Debates of Feb. 8th, 2011

Human Resources

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

Mr. Speaker, we have stood up and we have taken action to help Canadians by expanding the eligibility criteria for compassionate care to those not just within the employed sector but to the self-employed sector as well.

However, if the Liberals believe so much in standing up for Canadians and their needs for compassionate care, then please explain to me why they have promised such a program not just once or twice but three and four times. This is the fifth time they have promised it. If they had actually done something, if they had actually ever stood up for Canadians, they would not be promising it this time.

We have stood up. We have done it.

Shipping Radioactive Waste

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when asked about the risks involved in shipping radioactive waste on the St. Lawrence, the Minister of Natural Resources claimed it was not nuclear waste, but nuclear generators. He should know that a contaminated steam generator might be a contaminant.

If we are not talking about waste, can the Minister explain why Sweden has to return radioactive waste to us for disposal after the decontamination process?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, instead of sending everyone into a panic, as the hon. member is trying to do, let us put things into perspective.

This attempt to instill panic is absolutely wrong and dishonest. The decision clearly states in paragraph 48—I urge the hon. member to read and understand the decision—that there is less radiation on the surface of the generators than on isotope packages, the medical isotope packages that are delivered each day to hospitals across the country. They should stop fearmongering.

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, instead of downplaying the risks, the Minister of Natural Resources, an MP from Quebec, should at least consider the outcry from residents along the St. Lawrence and heed the calls from the Fédération québécoise des municipalités and the 116 municipalities that are against using the St. Lawrence to ship nuclear waste from Ontario.

Will the government listen to the public and overturn the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission's decision?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, the report of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission cannot be any clearer. Evidence was submitted to a quasi-judicial body made up of scientists. I know that the decision was made with a view to protecting workers, the environment and the general public. What is more, Canada is assuming its international responsibilities.

Again, the radiation on the surface of a steam generator is not as high as the radiation on the medical isotope packages that are delivered across the country every day. They should stop fearmongering. It is irresponsible.

The Environment

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, members of Climate Action Network Canada, a coalition of over 75 organizations in Quebec and Canada, are on Parliament Hill demanding that the Conservative government introduce a credible plan to combat climate change. The Conservative government must stop hiding behind countries that are dragging their feet and make oil companies do their part.

When will this government present a real plan for reducing greenhouse gases?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, we have a plan and the plan is working.

We have a plan to meet our target of a 17% reduction of our greenhouse gas emissions--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

Order, please. Everyone wants to hear the Minister of the Environment's response. There is too much noise.

The hon. Minister for the Environment has the floor.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we have a plan and our plan is working.

We will continue to regulate sector by sector to achieve our climate change and greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. We started with the two largest greenhouse gas emitters in the transportation sector and in the coal-fired electricity sector. We will proceed with other large emitters.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the minster's plan is working, then why is Canada the country that is most threatening to the planet? That is the reality. Like the Bloc Québécois, Climate Action Network Canada is asking the federal government to use the upcoming budget to put an end to tax breaks for dirty fuel and implement policies for reducing our dependence on oil.

Why does the Conservative government continue to subsidize the oil industry and the oil sands rather than investing in clean energy alternatives?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, our gas emitting friends on the other side of the House should be aware that all Canadians are proud of the Canadian oil sands as a natural resource. It is well-regulated and responsibly administered in an environmentally-sensitive and sustainable manner.

Child Care

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

Mr. Speaker, speaking of plans that are not working, let us talk about child care.

Canadian families are amazed at how out of touch the human resources minister is. Last week I asked her to indicate the government position on parental leave because her departmental lawyers were in court questioning the value of the current one year parental leave that supports parents to stay at home for a year with their children. She did not answer that one, but she did ignite a firestorm of protest by insulting parents who use child care when over 70% of mom's work.

Will the minister apologize to Canadian families and does she support the current one year parental leave plan brought in by the previous Liberal government?

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

Mr. Speaker, we respect the right of parents to choose the form of child care that their children receive. Whether it is mom and dad staying at home, whether it is granny looking after them, or whether it is institutionalized day care, we support that choice through our universal child care benefit.

Let us take a look at the Liberals, when it comes to insulting parents. They are the ones who said that parents would spend the universal child care benefit on beer and popcorn. It was the Liberals who said that staying home to raise kids does not constitute a real job. We have a lot more respect for parents.

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

Mr. Speaker, the minister talks a lot about choice, but Canadians do not think much of the choices she has to offer. She suggested that families choose vacation time to help a sick loved one. She suggested EI was too generous, that perhaps workers choose to be on EI. Now she offends parents who use child care, and it seems that the one year parental leave program is on the chopping block as well. That would be quite a choice for Canadian families.

When will the minister stop attacking families and call a halt to her tough on families agenda?

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

Mr. Speaker, we have done a number of things to help families. Apart from the universal child care benefit, we have made it possible for families with low income to get over the welfare wall with the introduction of the working income tax benefit and doubling it. We provided sports tax benefits to encourage the health of our children.

We are not going to insult Canadians like the Liberal member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel did when he referred to the universal child care benefit and said:

--the problem that I'm seeing is that the parents don't provide. They may have the money, but they use it for their own purposes--

That is an insult to Canadian families.

Social Housing

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the government has decided to punish social housing. The $400 million social housing program is one of the only infrastructure programs that did not get a seven-month extension.

Will the minister assure us today that it was simply an oversight and that the social housing program will also get a seven-month extension?

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

Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of what has been done under the economic action plan to help people in need of housing. We invested $2 billion in this project, which immediately created jobs and helped thousands of people across Canada obtain the housing they needed.

For example, there are more than 12,000 projects currently under way to help these people. We are proud of that.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, decent housing is the foundation of decent health, jobs and productivity, and the minister has just said no to this question.

She has acknowledged that alone among the infrastructure programs, social housing is not going to get an extension, but just about everything else is. Among the $400 million, many millions are going to the poorest people in the country on aboriginal reserves.

Why is she signalling out social housing destined to benefit the poorest in the land for this special treatment of not getting an extension?

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

Mr. Speaker, there are more than 12,000 housing renovation or construction projects under way right now as part of the economic action plan. The majority of these projects have already been completed. We are proud of that.

The Economy

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this morning the President of the Treasury Board tabled supplementary estimates (C), showing our government is on the right track to balancing the budget. These estimates ensure a strong economy and we urge the opposition to support them.

We are taking action to balance the budget. These estimates also show that we are not doing it on the backs of hard-working taxpayers like the Liberals did in the 1990s.

Could the President of the Treasury Board update the House on this important plan?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, President of the Treasury Board and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's diligence on doing his part and listening to his constituents in terms of furthering our action plan.

The documents that I tabled this morning in fact show increased payments and enhancements on things like the agri-stability program for our farmers, enhanced benefits for veterans, and an increase in the educational savings grant program for families saving for college education. We are pleased to do that.

It also shows, in these numbers that were tabled, that we are on track to a balanced budget.

Public Safety

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, everyone agrees that white collar criminals deserve sentences that reflect the seriousness of their crimes.

In order to ensure that the system of granting parole after one-sixth of a sentence is served, which was brought in about 15 years ago, is updated in a responsible manner, the NDP believes that this bill needs to be carefully studied. That is our primary responsibility as parliamentarians.

I have three questions concerning the Conservative-Bloc scheme that was concocted behind closed doors. How many cases will be affected? What effect will the charter have on retroactivity? How much will it cost?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, there is only one person and one party standing in the way of ensuring that we end accelerated parole for criminals and that is the New Democratic Party. It is consistent with its policies in respect of soft on crime and allowing criminals to victimize people through fraud, especially our senior citizens.

I am asking that member to reconsider his ill-thought out position, stand with us, and pass that bill today to end accelerated parole for fraudsters.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for proving that they cannot answer a single question.

The individual at the Competition Bureau who is responsible for collusion cases for Quebec is all alone. He has no resources and cannot do his job. And yet, that falls under federal jurisdiction.

Consider the famous case of Earl Jones. Documents submitted in court clearly show that the Royal Bank knew that he was committing fraud, yet it did nothing. Who is responsible for watching over the banks? The federal government. What did it do? Nothing.

Is that not the real problem? Instead of trying to prevent us from doing our jobs, the government needs to start doing its job.