

I thank Gordon Lightfoot for those words.

For some members in the House who are city dwellers, they may not know that that kind of wild Canadian land still exists in this country. In my part of Canada, in northwestern Ontario for centuries the waterways were how the fur traders got around. In 1803, people in Fort Frances, named after Lady Frances, were trading using the waterways. Now in this budget implementation bill our free and I would say ancient responsibilities to our navigable waterways are going to disappear.

Amendments will be made to the Navigable Waters Protection Act to streamline approval processes, the government says, to give more authority to the minister to allow construction without further environmental assessments. It will exclude work on certain classes of navigable waters from the approval process.

The act was first implemented in 1882 and there is no doubt that it needs a little modernization, but--

Budget Implementation Act, 2009Government Orders

6:30 p.m.

NDP

The Acting Speaker NDP Denise Savoie

I regret that I must interrupt the hon. member. He will have eight minutes left in his speech when the House resumes.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

6:30 p.m.

Liberal

Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB

Madam Speaker, last Thursday I rose in the House during question period and I asked a question which focused on the substance and on the seriousness of implementing key recommendations from the United Nations periodic peer review which was conducted last week in Geneva. This review included recommendations from some of our very close friends and allies, including the United Kingdom, Norway, Denmark and Switzerland.

Criticisms from the peer review included: Canada's failure to address violence against aboriginal women; the failure to uphold CEDAW obligations; the lack of effective remedies for particular rights violations, such as those in the area of economic and social rights of the most vulnerable; Canada's failure to support the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, especially in light of an opposition motion supporting its full implementation; and the fact that Canada has no strategy to eliminate poverty and homelessness, just to name a few.

My question focused on a number of these serious criticisms and asked about the government's plan to address them. In his answer, the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development did not address the substance of my question and provided the House with information and quoted a reputable international rights lawyer from Winnipeg, David Matas, I think out of context.

In an email Mr. Matas sent to me on Friday, the day following the question, he points out that the minister “plays on an ambiguity. He takes something I said, about Canada's presentation, out of context. I was talking about form not substance. The drift of his answer suggests I was talking about substance and not form”.

In his comments, Mr. Matas continues in saying that the best one can say of the minister is that “he uttered a non sequitur, reacting to a question about how bad Canada is in substance by answering that Canada is in good form. It is illogical to respond to a charge of weaknesses in the Canadian human rights record by saying that Canada has presented a good report on those weaknesses...it looks to me that he has fallen into verbal game playing, undercutting at home what Canada is doing abroad. In Geneva, Canada is taking the UPR seriously, setting an example in the hope that other countries will also take the UPR seriously. This effort is undermined when Canada at home does not also take the UPR seriously but instead plays the kind of verbal games in which the minister has indulged”.

The government has still failed to adequately respond and give the House and indeed Canadians the answer they were looking for. Will the government finally stand and address the seriousness of this matter and let us know how it will address these recommendations, or will it continue to ignore the recommendations from international bodies and continue to embarrass Canada on the world stage?

6:35 p.m.

Vancouver Island North B.C.

Conservative

John Duncan ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to the question from the member for Winnipeg South Centre. I would like to add my regards to Mr. David Matas, a man I have met and respect greatly.

Our government has a strong record of supporting and advancing aboriginal rights at home and abroad. As a leader in human rights, we take our commitments in this respect extremely seriously.

In fact, we recently passed Bill C-21, An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act, critical legislation which underscores this government's strong commitment to protecting the human rights of all Canadians.

What is more, we have reintroduced in this Parliament the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act. This bill would finally resolve the intolerable and inexcusable legislative gap of on reserve matrimonial real property.

Our government recognizes the vital place that aboriginal women hold as the emotional and spiritual centre of their families. We also recognize that to support aboriginal women is to bolster the entire community. However, there are some very real challenges facing aboriginal people both on and off reserve. It is often women and children who are the most affected and the most vulnerable. That is why we are focused on making progress on quality of life issues such as education, drinking water, health and housing.

Budget 2009 provides $1.4 billion over two years for specific initiatives aimed at improving the well-being and prosperity of aboriginal people in Canada.

Aboriginal families and communities will benefit from almost $1 billion in immediate investment toward urgent infrastructure needs on reserves like housing construction and remediation, school construction and improved access to clean drinking water.

Budget 2009 builds on the progress we have made together over the last couple of years, progress that is the result of genuine collaboration between aboriginal women's groups and the federal government. The greatest asset we have going forward is the determination and drive of aboriginal people themselves.