House of Commons Hansard #99 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was aircraft.
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Mr. Speaker, as the G8 and G20 summits clearly demonstrated, the Conservatives love to throw money around. The purchase of the F-35s is no exception.
As we know, our allies are backing away in the face of rising costs. We know that a Canadian competition could have saved at least $3 billion.
Why is the government refusing to act responsibly and hold an open, competitive process in Canada that would save taxpayers billions of dollars?
Tony Clement ConservativeMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, as industry minister, I can say that the measures taken to purchase this aircraft opened the door for members of the Canadian aerospace industry to gain priority access to the F-35 program.
Members do not need to take my word for it. Today, the head of the Aerospace Industries Association, Claude Lajeunesse, said:
We need to move forward on this critical investment for our military and for our industry in order to continue to reap the benefits from being part of this international program.
He urges us to vote against the Liberal motion.
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that the Conservatives chose the F-35 arbitrarily and they are now improvising the biggest military procurement in Canadian history.
A Canadian competition, not one at the Pentagon, would save Canadian taxpayers $3 billion. This money could be spent on initiatives like family care.
Why will the Conservatives not do the right thing and have an open Canadian competition? It would save money for Canadian taxpayers and get the right aircraft for our air force.
Tony Clement ConservativeMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has a short and selective memory. It was his government that had the competition on the F-35 and at the time the hon. member was all in favour of it. He was praising the F-35 choice.
While he has been out debating this issue and trying to cancel this contract, I was at GasTOPS Ltd. today, a great Canadian company in Vanier, that is building parts for the new F-35. Those workers know that we are on their side.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia today signed a $6.2 billion agreement for a hydroelectric development project that includes a subsea electric cable between the two provinces. They plan to ask the federal government for financial assistance to complete their project.
Can the government confirm that it will not provide financial assistance to these two provinces, which, with their project, will be competing with Hydro-Québec, which did not receive any federal funding to develop its facilities?
Christian Paradis ConservativeMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, our government created Public-Private Partnerships Canada, a crown corporation that operates at arm's length from the Government of Canada, to meet Canada's infrastructure needs. As a crown corporation, PPP Canada operates at arm's length from the government, as I said, and applications are assessed on their merit.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government does not have a clear position on this.
Will it confirm that it will not fund, either directly or indirectly—because PPP Canada funding comes from the federal government—any part of the hydroelectric development project of Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia, and by that I mean neither the construction of a generating plant nor the laying of land and subsea power lines?
Christian Paradis ConservativeMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, PPP Canada Inc.'s mission is to help fund Canadian infrastructure. Projects are eligible. Any entity is free to apply for project funding. Applications are assessed on their merit. I repeat, PPP Canada Inc. operates at arm's length from the Parliament of Canada.
Paule Brunelle Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Mr. Speaker, it is always the same thing with the federal government: it always makes things difficult for the Quebec government and Hydro-Québec. Just look at equalization. While Hydro-Québec's revenue is taken into account, a portion of Hydro One's revenue in Ontario is excluded, with the excuse that it only transports energy.
Why does the government insist on penalizing Quebec, which chose, 40 years ago, to develop clean energy?
Ted Menzies ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I think we are referring to the offer that was presented to PPP Canada Inc. Public-private partnership is the operative term here. We are encouraged that it is looking at a private sector solution for this sort of investment. However, we do not interfere with a crown corporation. It makes its decisions based on merit.
Paule Brunelle Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Mr. Speaker, in addition to treating Hydro-Québec's revenue unfairly in the equalization calculation, the federal government has spent more than $66 billion on developing the oil sands and on nuclear energy, but has not invested a dime in hydroelectricity in Quebec.
Why does the Conservative government want to add funding power transmission lines to the long list of injustices perpetrated against Quebec and its hydroelectricity?
Christian Paradis ConservativeMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, that is absolutely not true. Our government is making investments to ensure that we have a healthy mix of energy. We want to be a major player on the world stage. We can become a clean energy superpower, and hydroelectricity is part of that equation.
Once again we see that the Bloc Québécois is trying to stir up trouble over energy issues. All of sudden the Bloc is interested in the oil industry, shale gas and issues involving the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Why? Only to stir up trouble. One thing is certain: the Bloc has no credibility when it comes to this issue.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence is saying that the mishandling of the file of the Camp Mirage situation has set back relationships with the UAE by a decade and that it is creating operational problems for our troops. That is very clear.
However, the Conservatives have decided to leave our troops in Afghanistan for three more years without a vote in this House and now a spat in the Conservative cabinet is putting at risk our troops.
If the defence minister had spent less time advertising for “Fly Emirates” here on Parliament Hill, perhaps he would have had a solution to the problem of Camp Mirage.
What does the government say about the minister of--
John Baird ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, we have an obligation to stand up and do what is right for Canada. It was not just the government that came to this conclusion on this position. Others are stepping forward to support this as well.
Why does the leader of the NDP not listen to Ken Lewenza, the national president of the Canadian Auto Workers? Why does he not listen to Paul Moist, the national president of CUPE, who wrote a letter to the Prime Minister saying, “We support your position on this matter”.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, the future of our troops in Afghanistan is a serious matter. To see our Minister of National Defence parading around in a “Fly Emirates” hat is clearly an insult to our soldiers. The Prime Minister must ensure that they have the support they need. If he is serious, he must present to Parliament the plan for extending the military mission in Afghanistan.
When will he allow the House to vote on extending our military mission in Afghanistan?
John Baird ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite started his question by talking about the issue with the United Arab Emirates. Why is the leader of the NDP standing behind a foreign-owned, state-controlled foreign corporation instead of behind the working men and women of the CAW and of CUPE? Maybe he could tell that to the House.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that the government does not want to answer questions about why it will not allow a vote in the House because it is undemocratic what it is doing.
The fact is that the Prime Minister is keeping our troops in harm's way after promising to bring them home. He is not allowing a vote after promising there would always be a vote.
Now, despite previous denials, the details about a secret deal that was being negotiated between the government and its favourite former premier of Ontario are beginning to come out.
Will the government finally come clean about the secret deal? Was it the Liberals or the Conservatives who said that we should cut aid while we extend the mission?
John Baird ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, we believe we have an important responsibility, not just to honour the memories of the brave men and women of the Canadian Forces who contribute so much to peace and security and so much to the rebuilding of Afghanistan, but also to the people of Afghanistan, to ensure we see this mission through.
That is why, while ending the combat mission, a training mission will continue. We think that is good for Canada, good for the people of Afghanistan and good for the national security of all of us.
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Toronto police department has come clean on its summit spending. What we do not know is how the OPP and its former chief, Julian Fantino, spent over $100 million. The Conservatives are burying the truth to shield their candidate in the Vaughan byelection.
When will the Prime Minister stop protecting his hand-picked candidate, come clean and release the figures?
Dave MacKenzie ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, the security arrangement with the Ontario government states that it has until December 1, 2010 to submit all of its G8 and G20 security expenses.
As the member opposite knows, the deadline has been in place from the beginning of the agreement with the provincial government. In fact, this agreement was signed by Ontario minister Rick Bartolucci, a member of the Liberal caucus in Ontario.
Are the federal Liberals really suggesting that our Premier McGuinty would permit the OPP to waste taxpayer money?
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is releasing the numbers two days after the byelection and we are supposed to believe that it is a coincidence. He is the same Prime Minister who blocks Conservative candidates from public debate, muzzles them, does not let them speak. Now he is keeping the voters of Vaughan in the dark about the $100 million their Conservative candidates signed off on.
Will the Prime Minister show some respect for the voters of Vaughan and release the figures today?
Dave MacKenzie ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, the silly season opposite will end on November 29, but we do understand from public statements made by the OPP that in fact its costs are expected to come in well under budget.
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
Mr. Speaker, as the stink from the mounting pile of summit waste grows, the government just keeps trying to polish it.
At committee today, government officials called the nearly $200,000 for distant toilets “a gift to the community”. Rather than shame for blowing $100,000 on a table, the Conservatives boast about selling it to themselves. No one would buy it and the town of Huntsville called it a piece of junk, but the government is proud to own a table as worthless as the leftover puddle from its $20,000 ice sculpture.
When will the minister stop treating Canadians like fools and show some respect for taxpayers?
Peter Kent ConservativeMinister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas)
Mr. Speaker, with regard to the G20 leaders table, it is a departmental asset and it is currently in storage. A second G20 outer ring table has been donated by the Government of Canada to the University of Waterloo Huntsville campus for its use.
Departmental assets as a whole are included in the DFAIT costs, which were tabled two weeks ago.
