Debates of Oct. 21st, 2010

Government Contracts

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives keep saying that they cannot be bought for a measly $500, so it begs this question. What is their price?

Nicola Papiccio gave $1,500 to the Conservatives and his company got a $36 million contract with the Minister of Public Works and Government Services. We now learn that Camille Villeneuve gave to the riding association of the former minister of public works. His company got a $293 million untendered construction contract. It seems greasing the wheels of commerce is a time honoured Conservative tradition.

If $500 is not enough, what does it cost to buy contracts from the Conservatives?

[John Baird, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, this government, when it comes to administrating the public's business, always acts with great, high ethical standards, openness, transparency and fairness. Those are all the principles. When it comes to standing up for Canada, this government has no price. We will always do what is right for this great country.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative riding association of Bourassa financed itself almost entirely off a single cocktail party financed by grateful contractors who dutifully coughed up a tithe to the Conservative Party, the maximum allowable tithe. The minister's own riding association finances itself from donors who get government contracts.

People should not have to wait for the RCMP to raid ministers' offices to find out the extent and the scope of this problem. Will the government finally just own up to the fact that its fundraising tactics are immoral and in fact corrupt?

[John Baird, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I have high personal regard for this member, but these allegations he is making are quite outrageous. I would say to the member, if he has any facts he would like to put on the table, if he would like to repeat some of these allegations outside, I would welcome him to do that.

Employment Insurance

[Joe Preston, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we will debate yet another coalition EI bill. Our Conservative government is the only party in this House that is standing up for taxpayers and voting against this costly and irresponsible bill. Bill C-280 would provide a year's worth of employment insurance after only 45 days of work. This is offensive to hard-working Canadians.

Can the parliamentary secretary inform the House of the consequences if the Liberal-Bloc-NDP coalition gets the chance to implement its EI plans?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, certainly I will. The Liberal-Bloc Québecois-NDP coalition EI plans would cost Canadians $7 billion per year. It would permanently increase EI premiums by a whopping 35%. The coalition EI plan would cost billions of dollars, result in a massive permanent increase in EI premiums, kill jobs and harm our economic recovery.

Our Conservative government will continue to stand up for hard-working Canadians and job-creating small businesses and continue to fight against these costly and irresponsible bills.

Child and Spousal Support

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, according to the last census, over 80% of single-parent families in Canada are headed by females. We have all heard from our constituents. Thousands of single moms in Canada are facing delays in getting their court-ordered child and spousal support payments from the government. In the last four years, the Conservative government has been delinquent in paying over $2.4 million, in over 6,400 cases. Single moms of Canada really do deserve better.

The government knew about this mess six months ago. Why has nothing been done to clean it up?

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question coming from the member opposite. There have been some areas where this has not moved along quickly enough and we have given very clear direction that we want this to proceed as quickly as possible.

Transportation

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

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Quebec is trying to reach an agreement with the federal government on the necessary additional costs involved in completing highway 175. The Minister of Veterans Affairs himself recognized that work of this scale could see some cost overruns. The Conservative government has even agreed to cover the first cost overrun.

Will the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities answer the call of the National Assembly and commit to covering half the total construction cost of highway 175?

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, we were quite clear yesterday. I read from the agreement that was signed between the Government of Quebec and the Government of Canada. It was a previous government but it was signed by the prime minister, to agree to a certain dollar figure on phase one. I can tell the hon. member that phase two would not have even happened if the hon. member down here, the member from Quebec, the regional development minister, had not gone to bat, because he gets no help from the members over there. He has to do it all himself.

Human Rights

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's international reputation is taking another beating, all because the Conservatives have still not signed on to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Yesterday, in Japan, Canadian delegates to the Convention on Biological Diversity blocked the treaty to curb the rapid loss of plant and animal species throughout the world. Why? Because it had language recognized in the UN declaration.

Canada already agreed to this language in May after the Prime Minister had announced we would officially endorse the declaration. Why does Canada keep backtracking on the rights of indigenous peoples?

[John Duncan, Conservative, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, Canada will take steps to endorse the UN declaration, which is an aspirational document, and we will do so in a manner fully consistent with Canada's Constitution and laws and in balance with the rights of all Canadians.

Our commitment to helping improve the lives of aboriginal peoples builds on the Prime Minister's historic apology to former students of Indian residential schools and the creation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

Science and Technology

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, CBC's The National highlighted Canada's new brain gain: the fact that many scientists from Great Britain and other countries are coming to Canada to conduct their research because of the strong support of our government.

British neuroscientist Adrian Owen said:

Canada has decided to invest in science...and I am going to a place that is going to support the work that I do.

Would the minister update the House on our government's success in supporting research across the country?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his strong support for research in the first place. Of course he is correct. Canada is becoming an international destination of choice for the world's top researchers. Last week, it was reported that our government will spend a historic $11.7 billion on science and technology this year alone. We are doing this because science drives commerce. It creates jobs. It improves the quality of life for Canadians.

It is disappointing that the official opposition is doing all it can to drive jobs away with its F-35 stance and its raising of taxes stance. That is not good for the country. What we are doing is good for the country.

Transportation

[Helena Guergis, Independent, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Mr. Speaker, a cost-competitive transportation sector is a key component of the travel and tourism industry, generating billions in tax revenues.

Canada's existing airline policies have resulted in a drop from 8th to 15th place among the world's most visited destinations. Our tourist deficit has risen dramatically from $1 billion to $14.5 billion, and 2.5 million Canadians are now going to U.S. airports in order to travel on less expensive airline tickets.

When will the government live up to its commitment to eliminate or cut airport rents and excise fuel taxes so Canada can become globally competitive and a more affordable destination?

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, of course, things such as airport rents are important. After we took office, we reduced the rents for airports by half. They have been cut in half from what they were up to 2005. So there are some savings there.

Last night, I was speaking to the Senate committee. It is starting a study on the whole airline industry, as well. I have encouraged its members to look at not only things such as airport rents but also the governance structure of the airport authorities themselves and other issues. It is a pretty wide-open study, but I think right now we are in that mode where it is time to re-examine the policies for Canada. We want it to be very competitive.

Child and Spousal Support

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the government admitting that when people become delinquent in paying court-ordered spousal payments they become deadbeats.

Health Canada and Veterans Affairs have admitted that almost 40% of their payments are delayed. This outlines a serious problem. National Defence has 3,600 cases delayed. This shows it is not an isolated problem.

The reality is that single moms, single fathers, and their children are suffering, their mortgage rates are going up, and their credit card bills are stacking up.

How can Canadians trust the government if, at the end of the day, it has not delivered and has become delinquent? It is betraying single parents.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned before, we are concerned about reports that payments may have been delayed. The President of the Treasury Board has asked officials to look into this matter and we expect it to be resolved as quickly as possible.

Presence in Gallery

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

I would like to draw to the attention of hon. members the presence in the gallery of His Excellency Blaz Kavcic, President of the National Council of the Republic of Slovenia.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

Business of the House

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is Thursday and time for the question for the government House leader. Could he give Canadians a better understanding of what is forthcoming in terms of the House schedule this week and going into next week?

Could I also ask the House leader of the government to take a moment to explain to parliamentarians when we should anticipate dealing with the government's second budget implementation bill, which of course is followed through the ways and means motion? We have seen the bill and we are waiting for further notice in terms of when we can begin that very important debate.

[John Baird, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I did want to stand in my place and correct the record.

Earlier today, in answering a question, I neglected to mention the good work of the Minister of State for Western Economic Diversification as a woman serving in this cabinet. As well, the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the hon. Marjory LeBreton, makes a very powerful and substantial contribution to this government.

I am also pleased to report that the four House leaders are working well together. We have got off to a very good start.

Today is an opposition day for the Bloc Québécois and we will continue to debate on that for the rest of the day.

Tomorrow, we will resume debate on second reading of Bill C-46, the Canada-Panama free trade agreement; followed by Bill S-9, the tackling auto theft and property crime legislation.

On Monday and Tuesday we will begin with Bill S-9, on tackling auto theft and property crime; followed by Bill C-46, the Canada-Panama free trade agreement; report stage of Bill C-3, gender equity in Indian registration; Bill C-42, strengthening aviation security; Bill C-29, safeguarding Canadians' personal information; Bill C-30, on the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R v. Shoker; Bill C-41, strengthening military justice in the defence of Canada; and Bill S-2, protecting victims from sex offenders.

On Wednesday we will begin debate on Bill C-49, the preventing human smugglers from abusing Canada's immigration system act. If debate on Bill C-49 concludes, we will continue with the business that I outlined on Monday and Tuesday.

The House leader for the official opposition also requested to know about the second budget bill, for the fall. We have begun debate on that. We have already adopted the ways and means motion, but we certainly will be calling it again before the November Remembrance Day break week for constituents. That is obviously an important piece of legislation that we look forward to having the opportunity to debate in this place.

I also neglected to mention the hard work of another member of the priorities and planning committee, the hon. Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Federal spending power

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

When this matter was last before the House the hon. member for Dartmouth—Cole Harbour had the floor and there were six minutes remaining in the time allotted for questions and comments consequent upon his speech. I therefore call for questions and comments.

The hon. member for Cape Breton—Canso.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the presentation we had the opportunity to listen to from my colleague from Dartmouth—Cole Harbour touched on a number of very important points.

To be fair to the question, a number of programs have had varying degrees of success, but some have been very successful.

Back in 2002 there was a program established by the former Liberal government that enabled provinces to embark on partnerships to acquire health care equipment. Before the program was developed, there were about 15 MRI units in the whole of Canada. Through the development of this particular program, that number rose to around 150 MRI units. We all understand the importance of MRI units and the great benefit they bring to the citizens of this country.

There have been great programs like that, but I know there have been other instances that have not panned out as well. We had discussed earlier the millennium scholarship fund where allocations of money had gone to the province of Nova Scotia and were not really used in the manner that they thought.

With the proper checks and balances, I think it is much to the benefit of all Canadians to continue to maintain well thought-out and well-regulated programs. I think that would benefit all provinces and all citizens of this country.

I would like my colleague's comments on that particular issue.