House of Commons Hansard #21 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was information.
Peter Kent ConservativeMinister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas)
Mr. Speaker, my colleague should know that Rights & Democracy is an arm's length organization. The government is not involved in the organization's day to day activities.
It is true the House foreign affairs committee is currently studying Rights & Democracy issues and I understand the committee will hear the board's point of view tomorrow.
I would like to say that the government has appointed an extremely capable and competent individual as president of Rights & Democracy.
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Mr. Speaker, the testimony of the three employees recently fired by Rights & Democracy and the op-ed piece by a new board member recently appointed by the Conservatives have literally caused the current crisis. The Conservatives want to take control of the organization and make it a partisan instrument.
Will they finally admit that they are deliberately destroying a great human rights institution?
Peter Kent ConservativeMinister of State of Foreign Affairs (Americas)
Mr. Speaker, that is simply not true.
To ensure the future stability of Rights & Democracy, the government has appointed an extremely capable and competent individual to lead it out of this period of turmoil.
The member should be proud of the fact that another recent government appointee to the board of Rights & Democracy is now on the long list of the Nobel Peace Prize nominees this year.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government, which prides itself on having recognized the Quebec nation, is stubbornly refusing to compensate Quebec for harmonizing its sales tax with the GST. A unanimous motion adopted yesterday by the National Assembly of Quebec states that Quebec's sales tax has been harmonized with the GST since 1992. Only the Conservative government denies this.
Will the Prime Minister dig his heels in and keep reneging on the 1992 agreement, or will he comply with the unanimous motion of the National Assembly and provide Quebec with $2.2 billion in compensation?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has signed agreements with several other provinces to harmonize their tax with the GST. Under these agreements, we are obliged to offer the same conditions to Quebec. We hope that Quebec will really harmonize its tax instead of having two separate taxes. We will continue negotiating with Quebec to that end.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, once again, the Prime Minister just spread untruths. In 1997, an agreement was signed with the Maritimes. That agreement was quickly changed to suit Ontario and British Columbia. In that case, it was possible to change the rules of the agreement so that Ontario and British Columbia would get their money. But when it comes to Quebec, the federal government is digging in its heels, which is depriving Quebec of $2.2 billion.
Is that Canadian federalism, where Quebec never gets its due and all the Conservative members from Quebec blindly applaud as Quebec suffers injustices?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, the government is willing to sign agreements with all the provinces. When we offer conditions to some provinces, we are obliged to offer the same conditions to other provinces.
The conditions are clear: we will not pay for two separate taxes. We want real harmonization, which means a single tax for consumers and industries in Quebec. I hope we will achieve that goal.
Daniel Paillé Bloc Hochelaga, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Quebec's finance minister asked that Quebec and Ontario be treated equally by the federal government.
He called for $2.2 billion for harmonization of the GST, for the same reasons that Ontario received $4.3 billion. He is concerned about the cap on equalization payments that is depriving Quebec of $357 million. Yet the federal government gave Ontario $617 million. He is calling for $250 million annually because Hydro-Québec and Ontario's Hydro One are essentially the same.
What are we supposed to think of the stubbornness of the Minister of Finance, Ontario's former finance minister, as it strangles Quebec's public finances?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, what the member is saying is not true. If Quebec wants the same agreement that Ontario got, it can be signed today. And the federal government will offer the same conditions. Up until now, Quebec has not wanted to do that. We are ready to negotiate and to find a solution.
Daniel Paillé Bloc Hochelaga, QC
Mr. Speaker, the federal government can afford to be flexible if it means cutting Quebec off financially.
Yesterday, it was revealed on page E-26 of the budget speech that protection payments for the other provinces total $1.9 billion, but that the federal government has deprived Quebec of $2.4 billion in such payments.
How can the Minister of Finance be so accommodating when it comes to the other provinces and so rigid when it comes to Quebec?
Jim Flaherty ConservativeMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the 2010 budget states that we will remain open to negotiating in good faith with all of the provinces. We have had some good discussions with Quebec's minister of finance. As he said today, discussions are ongoing.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, first, a big thanks to all my colleagues here for the consensus on the ties and scarves, and a big thanks to Prostate Cancer Canada and all the medical staff and volunteers who work on this issue.
Who knows, maybe we can create some consensus on a few other things here.
The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken
Order, please. We will have at least 35 seconds for this, but the hon. member for Toronto—Danforth will not get more.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, there is a new consensus developing on EI. Canada's small businesses have come out very strongly against the idea of EI premiums, joining with many workers who say that they should not be charged additional EI premiums. Why? Because of the roughly $60 billion that was stolen from the fund they had contributed to over the years.
Why would the Prime Minister be increasing EI premiums instead of paying the money back to the fund and cancelling the corporate tax cuts?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, we are delighted to join in solidarity with the leader of the NDP on the issue of prostate cancer. We are delighted to see him looking so good and so healthy in the House of Commons, and looking ever better in that blue tie.
In terms of the EI premiums, EI premiums are set by an independent commission every year in order to cover the costs of the program. It is true that the previous government took $60 billion out of the EI account, which it spent on other programs and other priorities. The fact is that money is gone.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, the government is saying that it will not do what the Liberal government did, that it will not siphon off $60 billion to balance the budget and that it will not siphon off the EI fund to put it in consolidated revenues. That is what the finance minister said yesterday. Now we have heard the same thing from the Prime Minister today.
Why will the government not pay the money back to the people who paid into the fund, which are the small businesses, the employers and the workers of our country? Instead, the government is locking in the theft in the budget implementation bill. Why would it do something like that?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, if I could make $60 billion appear out of thin air, I would do it, but I am not able.
The fact is that money has been spent. It is gone. The fact is we do not want that to happen in the future. That is why we have brought in a system where rates are set independently and set to cover the genuine costs of the program.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives agree with what I am saying. They have pointed it out themselves a number of times. The federal government has stolen almost $60 billion from the employment insurance fund. The Conservatives are the federal government now. We all know that the Liberal Party is to blame, but it is up to the Conservatives to right this wrong and we want to know why they are doing the opposite.
They are going to make this permanent. Why?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, we cannot change the past. We can only work toward a better future. That is what we are doing. The former government took $60 billion from the employment insurance fund for other priorities and that money has been spent. We struck an independent commission to determine employment insurance premiums based on associated employee and employer costs. That is our commitment.
Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, the the status of women minister denies knowledge that her staff wrote a series of fawning letters to newspapers in her riding. However, the sheer volume of letters demonstrates a troubling pattern of deceit. Not only did her executive assistant, Jessica Craven, author at least four separate letters to the editor, but her constituency staffer, Valerie Knight, wrote at least three.
Does the minister not read her local papers? When will the minister step down for her serial abuses of public trust?
Helena Guergis ConservativeMinister of State (Status of Women)
Mr. Speaker, I did answer this question in the House yesterday.
Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—La Prairie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the minister would have us believe that she knew nothing about this, but there are plenty of examples to suggest otherwise. On March 5, a certain Paul Shaw wrote an op-ed piece condemning the work of the airport staff, and even suggesting that while they were putting the minister through the usual checks terrorists could have had a field day.
Can the minister confirm to us that the author of that letter is indeed a former reform candidate and the current president of her riding association?
Helena Guergis ConservativeMinister of State (Status of Women)
Mr. Speaker, as I have just said, I did address this question in the House yesterday.
Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON
Mr. Speaker, it shows the minister is totally out of control and her staff is totally out of control.
She has expanded her letter writing brigade and drafted other member staffers to write on her behalf. Bonnie Ainsworth, a constituency staffer for the neighbouring riding of Barrie, wrote to the local paper to also defend the minister. Like the others, she failed to identify herself as a paid staffer.
With all these letters coming out, how can the minister continue to deny any knowledge of this orchestrated campaign? When will the Prime Minister boot the minister out?