Debates of March 31st, 2010

Status of Women

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I thank members of the official opposition for their hearty applause. The minister has clearly spoken to this issue in this place, not just today but as well yesterday.

All of us in the House have been given a great opportunity to serve the interests of Canadians. Let us focus on their priorities, on jobs, on improving health care and on making our communities safer.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, this letter defending the minister and sent to a local Simcoe newspaper was signed by Dawn Richards, who is apparently the mother of, wait for it, Jessica Craven.

Five letter writers connected to the minister, yet she claims ignorance. What a coincidence.

The Prime Minister's code of conduct states that ministers must act “to ensure public trust and confidence”, yet the minister continues to abuse the public trust without end.

How can the Prime Minister condone this kind of behaviour by his minister?

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, as the minister said both yesterday and earlier today, she has spoken to this issue.

We have all come together to represent Canadians, to work hard on the matters that are important to Canadians and their families. We are coming out of an economic recession thanks to the actions of this government. Let us remain focused like a laser on jobs, the economy and improving the lives of Canadians.

Maternal and Child Health

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Secretary of State has roundly criticized the Conservative government's backward position on women's health. Hillary Clinton pointed out that, “You cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortions”.

Will this pointed reminder convince the government to set aside its Conservative ideology and commit to improving the lives of women and children at the G8 summit?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Minister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas)]

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister reminded the House moments ago, Canadians set Canadian government policy, whether it is in Afghanistan, whether it concerns Arctic sovereignty, whether it is helping with the reconstruction and relief in Haiti, or in terms of our agenda item at the G8 in June.

Canada will lead the G8 discussion on child and maternal health. We will not, as the opposition is attempting to do, reopen the abortion debate.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not mince words. She said that access to contraception and abortion is vital to the health of women in developing countries. Her position contrasts sharply with the Conservative government's attempts to export its backward ideology overseas.

Will the Prime Minister heed Ms. Clinton's recommendations, or will he insist on siding with the ultra-conservative lobbyists who seem to have privileged access to his office?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Minister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas)]

Mr. Speaker, as we have made clear, we will be focused, as we lead the G8 discussion on child and maternal health, on how to save the lives of mothers and children around the world. We have clearly said that we are open to all options to save lives including contraception.

Rights & Democracy

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, at the committee hearing, witnesses confirmed that relations between staff, management and the new board members had deteriorated to the point that harassment had escalated, employees were gagged and key senior managers were finally fired. The organization was also threatened with closure if criticism of the government did not stop.

Does the evidence of former employees not confirm that the government's intention is to discredit the organization in order to have a better case for closing it?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Minister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas)]

Mr. Speaker, I would encourage my colleague to be patient. It is true that yesterday the House foreign affairs committee did hear some issues presented by some former employees regarding Rights & Democracy, but tomorrow, I understand, the committee will be hearing the board's side of the story. As I am sure my colleague will agree, there are two sides to the story at Rights & Democracy.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, according to Marco Navarro-Génie, a Rights & Democracy board member appointed by the Conservative government, the committee hearings are a waste of time. He even told parliamentarians to look elsewhere. As if it were his business.

What is the government waiting for to remind the one doing the dirty work that Rights & Democracy was created by Parliament and, therefore, that the opposition is just doing its job by calling for accountability?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Minister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas)]

Mr. Speaker, I would agree with my colleague. Rights & Democracy is indeed a creation of this House and Parliament, and Rights & Democracy is also a arm's-length organization. This government does not have any involvement in the organization's day-to-day operations.

I would remind my colleague that to ensure the future stability of Rights & Democracy, this government has appointed an extremely capable and welcomed new president to lead the organization.

Afghanistan

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Colonel Juneau, the Deputy Commander of the Joint Task Force Afghanistan, told the Minister of National Defence seven months after the government claimed it fixed the problems that he could not ensure that the transferred detainees were not facing a real risk of torture. He told the government that the legal test upon which transfer decisions must be based could not be satisfied at that time.

While in a state of denial, the government has known this all along. Is it not time to stop the cover-up and call a public inquiry to tell Canadians the truth?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for bringing this question forward. I thank the Globe and Mail for highlighting again that the Canadian Forces act responsibility. Whenever there has been a credible allegation, we have acted responsibly and done the right thing. We continue to do so.

With respect to the issue he refers to, we now have retired Supreme Court Justice Mr. Iacobucci looking at documents with respect to disclosure, as have arm's-length public servants in the past.

We have the Military Police Complaints Commission now operating and looking at the same issue. We have the committee, of which the hon. member is a member, also looking at this issue.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is the irresponsible conduct of the government that is at issue. In November 2007, Brigadier General Guy Laroche, Commander of Joint Task Force Afghanistan, told the government he was unable to guarantee that detainees were not being tortured. He told the government that continuing transfers in this situation would put the Canadian Forces in a difficult position.

Yet, the government has always denied that anyone advised it of a real risk of torture. It is time to stop the denials, end the cover-up, tell the truth, and call a public inquiry.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. friend for that calm, introspective, forward looking question. As he knows, over three years ago we dealt with this issue. We have had a new transfer arrangement in place now that allows for monitoring, mentoring. We have invested in the Afghan prison system, in the actual physical surroundings where prisoners are transferred. We continue to try to improve upon that.

However, here is what a former chief of staff to two Liberal defence ministers had to say:

This government improved the agreement. The concerns that a particular bureaucrat...had raised and the provisions that she had apparently at that time argued for were indeed put in the agreement by this government, the Conservative government, and kudos to them.

Canadian Council on Learning

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Council on Learning has lost its federal funding and will be laying off 50 of its 72 employees tomorrow. Nobody in education in Canada understands the government's decision and, ironically, CCL will survive due to foreign foundations who are baffled by the ignorance of the government.

At a time when Canada faces the dichotomy of “people without jobs, yet jobs without people”, we need CCL to shine a light on our investments in education. Instead, the government continues to stay in the dark.

What exactly is it about facts, research, and truth that scare the Conservatives so much?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member had done his research, he would have realized that the facts are that the funding to CCL was always intended to be for a period of time. That period of time has lapsed.

We are concerned about learning and education. That is why we have made unprecedented investments in post-secondary education for young people, in jobs to help them afford that education, and in adult learning. We have invested more than any previous government. We are getting the job done. He should keep up.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is the government wants billions more in corporate tax cuts, but gives peanuts for students.

Youth unemployment has skyrocketed during the Conservative recession. Last year, Statistics Canada told us that there were 128,000 less student jobs than the year before and the government increased Canada's summer jobs by 3,500, less than 3% of the jobs lost.

The government has turned its back on students, on child care, on literacy and the CCL. The results are going to be clear. Is that why it is trying to kill CCL, to hide its own incompetence?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Conference Board recently released a report that shows when it comes to education and early learning, Canada received an A because we are getting the job done.

We are investing in students. We are investing in post-secondary institutions, such as colleges and universities, with some $4 billion in infrastructure, so they have the capacity. We are providing apprenticeship programs, so young people can get into the trades and afford to do that.

Let us face facts. The Liberal member and his colleagues voted against every single one of those initiatives. Shame on them.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of my first nations heritage. Fifty years ago today, first nations people acquired the right to vote. This is a significant milestone and a cause for reflection.

Would the Prime Minister please share with the House his thoughts on the importance of today and outline our government's commitment to first nations people?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the member is correct, today is a historic day. It was 50 years ago that Prime Minister Diefenbaker extended the right to vote to all first nations people in this country, a measure that was long overdue. There is nothing more fundamental than our right to choose those who govern us and, obviously, all advances for aboriginal people since then have been based on that step forward.

In the recent Speech from the Throne, we committed to carrying this work forward, with additional work to promote the rights of aboriginal people, to promote infrastructure for aboriginal people, education, child and family services. We want to ensure that our aboriginal people are full partners and have the full opportunities of Canadian society.

Tax Harmonization

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance just repeated that negotiations on the harmonized sales tax would be conducted “in good faith“.

When he revealed his letter to Minister Bachand on the eve of the Quebec budget, was the federal minister acting in good faith?

Did he realize that the reason free health care services are in danger is directly related to the fact that he is depriving Quebec of the $2.2 billion it is owed?

Why did he tell Minister Bachand on the telephone that Quebec could keep collecting the tax, when his own letter stated the opposite?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to clarify the position of the NDP. It has said that it is against GST harmonization. Today, it is asking for GST harmonization.

What is the NDP's position?

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP thinks that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Since Quebec has harmonized its tax, it deserves to be compensated. We were against a new tax in Ontario, and we said so.

The government has completely shortchanged Quebec.

Does the Prime Minister realize that on December 8, the Minister of Finance said in committee that Quebec could keep collecting the tax, and that he is simply giving ammunition to those who call the federal government double-crossers?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we introduced a bill in the House to give all provinces the opportunity to harmonize their sales tax with the GST, and the NDP voted against this bill.

This party says that Quebec has the right to sign the same agreement as the other provinces.