Debates of May 12th, 2009

Infrastructure

[Gerard Kennedy, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is no coincidence he is reaching back to October. He does not want to talk about what is not happening today.

In fact, the minister is not tracking jobs created at all. He is not even asking communities to indicate whether their area is in need of stimulus funds; not at all.

Will the minister admit here today he has no idea how many jobs he may be creating or whether they are needed in the areas he may be sending money to? When he reports to the House in June, will he simply be making the numbers up?

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, what we want to do is put politics aside and work constructively with the province and municipalities.

This member wants to push aside the Premier of Ontario and not involve the provinces in infrastructure. It is not new. He wanted to stop Dalton McGuinty from becoming leader of the Liberal Party. In opposition, he conspired against him; and in government, he resigned from his cabinet.

If he will not work with the provinces and with Premier Dalton McGuinty to help the people of Ontario, he should step aside, because those of us on this side will.

The Environment

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, out of the $1 billion over five years the Conservatives have earmarked for what they call clean energy, at least $650 million will go towards financing projects involving carbon capture and storage, an unproven technology. The government is merely trying to paint the tar sands development in a greener light.

What is the Minister of Natural Resources waiting for to commit her government to a real plan to develop clean and renewable energies?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Actually, Mr. Speaker, this government has been working very hard on having a clean, green energy plan. We have had one in place for a while. We have a whole suite of eco-energy programs, from renewable heat to power from hydro, to all kinds of measures that are available to the public and to companies in order to ensure that we have green technology and that we are indeed protecting the environment.

However, with respect to carbon capture and storage, it is the technology that is world-renowned. It is known around the world as being our best bet in terms of dealing with mitigation of fossil fuels. In fact, the G8 has agreed that it is the best way--

[The Speaker, Peter Milliken]

Order, please.

The hon. member for Trois-Rivières.

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the forestry industry made a concerted effort to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. With a real carbon exchange, absolute reduction targets and 1990 as the reference year, this industry could sell its carbon credits and benefit from the cashflow it needs.

What is the government waiting for to move forward on this and do justice to all the industries that have been making an effort to reduce greenhouse gases since 1990?

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, we are dealing with the matter of offsets, which the hon. member raises in her question, the entire question of the integrity of the offset system, how it will be defined, how offsets will be recognized on a continental basis and an international basis, as well as domestically.

This is a matter that we continue to negotiate with all the parties that are part of the major economies forum, as well as part of the ONU process that will resolve these issues at Copenhagen.

National Defence

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when questioned about the possibility of moving the Griffons and closing 439 Squadron at CFB Bagotville, the Minister of National Defence first said that this was fiction. The next minute he said that no decision had been made. Therefore the minister’s comments confirm that a move is still a possibility.

Will the Minister of National Defence admit that the Griffons could be moving to Petawawa, thereby breaking the 2006 election promise to increase the number of troops based in Bagotville?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, I repeat that no decision has been made on the location of the existing fleet and the aircraft that will be purchased in future.

There is no decision and no plan to move the helicopters from the Bagotville base. This is fiction. It is an attempt by the Bloc to scare Canadian Forces personnel and their families.

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is a little muddled. He says that no decision has been made, but one is in fact expected, and we want to avoid the closure of the Bagotville and Saint-Hubert bases.

The Minister of National Revenue went even further. This morning he stated that the mission of an air response unit is to intervene anywhere in Canada and the world in the event of a catastrophe, and that if you have a military obligation to respond to a catastrophe, then logically helicopters have to be there.

I ask the Minister of National Revenue what we are to understand from this statement. If the Griffons are leaving CFB Bagotville for Petawawa, as appears to be the case, does this not mean the outright disappearance of 439 Squadron?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, let me make it very clear. I hope the hon. member will put his earpiece in and listen.

There is no plan to relocate helicopters from the base in Bagotville. This is an attempt by the Bloc, constantly, to create a crisis that causes fear for the men and women who are on the bases. We have the leader of the Bloc taking part in his usual Chicken Little approach, creating a crisis and a fear and then pretending that he is solving the problem. That is what the Bloc does. It creates problems and fear but does nothing.

Employment

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the finance minister confirmed he gets an advance peek at the job numbers. He assured the House:

I do not comment on employment numbers before the numbers are announced....

On February 5, he said, “We are going to get some job numbers tomorrow that are going to be very regrettable”; and on April 8, “I expect tomorrow's numbers to be not encouraging”.

Would the minister like to take this opportunity to correct his words from yesterday?

[Jim Flaherty, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member opposite and the House that I do not comment on the employment numbers that are going to be released the next day. What I said on Thursday last week, for example, was that I expected the numbers on Friday not to be good. In fact, they were good.

We are looking a general trend in the economy during the recession where we are going to have increasing job losses until we start to have economic growth and recovery. That is the reality. I keep the figures that I am given confidential.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

That is not what the markets infer.

The minister has so often commented on statistics before their publication that one Bank of Montreal economist jokingly remarked that they were eagerly awaiting the minister’s employment predictions in the coming days.

When he thinks aloud, the minister benefits speculators. Will he promise to stop talking about statistics before they are published?

[Jim Flaherty, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, I am not given the figures until I have completed my public engagements on Thursdays and I do not refer to the figures, but I do refer to support for the economy and I do refer to support for Whitby—Oshawa.

I encourage the member opposite, who thinks he drives a North American car and then decides that he does not drive a North American car, to join me and come down to Oshawa, buy an Impala and support the Canadian economy.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Hubert Lacroix, President and CEO of the CBC, announced to all employees that the government is imposing a cut of up to 5%, or $56 million, as a result of the strategic review.

Yet, on April 29, I looked the minister straight in the eye and asked if he would guarantee that his government would not make cuts to the CBC. He answered yes.

Is the minister telling us today that Mr. Hubert Lacroix is lying? Or is it a question of the minister, two weeks later, breaking his promise, his word and reneging on his commitment?

[James Moore, Conservative, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the strategic review, we are working with the CBC and not against it.

Let us be clear. The only party in this House to have made cuts to the CBC is the Liberal Party of Canada. The Liberal Party of Canada made election promises in the 1993, 1997 and 2000 election campaigns. It clearly stated that it would not make cuts to the CBC. And yet it cut 4,000 jobs and $414 million from the CBC budget.

We keep our promises, we are making investments and our investments are effective.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the CBC is suffering a slow, painful death from repetitive, unexpected cuts by the Conservative government. In smaller communities, like Kamloops, B.C., this means that they no longer have access to CBC broadcasts. Noon hour programs have now been cut by half, so local shows are disappearing. As a result, the CBC is restricted in meeting its mandate to provide local and regional programming.

Could the minister tell us whether this is his ultimate agenda, to prevent the CBC from meeting its mandate, so he can eventually find cause to do away with Canada's public broadcaster?

[James Moore, Conservative, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, I know the good people of Kamloops and Prince George are shaking in their boots thinking that this member will be defending their interests.

The Conservative government made very clear promises in our election campaign platform with regard to the CBC. We have kept our word, unlike the Liberals who said in 1993 that they would not cut the CBC, then they cut it by $414 million; unlike the Liberals who in 1997 said, “Forget about the past. This time we really mean it. We will not cut the CBC”. They cut it even further.

It was the Liberals who cut the CBC. It is the Conservative government that keeps its word to taxpayers.

Government Accountability

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Mr. Speaker, today the Auditor General released her spring report, which includes the details of another Liberal spending scandal.

Could the Minister of Natural Resources please tell the House how our government has improved accountability and value for Canadian taxpayers' hard-earned money?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar for her interest in accountability for Canadians.

The contribution agreements of the Auditor General's spring report were signed under the previous Liberal government. It was this government that actively recovered taxpayers' money for work that was not done. As this House knows, in 2006 this government set out to improve accountability, transparency and value for taxpayers' dollars. I am happy to see that the Auditor General has recognized our efforts today.

The Environment

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

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government's record on climate change has been three years in denial, three delaying ministers and three disastrous plans. According to the Environment Commissioner today, the government has no accountability, no chance to meet its own targets, and no clue as to what the emissions actually are in Canada.

Conservatives are flouting international and Canadian law. How does the government expect to be taken seriously in Copenhagen when it is not obeying its own law here in Canada?

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, climate change is a serious issue and this government is dealing with it in a serious way. We are dealing with it at the Copenhagen process as well as the major economies forum, which is going on in the United States as a complimentary process.

I know, the hon. member knows and everyone in the House knows, that the Kyoto implementation act was a bit of partisan mischief on the part of the NDP, the Bloc and Liberals. That is clear. This government will carry on. We will deal with real plans to reduce greenhouse gases. We will do it in a way domestically, internationally and continentally that protects the Canadian economy and the environment.

Status of Women

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General released a report today that proves that the government has failed to apply gender-based analysis to government programs. The audit clearly outlines the failure to implement the 1995 federal plan for gender equality. For 14 years, Conservative and Liberal governments have failed to live up to their obligations and their commitments to gender equality in Canada.

When will the government take women's equality seriously and properly implement gender-based analysis to finally ensure that women are treated equally and fairly?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, that is not what the Auditor General said. In fact, it was our government that took action to ensure that gender-based analysis was included in memoranda to cabinet.

Our government is committed to gender-based analysis. Our government is completing that in every department. The Treasury Board is there to ensure that it occurs. It will happen.