Debates of May 13th, 2009

Department of National Defence

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister needs to come and join us in the regions to see what is really happening on the ground.

Yesterday the Minister of National Defence did his best to evade the questions concerning the management of public funds within his department.

Upon examining the Auditor General's report more closely, there is cause for concern.

Not only did the department waste $300 million because it failed to effectively monitor resource management, but there is no current information that specifies exactly what was achieved with the money that has already been spent. The minister has no control over his department. Why is that?

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

Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. We are talking about money at the Department of National Defence that was not spent, that went back to the overall budget. It is not missing money like in the sponsorship scandal. It is money that actually was not spent.

As I said yesterday, this was never a problem during the hon. member's government because under his government the Department of National Defence was starved of resources. The men and women in uniform had to beg and borrow. That is what happened under a Liberal government. We are funding the Canadian Forces fully.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Did I hear the word Schreiber, Mr. Speaker, or Elmer?

This is not Monopoly money; this is taxpayers' money.

The minister said yesterday that losing $300 million was a nice problem and that it proved that he had enough money. The problem is that the Auditor General believes that his department's financial management and monitoring are a problem. Departmental officials do not even know where the money was spent. The minister has no control over his own department.

How much more money is he prepared to lose by his incompetence and still call that a nice problem?

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

Mr. Speaker, having met with the Auditor General, she fully understands that the Department of National Defence is working very closely with her department and with other departments to ensure that accounting practices are followed and improved.

I will quote from her report. It states that “National Defence has taken steps to strengthen financial management and control”. I would add that for the fiscal year 2008-09, the Department of National Defence estimates that it will not lapse any funds.

Again, that was never a problem when the hon. member was part of the government because then his government took money away from National Defence. We are putting money into it.

The Environment

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

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government has a truly abominable record as far as climate change is concerned. The report by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development tells us that the government has totally overestimated its greenhouse gas reductions, basing its false predictions on carbon capture, a technology that will not be perfected for some years yet. In the meantime, the Government of Quebec forges ahead with its carbon exchange.

Does the Prime Minister realize that his lack of environmental vision is a hindrance to the sustainable development of Quebec, when its purpose is merely to protect the interests of his buddies, the oil companies?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois has no environmental plan, and does nothing but attack Alberta and the other industries of this county.

We are working in conjunction with the government of the United States to establish true systems for controlling greenhouse gas emissions in North America.

We have solutions, while the Bloc seeks only to create division.

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

Mr. Speaker, wanting to make Quebec a country does not mean wanting the destruction of Canada. As for creating division in Canada, I will leave that to the Prime Minister, since he is managing that very well on his own.

President Obama has been very clear. He has chosen absolute targets, not intensity targets, for reducing American greenhouse gas emissions. Since the Prime Minister intends to have Canada take part in a North American greenhouse gas emission credit exchange system, what is he waiting for before putting absolute targets in place?

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

Mr. Speaker, our government has a realistic and clear plan with achievable targets. This is what it is working toward, within an international, continental and national approach.

I would remind our colleagues that Quebec obtained $350 million through a trust, when it had asked for only $325 million. We sat down with Quebec and asked ourselves how that goal could be achieved. Their approach is territorial, and their objectives are ambitious. We salute them for it.

To say that we are hindering Quebec is an untruth. What we are doing is giving it a boost.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this government's record in environmental matters is an absolute disaster. The conservatives' strategy has not helped at all to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which have literally skyrocketed. Alberta's emissions have increased by 44% and those of Saskatchewan by 66%. Without Quebec, the overall results would be even more catastrophic.

In view of these results, will the Minister of the Environment acknowledge that we need a territorial approach so that those who have taken action, such as Quebec, do not pay for those who have dragged their feet?

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

Mr. Speaker, that is rather ironic. Others stand there and criticize, as my colleague has done for so long. But on this side we have taken action.

In the 2009 budget, $1 billion was allocated to a green infrastructure fund in order to finance tangible projects that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

But what happened once again? The Bloc voted against it. That is shameful.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government's plan has been rejected by environmentalists, economists and all Quebeckers. That is the reality.

The Minister of the Environment has to realize that the time lost by Canada in implementing measures to achieve the Kyoto protocol targets, under the Conservatives and the Liberals, will result in even greater costs.

Why is he refusing to follow Quebec's lead of adopting absolute targets and using 1990 as the reference year rather than always opting for the same measures designed to spare major polluters? That is the reality.

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

Mr. Speaker, I can say one thing: I am proud to be part of a government that recognized Quebec's efforts and transferred $350 million by means of the trust so that Quebec could achieve its objectives.

Take a look at the budget and see what the Bloc voted against: $400 million for clean energy, $1.3 billion for the renovation and improvement of social housing—there was a consensus on that, $81 million for decontamination of sites, $407 million to be invested in VIA Rail and the implementation of a tax credit for home renovations. These are tangible projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions but they voted against them. That is shameful.

General Motors Pension Fund

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

Mr. Speaker, GM faces a pension shortfall of $7 billion. The federal government is trying to pass the buck to Ontario and is saying that it has no jurisdiction in the area. The Minister of Industry drops the ball as quickly as he can and says that the government is not going to be on the hook for the pensions of GM workers. However, these workers, some of them in their seventies and eighties, have played by the rules, they have worked all their lives and they are worried that they might even lose the modest that they have at the end of the day.

Why will the Prime Minister not show some leadership here, step up to the plate and indicate that he and Canada will stand behind the workers' pensions?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the ministers are absolutely correct in observing that these pensions are under provincial jurisdiction.

At the same, the leader of the NDP should know that ourselves and the Government of Ontario, along with the Government of the United States, have been working on the restructuring issues at General Motors for some time. Those discussions go on. Obviously, what we are trying to do is ensure that we sustain a viable company in the long term and we continue to work on a solution to advance that objective.

Pension Plans

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

Mr. Speaker, the courts have allowed AbitibiBowater to shirk its obligations to its employee pension fund. This decision shows how fragile our pension system and pension plans are. This money needs to be there so that our seniors have sufficient income. But governments have given companies the right to stagger or even suspend their contributions. As a result, a number of pension funds are threatened.

When will the government take action to protect our retirees and their pensions?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, since we came to power, we have taken a number of steps to help this country's retirees, including income splitting for pensioners. We have created the tax-free savings account to promote investment, and we have improved RRSPs. I could go on at length.

We are continuing to work to improve our pension system. We are discussing these problems with the provinces, which also have extensive jurisdiction over this issue.

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

Mr. Speaker, the truth is that the government will not act even when it is the law.

In December 2007, Parliament took action to protect Canadian pensions by adopting Bill C-12 to amend bankruptcy laws. Section 39(2) prioritizes unpaid pension contributions in the case of bankruptcy. Sections 44 and 131 ensures that the court cannot unilaterally overturn a collective agreement. Section 126 prohibits a court from sanctioning restructuring plans unless all unpaid wage claims and pension obligations have been met. It is the law but the government has refused to put it into force. Why?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member well knows, or should know, it is one thing to pass a law but it is another to have the regulations in place that will ensure the law can be implemented wisely and in the best interests of the people of Canada.

We are working as fast as we can on those regulations because we want to protect people in that situation, and we will do so with great alacrity.

National Revenue

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

Mr. Speaker, in her latest report, the Auditor General stated that Canadian taxpayers lost approximately $90 million through the incompetence of the Conservative government.

Ms. Fraser estimates that Revenue Canada has taken a $30 million hit every year since the Conservatives became government in interest payments that should not have been made.

Was the minister aware of this, was he simply blindsided by the report or was he simply incompetent?

[Jean-Pierre Blackburn, Conservative, Minister of National Revenue and Minister of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, under the Income Tax Act, companies must pay tax instalments to the Canada Revenue Agency so that when year-end assessments are issued, much of the money has already come in.

That said, the Auditor General found that some people were overpaying their taxes to take advantage of a higher interest rate than the rate the banks usually offer. This is certainly an unacceptable anomaly, and we have already asked that corrective measures be taken so that it does not happen again.

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

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are tired of the financial bungling of the Conservative government, and non-answers do not enhance its imagine.

Under the Conservative government, some businesses have used loopholes to take advantage of higher government interest rates. However, if ordinary Canadians buy a government bond they only receive a measly 0.75%.

Will the minister take the responsibility seriously and take the necessary steps to close these loopholes?

[Jean-Pierre Blackburn, Conservative, Minister of National Revenue and Minister of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, as I just said, we also find it unacceptable that some companies are paying the government more than they owe in order to benefit from higher interest.

The rate was 2% higher than what they get at the bank. We disagree with this practice. This is not the purpose of income tax, and we have already asked that corrective measures be taken.

The Environment

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Environment Commissioner confirmed that after three years, three ministers and three plans, on climate change the Conservatives are not credible on any level.

Their emission reductions have no rationale. They are not transparent. Emissions are way up. Worse, they are deliberating overstating reductions targets, which they know they cannot meet.

Given those conclusions, why will the Prime Minister not finally admit that he will not come anywhere close to meeting his reduction target of 49 megatonnes for our large industries by 2010?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, it is a bit rich to hear from that side of the House that we are being judged on a piece of paper that the Liberals signed knowing fully that they could not deal with that and adhere to it. They had no plan to implement it nor execute it. They had no ability to fulfill the Kyoto protocol.

We have put together a plan that focuses on mitigating the use of fossil fuels with renewable energy in which we have put approximately $7 billion since 2007, and focuses on fuel efficiency.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the so-called dialogue with the United States is turning to confrontation.

The natural resources minister lobbies to block progressive fossil fuel standards out of California instead of helping Canada compete and win in the race to the low carbon economy.

Today, the environment minister is busy finger-wagging and lecturing the United States on its own plan because he has none to present.

When will the government realize that when it comes to achieving Canada's green energy potential, the United States is not the bad guy and it is not our greatest threat? Our greatest threat continues to be Conservative incompetence.