Debates of June 8th, 2010

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

Mr. Speaker, our government's track record on foreign aid is impeccable. We have doubled our aid to Africa, and we have doubled our total aid to a record $5 billion. We are making our aid more effective, focused, and accountable. The goal of foreign aid is obvious. It is to reduce poverty in developing countries. Improving the lives of mothers and children is the foundation for achieving sustainable poverty reduction.

What the opposition is failing to mention on this issue is the simple fact that the NGOs that support our initiative are experts. We worked with World Vision, UNICEF, RESULTS Canada, CARE Canada, Plan Canada, and Save the Children. These NGOs support our initiative, because they know, through their expertise, that it is an excellent initiative. These NGOs have not been caught up in the scare tactics of the opposition.

I want to repeat some of my points from earlier speeches. Our government is not interested in reopening the debate the opposition is pushing. The Liberal leader appears to be taking a page out of the failed Liberal playbook on smear and fear tactics.

Our G8 initiative is about saving lives. Our G8 initiative is about low-cost, results-driven solutions that will help mothers and children in an effective, focused, and accountable manner.

Committees have heard plenty of testimony supporting and applauding the government's initiative. We have heard testimony identifying Canada's unique expertise with regard to midwifery and micronutrients. Our contribution to this initiative will bring that expertise to the world. Our partners will bring their expertise.

I want to make sure that the Liberal member opposite is very aware of those facts. The opposition is trying to smear the government in an attempt to score political points and spread an irrational fear against this government. It has sensationalized this debate.

Canadians want to see us operate on the world stage in a manner that brings people together. Canadians want their government to be a world leader, and this Prime Minister has taken it upon himself to ensure that we get the job done on maternal health.

According to the World Health Organization, every year more than 500,000 women die during pregnancy and childbirth, most of them in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, from largely preventable causes. These women are giving birth in conditions that are entirely unsanitary. Our initiative is working to change that, and I urge the opposition to get on side with us and on the side of the NGOs.

Every year, three million babies die within their first week of life. Every year, almost nine million children in the developing world die before their fifth birthday from largely preventable diseases.

A few weeks ago, in Halifax, all G8 development ministers unanimously agreed that improving the health of mothers and children is a top priority for the G8. As the secretary-general of the UN, Ban Ki-moon has said, “We know how to save mothers' lives”. That is the objective of our government, plain and simple.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would, in fact, question who is using smear tactics and political rhetoric in this debate.

Members on this side of the House support the government's initiative but say that it does not go far enough. There is no question that we are all committed to reducing the deaths of women from unsafe abortions. However, why is the government picking who can live and who can die? Why is it ignoring the 70,000 women who die each year from abortions? Why is it ignoring the motherless children who are left? The member opposite cited the number of deaths of children. Many of those children are motherless children without the nutrition and without the opportunity.

I want to quote Jill Wilkinson, president of Women Deliver, who said, “Women need access to family planning programs and modern contraceptives. And they need access to skilled care”, we agree, “before, during, and after childbirth, especially access to emergency obstetric care....Women also need access to safe abortion services when and where they are legal”.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, over the past months, the Minister of International Cooperation met with representatives of our Canadian non-governmental partners, such as CARE, UNICEF, World Vision, and Save the Children, who shared their collective experience and their knowledge with her. They helped plan this initiative.

Our government is entirely in step with international NGOs. This is not about reproductive rights. It is about preventing the unnecessary deaths of mothers and children.

This debate, regrettably, has fallen into the hands of the Liberal leader. The debate we are having tonight is a creation of the Liberal leader. It is not to help mothers. It is designed to help him with his failing leadership.

In contrast, the actions of this government and the Prime Minister will save lives.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to follow-up on a question that I asked on April 26 regarding the government's expenditure on the Canada pavilion at the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games.

I do want to reiterate the fact that these games were very successful. A number of leaders spent over a decade making sure these games would be as successful as possible. I am speaking of people like Gordon Campbell, the Premier of the province; Jack Poole; John Furlong, the chief executive officer of the Vancouver organizing committee; the athletes; and the paralympians.

This was an extraordinary moment for Vancouver, British Columbia and Canada. It was an opportunity to savour the fact that half a million people would be coming from all over the world to visit our city and country. It was also an opportunity to make the most of the fact that business people and investors would see our city, our province, and our country as a place to invest or do business.

The B.C. pavilion was an excellent example of a way to utilize that opportunity. Over 100 meetings or events with various associations and sectors of business were held there to show what Canada had to offer to a whole range of sectors.

The Canada pavilion on the other hand was a rented tent that was not even open at the beginning of the Olympic Games. It was an embarrassment. Commentators from a wide range of backgrounds were amazed that this was the pavilion which would showcase Canada and Canadians to the world.

My question back in April had to do with that tent. It contained a variety of sport video games and some videos from Parks Canada that had been borrowed from the ministry and very little else. There were some lineups to get into the pavilion but that might have been due to the fact that it shared its location with a live site and a beer tent sponsored by the city of Vancouver.

We have never received any accounting on how the $10 million was spent. The government has not been transparent. That was a waste of money. The pavilion was a very poor product for Canadians considering that the government borrowed the $10 million.

I would ask the minister to give an accounting of the $10 million that was spent on the Canada pavilion at the games.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the member has indicated that she would like some accounting. I will give her some numbers, absolutely.

At the outset, I would remark that the Canada pavilion was, of course, a tremendous success. She has indicated there was a lineup. In fact, there was a lineup. There was a lineup from the beginning of the games, right through to the closing of the games. In fact, 7,178 visitors visited the Canada pavilion on the first day and 137,163 visitors in total lined up during the games.

Once they were inside the pavilion, visitors were treated to entertaining and engaging interactive activities that highlighted innovative Canadian technology.

The member may think those are meaningless video games, but I would point out to her that one of the big things that is actually developed in Vancouver and in her part of the world are video games and interactive technologies. I am surprised that she would slam them in the House.

Visitors were able to participate in sports trivia games, watch videos highlighting Canada's sports legacy and legends, and view some extraordinary experiences available in our national parks and must see tourist destinations. It was a unique experience. It was truly Canadian.

In fact, the member remarked about the Canada pavilion itself. The Canada pavilion was built by Canadians boasting things about Canada. It was a true expression of Canada. It was well attended, as I indicated. There were lineups there all the time. It was a big part of the success of the Vancouver 2010 games.

I am really surprised that the member has even brought this forward. She asked about transparency. I know the member has asked and received costing, and so forth on this. She knows what it cost to build it. There is no lack of transparency there. She knows what it cost to operate. There is no lack of transparency there. She knows how the contract was awarded. There is no lack of transparency there.

I think the real bottom line is that the member embarrassed herself when she asked these questions. She embarrassed herself because she spoke poorly of something that attracted tens of thousands of visitors and these visitors were all very impressed with what they saw. They were impressed with the experience, which was a big part of the success of the 2010 games, a success that this government worked very hard with other partners, including the B.C. government and of course Vanoc.

We worked together to ensure that the Vancouver 2010 games were a success and they were.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this was a $10 million boondoggle with a contract that went into the pockets of an American company because it was a complete botched job by the government.

Unfortunately, it is $10 million of borrowed money because the government has record deficits. The dollars that the government is spending beyond what it is earning is unbelievable. The fact that it does not believe that it has any obligation to account for these dollars is an unfortunate arrogance, which we are seeing now in a billion dollar boondoggle with the few days of conference that are being planned with the G8 and G20, a fake lake for $20 million, and hundreds of thousands of dollars for assets that are nowhere near where the meetings are taking place.

Therefore, this lack of accountability by the government is an embarrassment to Canada. It is spending dollars that it is borrowing. The government has no ability to manage funds or provide accountability to the public.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

We will take no lessons in operating our finances from the tax and spend Liberals, Mr. Speaker.

The member indicated that this was an American company. Too bad that the actual headquarters for this company, its Canadian headquarters, is in the riding of the Liberal member for Mississauga—Brampton South. Perhaps it would like to move to Peterborough. I would welcome it there. I would certainly see it as a Canadian company employing Canadians. Of course, it also has jobs in other ridings, for example, the Liberal member for LaSalle—Émard. However, I guess the member would prefer that in this case it not be considered a Canadian company employing Canadians.

This was a project built by Canadians for Canadians.

The member also talked about the financial record of this government. What is great about the financial record of this government is 6.1% economic growth in the first quarter. That was the expansion of the GDP. There were another 24,000 jobs created just last month and over 300,000 jobs were created since July. That is the record of this government.

That member should be embarrassed.

[The Acting Speaker, Barry Devolin]

The hon. member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley not being present to raise the matter for which adjournment notice has been given, the notice is deemed withdrawn.

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7:03 p.m.)