This week, I changed much of the tech behind this site. If you see anything that looks like a bug, please let me know!

House of Commons Hansard #130 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was offenders.

Topics

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

I do not believe that she said she used the word. If the hon. member for Québec used the word “liar”, she knows very well that such language is unacceptable in the House, even if she wants to change her words later. It must be withdrawn. So if the member used that word, I ask her to withdraw it immediately. I did not hear it myself.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

Mr. Speaker, for the third time, I will say that I withdraw the word, but the member continues. Her specialty seems to be misleading the House and spewing nonsense when answering during question period.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

The word has been withdrawn.

Citizenship and ImmigrationCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

3:05 p.m.

Conservative

David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the eighth report of the Standing Committee on Citizen and Immigration in relation to a motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, February 10, on the funding to immigrant settlement and adaptation services.

Business of SupplyRoutine Proceedings

3:05 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean Ontario

Conservative

John Baird ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I would like to designate Thursday, February 17, as an allotted day.

Animal WelfarePetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:05 p.m.

Liberal

Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—La Prairie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the following petition that was presented to me by students in my riding.

They are calling upon the House of Commons to amend the animal transportation regulations under Canada's Health of Animals Act to be consistent with the findings of the EU's scientific committee for animal health and welfare, to reduce transport times for pigs, poultry, horses, cows and lambs to 8 hours and 12 hours for cattle, sheep and goats, and to ensure adequate enforcement of the regulations.

Société d'habitation du QuébecPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:05 p.m.

Bloc

André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be presenting a petition asking the government to give the Société d'habitation du Québec the necessary public funds to complete its low-income-housing renovation plan. A number of municipalities have also shared their concerns with me about the 30% budget cut imposed by CMHC.

I would like to thank Jacqueline Boisvert, who circulated this important petition in my riding.

National DefencePetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:10 p.m.

NDP

Fin Donnelly NDP New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions to table.

First, I have a petition urging hearings on the Joint Strike Fighter purchase. The petitioners say that the Government of Canada is proposing the purchase of 65 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters for a cost of roughly $30 billion over 30 years.

The petitioners call upon the government to conduct public hearings to enable a thorough, informed and frank national debate about the security threats to be met, as well as the costs, benefits and consequences of the acquisition of a new generation of fighter aircraft and a competitive selection process before any final commitment to the JSF project is made.

Animal WelfarePetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:10 p.m.

NDP

Fin Donnelly NDP New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC

Mr. Speaker, my second petition is in support of Bill C-544, which was introduced by my hon. colleague from British Columbia Southern Interior.

The petitioners say that as Canadian horse meat products currently being sold for human consumption in domestic and international markets are likely to contain prohibited substances, they call upon the House of Commons and Parliament assembled to bring forward and adopt into legislation Bill C-544, An Act to amend the Health of Animals Act and the Meat Inspection Act (slaughter of horses for human consumption), thus prohibiting the importation or exportation of horses for slaughter for human consumption as well as horse meat products for human consumption.

International Co-operationPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:10 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Casson Conservative Lethbridge, AB

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions today that deal with two different issues. Pursuant to Standing Order 36 I would like to table these.

The first petition calls upon the Government of Canada and the provincial and territorial governments to cease negotiations with the EU while nation-wide public consultations take place.

JusticePetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:10 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Casson Conservative Lethbridge, AB

Mr. Speaker, the second petition has to do with the Omar Khadr case.

The petitioners bring to the attention of the Government of Canada the devaluation of the Canadian justice system in the case of Omar Khadr.

Heritage CanadaPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:10 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition signed by many constituents and people in the region of Durham concerned about the demolition of important heritage buildings in north Pickering conducted by the Government of Canada.

The petitioners ask that the government cease the destruction of those buildings, work with the municipality, re-establish the heritage committee to identify buildings of important heritage and ensure that going forward the wishes of the community to restore that heritage are respected and be borne by the owner of those lands, the federal government.

AfghanistanPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:10 p.m.

NDP

Jim Maloway NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Mr. Speaker, my petition calls upon the Canadian government to end Canada's military involvement in Afghanistan.

In May 2008, Parliament passed a resolution to withdraw the Canadian Forces by July 2011. The Prime Minister, with agreement from the Liberal Party, broke his oft-repeated promise to honour the parliamentary motion and, furthermore, refuses to put it to a parliamentary vote in the House.

Committing 1,000 soldiers to a training mission still presents a danger to our troops and an unnecessary expense when our country is faced with a $56 billion deficit. The military mission has cost Canadians more than $18 billion so far, money that could have been used to improve health care and seniors' pensions right here in Canada.

Polls show that a clear majority of Canadians do not want Canada's military presence to continue after the scheduled removal date of July 2011. Therefore, the petitioners call upon the Prime Minister to honour the will of Parliament and bring the troops home now.

Employment InsurancePetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:10 p.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

Mr. Speaker, I rise once more to talk about the employment insurance pilot projects for areas of higher unemployment, certainly above 10%. Well over 100 petitions at this point are asking that these pilot projects be made permanent. Since 2005, they have been extended time and again. The last extension went from September and October into June.

The petitioners are calling upon the government to make these projects permanent. Obviously, if they have been extended three or four times over a period of six years, then the government must believe that they are doing good and therefore deserve to be made permanent.

Once again, these projects include the best 14 weeks, working while on claim and, of course, the extended weeks.

I am hoping that the government will consider these petitions and this particular one from the Port Blandford area as well as Bunyan's Cove.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre Saskatchewan

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Funding Application for KAIROSPoints of OrderRoutine Proceedings

February 14th, 2011 / 3:15 p.m.

Durham Ontario

Conservative

Bev Oda ConservativeMinister of International Cooperation

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight regarding the funding application for KAIROS. I wish to clearly inform the House of the matter and clear up any misunderstandings that exist.

The CIDA officials did forward a document in which they sought approval of the recommendation for funding of the KAIROS proposal, but ultimately the decision to not provide funding was mine, as Minister of International Cooperation.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, departments do make recommendations to ministers and ministers, in carrying out their responsibilities, can agree with those recommendations or, as is the case with this issue, they can disagree. In this case, the process in place requires the department to make recommendations, not to make the decision.

There was no decision taken by the department to provide funding. It was only a recommendation. It was my decision to disagree with the recommendation based on discussions with advisers. I was fully aware that my decision was not aligned with the recommendation of the department.

In the matter before you, Mr. Speaker, the opposition has asked you to rule on whether I intentionally or knowingly misled the House by saying it was a department decision.

At no time have I stated that the decision for funding was that of the department. I have repeatedly and clearly stated in response to questions in the House and at committee that the funding decision was mine. The “not” was inserted at my direction.

Given the way the document was formatted, allowing only for concurrence, this was the only way to reflect my decision. If some were led to conclude that my language implied that the department and I were of one mind on this application, then I apologize.

I would, Mr. Speaker, indicate to you that the way in which this case has been handled, including by myself, has been unfortunate.

In conclusion, let me be clear. In the memo the department did make a recommendation to me, as the minister for funding. My decision, as the minister, did not concur with the recommendation of the department. My instructions were to indicate on the document my decision not to provide funding.

I have consistently taken responsibility for that decision. I have consistently informed the House of the government's aid and effectiveness agenda, stating that our government's policy is to achieve impact, making a sustainable difference in the lives of those it is intended to help. In no way have I intentionally or knowingly misled the House or the committee.

Funding Application for KAIROSPoints of OrderRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I still do not think the minister has satisfactorily answered some questions about how it would be that the document in question would contain three signatures, two of which she now states did not accord with her decision and one of which is her signature.

The minister is giving us a different statement today than she gave in committee. When she was directly asked the question, “Who put the “not” in the document?”, she replied “I don't know”. She is now stating that in fact the document was doctored on her instructions. This is a different explanation from what we had in committee.

Funding Application for KAIROSPoints of OrderRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Funding Application for KAIROSPoints of OrderRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

I am sorry, it is. I can show you the transcript, Mr. Speaker. It is a completely different explanation.

The minister has to explain how it would be that three signatures would appear on a document, all of which would appear to be agreeing with the “not” when, in fact, the minister is stating today that two of the officials did not agree with the decision she has made.

Funding Application for KAIROSPoints of OrderRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean Ontario

Conservative

John Baird ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, in response to the comments of my friend from Toronto Centre, the minister has indicated that there was a “not” on the document. It was a way to agree but not to disagree, so she made that change. In the very best traditions of the House, her statement is strong, unequivocal and it speaks for itself.

Funding Application for KAIROSPoints of OrderRoutine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

I do not think it is the time for questions. In any event, the minister has made a statement to clarify the position. Obviously the committee still has the material before it or has been looking at the material. It could be pursued there or in question period tomorrow. However, I think that is the appropriate thing to do if there are to be questions on this issue. Submissions on a point of order are one thing, but questions, in my view, are another.

Funding Application for KAIROSPoints of OrderRoutine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am a bit confused. In terms of the minister's response, what is most critical in this statement is the funding that was serving some 5.4 million in Canadian aid in foreign countries.

The question is this. Mr. Speaker, you have admonished the minister for potentially misleading the House. She has just now not only reiterated that it was not her fault, that in fact the “not” that was put in and the signatures that were then placed on top of it was entirely her own doing.

In your ruling, Mr. Speaker, and in seeking for clarity in this place which we all require is that the minister be forthcoming. Yet today, again, we have an apology that is not an apology. We have an excuse that is not an excuse.

Funding Application for KAIROSPoints of OrderRoutine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

I would suggest the hon. member perhaps read it over. I think the minister did say that she instructed the “not” to be put there and then signed the document. The member can check her wording. I do not think a dispute like that is something the Speaker is going to settle.

I made no ruling that said there was a breach of privilege in this case. I said the contrary in my ruling. Hon. members can check out the words of the ruling.

The minister has offered some clarification, and I think it can be taken as that. If members have other questions about it, they can ask the questions either in the committee or in question period. I am sure the minister will answer.

I think that solves the matter for the moment.