Debates of April 16th, 2010

Human Resources

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Mr. Speaker, at the human resources committee on Wednesday, the member for Beaches—East York confirmed that the Liberals want to take away choice in child care from Canadian parents. However, we should not be surprised. The Liberal leader has said that he would get rid of the UCCB, and the Liberal MP for St. Paul's said that mothers who stay at home to raise their kids do not have “a real job”.

Could the minister inform this House how our Conservative government's approach to children and families differs from that of the Liberals?

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

Mr. Speaker, our government does not agree with the Liberals on the issue at all. We believe that a strong family is part of the foundation of our great country. We believe that parents know what is best for their children, which is why we are providing choice in child care, $100 a month with the universal child care benefit, because we know that parents know that our Conservative government is the only one that will stand up for choice for them.

Vale Inco

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Mr. Speaker, for eight long months hundreds of workers in Labrador and thousands in Sudbury have been out on strike at Vale Inco operations. Families are suffering, communities are hurting. The Conservatives have taken a hands-off approach, abandoning workers, while in Labrador scab labour keeps filling the pockets of the company.

When foreign interests take over, they are supposed to ensure a net benefit to Canadians.

Will the government stand up for Canada's interests and hold foreign companies accountable? Will the government stand up and tell Vale Inco to get back to the table, negotiate in good faith, and demonstrate there truly is a net benefit to Canada?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned previously to an hon. member, we do continue to monitor the situation. We hope that it gets resolved quickly in the interests of the people of Sudbury and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The hon. member rightly points out that this is an issue of provincial jurisdiction.

We continue to monitor the situation and continue to look out for the best interests of all Canadians.

Canada Post

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the budget implementation bill, the Conservative government is trying to slip in a provision to make outgoing international mail accessible to the competition, thereby attacking Canada Post's exclusive privilege and opening the door to full deregulation of the crown corporation.

Does the government realize that by avoiding debate on the issue, it is being anti-democratic? Will it agree to remove this provision from Bill C-9?

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, we support the important role that Canada Post plays in Canada not just for individuals and families, but also for Canadian businesses and the Canadian economy. We certainly have no intention to deregulate that one now.

Chile

[Jim Maloway, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the government's aid to Chile in the wake of the earthquake that rocked the country on February 27, 2010, I would like to know the government's complete list of commitments to current aid for the victims in Chile along with other efforts still under consideration.

When will the Canadian government match dollar for dollar the personal donations of Canadians for the victims of the earthquake in Chile as it did for the earthquake in Haiti? When will the government give the same treatment to Chile as it gave to Haiti?

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation]

Mr. Speaker, the people of Canada were exceptionally generous in the situation in Haiti. The Government of Canada matched that kind of generosity.

The difference is the difference in the economies, the difference in the countries. The approach the Government of Canada is taking with respect to Chile is significantly different from the approach with respect to Haiti.

The member's question belies the fact that he does not recognize the difference between the two societies and the two situations.

Presence in Gallery

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I would like to draw the attention of members to the presence in our gallery of Her Royal Highness Princess Astrid of Belgium, the Roll Back Malaria Partnership Special Representative.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

Convention between the Government of Canada and the Government of the French Republic

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, with leave of the House and pursuant to Standing Order 32, I would like to table, in both official languages, the Protocol Amending the Convention between the Government of Canada and the Government of the French Republic for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income and on Capital signed on May 2, 1975, as amended by the protocol signed on January 16, 1987, and as further amended by the protocol signed November 30, 1995, signed in Paris on February 2, 2010.

Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the Republic of South Africa

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, with leave of the House and pursuant to Standing Order 32, I would like to table, in both official languages, the Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the Republic of South Africa regarding Mutual Assistance between their Customs Administrations, signed in Johannesburg on October 30, 2009.

Government Response to Petitions

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to five petitions.

Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act

[Jay Hill, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-15, An Act respecting civil liability and compensation for damage in case of a nuclear incident.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Procedure and House Affairs

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the sixth report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the question of privilege relating to mailings sent to the riding of Mount Royal.

If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in the sixth report later this day.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the seventh report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the question of privilege relating to mailings sent to the riding of Sackville—Eastern Shore.

If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in the seventh report later this day.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I move that the sixth report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs presented to the House earlier today be concurred in.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to move the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

(Motion agreed to)

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I move that the seventh report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs presented to the House earlier today be concurred in.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to move the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.