House of Commons Hansard #169 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was c-45.
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, there seems to be a mass outbreak of amnesia down there in that corner. When the Liberal Party was in government, it never once refused any foreign takeover for any reason whatsoever.
We understand that foreign investment does and can contribute massively to the development of our economy, to jobs and growth. We also understand that these investments have to be looked at very carefully to ensure they are in benefit of this country. That is what this government is doing.
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister seems a bit edgy.
Transparency and enforcement are two matters that require far more clarity. The government says that, when it approves a foreign takeover, it attaches conditions to ensure the deal is in Canada's best interests. But how can Canadians ever know that, when the terms are never made public? How can one enforce a secret condition?
Specifically, in relation to a state-owned buyer from another country, what is the instrument, what is the power, the Canadian government will use to actually enforce any conditions on that foreign state-owned entity after the fact?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, these are all questions we ask ourselves, none of which the member asked himself when he was in government.
Far from being unhappy today, I am actually quite pleased. I do particularly want to pay note to the decision of the Supreme Court today, which said and let me quote, “we reject the [Liberal] candidate's attempt to disenfranchise entitled voters and so undermine public confidence in the electoral process”. This is a great day for Canadian—
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, that is what I call not answering a question.
The Conservatives are no longer even hiding their contempt for seasonal workers. Not only did they eliminate the pilot project that provided five additional weeks of benefits—a huge help to seasonal workers—but the Conservatives did not even bother giving them any warning. That program helped workers, businesses and communities that are facing a high unemployment rate.
When will the Conservatives stop undermining the regions of our country that depend on seasonal industry?
Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Skills Development
Mr. Speaker, our government is focused on job creation. In fact, it has helped create over 800,000 jobs in this country since the recession.
The pilot project that the member talked about was meant to be temporary. It was extended during the recession, but the unemployment rate is lower now. We will help unemployed workers find jobs.
Robert Chisholm NDP Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Mr. Speaker, instead of focusing on regional development, Conservatives are turning their back on Atlantic Canada, and they are telling seasonal workers to hit the road and head west.
Without any level of public consultation or even informing seasonal industries or workers, the Conservatives have ended the five extra weeks project that helped people in areas of high unemployment.
When will the government start respecting the workers and businesses who pay for EI, and start listening to the needs of Atlantic Canadians?
Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Skills Development
Mr. Speaker, we are helping Atlantic Canadians and indeed Canadians right across the country to get back to work. We have expanded the job alerts program. We are providing them with more supports so that they are aware of the opportunities for jobs in their areas.
Quite frankly, we have a shortage of skills and labour right across the country right now, even in areas of high unemployment. We are offering training. In fact, in 2010, over one million Canadians took advantage of that training to give them the skills for the jobs of today and of tomorrow.
Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, first it was the employment insurance program, and now the word ”environment” is on the road to extinction. The environment is scarier than Casper, but the Internet knows no bounds. According to the Marine Service On-line website, “Navigable Waters Protection Program ensures the protection of the public right to navigation and the protection of the environment through the administration of the Navigable Waters Protection Act.”
Do the Conservatives understand the connection between the environment and navigable waters protection?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, the member must surely understand that navigation is navigation, nothing more.
We are making changes to focus on what is important to Transport Canada. Obviously, Environment Canada will continue to do its job, as will Fisheries and Oceans and the provinces and municipalities. Everyone will continue to do their job. We will focus on what is important to us: reducing red tape, which everyone has been asking us to do for years. We will take care of navigation.
Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, I could do this all day long.
The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency website says the same thing.
The Navigable Waters Protection Program (NWPP) is responsible for the protection of the public right to navigation and the protection of the environment....
Let us review. This is an act that protects navigable waters, and navigable waters are a part of—wait for it—the environment. So when the minister deletes this website, will we at least be able to see a copy of it at the Canadian Museum of History?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, the Navigable Waters Protection Act has always been about navigation, not the environment.
It has been the case since 1882. There is not a word about the environment in the actual act. My colleague is surely referring to some other act. We will continue to focus on navigation and cut red tape.
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Public Works said that no money would be spent “before the secretariat does all of the work necessary to independently verify the costs and the options available to replace our aging fleet of CF-18s.”
My question is about the available options mentioned by the minister. What are they exactly? Can she name a single fighter jet other than the F-35?
Jacques Gourde ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat is to ensure transparency and due diligence in the process to replace the CF-18s.
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the secretariat.
The fourth measure set out in the seven-measure plan clearly indicates that “[t]he Department of National Defence will continue to evaluate options to sustain a Canadian Forces fighter capability....” So, clearly, the Department of National Defence has the responsibility to examine other options.
Can the Minister of National Defence tell us the status of his department's evaluation and what fighter jets, other than the F-35, are currently being examined?
Jacques Gourde ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, no money has been spent in the acquisition of new fighter aircraft and no money will be spent before the secretariat independently verifies the cost of replacing the CF-18s.
Matthew Kellway NDP Beaches—East York, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence is clearly reluctant to get on his feet about the F-35s, and I get that. He is embarrassed after his big announcement that the Conservatives are buying 65 F-35s and for calling us unpatriotic for questioning the F-35s. Now it is back to his department to look for alternatives to the F-35s.
I have a question for him. We all know the statement of requirements was wired in favour of the F-35. The AG said so; the PM agreed. So is his department revising the requirements, and if not, who is?
Jacques Gourde ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, I am going to repeat myself. The purpose of the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat is to ensure transparency and due diligence in the process to replace the CF-18s.
Sylvain Chicoine NDP Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC
Mr. Speaker, the lack of answers shows that the Conservatives are not doing their job when it comes to managing military equipment, nor are they any better at managing programs for our veterans.
We learned recently that funeral directors often have to help pay for the funerals of our veterans who cannot afford their own funeral. A funeral costs between $6,000 and $8,000. The Conservatives contribute $3,600. Giving our veterans a ceremony that is worthy of the sacrifices they have made for this country is the very least this government could do.
How could the Conservatives have allowed it to come to this?
Steven Blaney ConservativeMinister of Veterans Affairs
Mr. Speaker, the best thing anyone can do here as members of this House to help veterans would be to stand up and support the concrete measures the Conservative government is bringing forward to help our veterans.
Unfortunately, we regularly see the NDP refuse to support our veterans, when it comes to programs aimed at improving their quality of life as well as programs we are putting in place to provide them with services.
We will continue to defend our veterans and work with associations.
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
Mr. Speaker, what utter nonsense. The fact is, he knows and the government knows that it is funeral homes and provinces that are picking up the financial slack to ensure that our veterans get the dignity they deserve when they pass on.
We are going to ask the government one last time. Will it now put the funding into the last post fund to ensure that every single veteran in this country, who served the country with the unlimited liability, gets the dignity that they and their families deserve?
It is the least we can do. It is our last chance for a grateful nation to thank the veterans for their service. Will the government restore that funding to ensure veterans get the dignity they so richly deserve?
Steven Blaney ConservativeMinister of Veterans Affairs
Mr. Speaker, the real question is when will the NDP and the member stand up in the House for our veterans?
We have been standing up for veterans, and the one thing I can assure the member we will not do is cut the funeral and burial program, as the Liberals did. We will stand by our veterans.
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Mr. Speaker, between 2006 and 2011, for the first time since the Official Languages Act was adopted, the proportion of Canadians living outside Quebec who speak French declined significantly. The Conservatives were in power during those years, and they are responsible for this deplorable decline. Their programs lack vision, and this is the result. There is strong demand for French language education in Canada; but the government is not meeting that demand.
What will the government do to turn things around?
Jacques Gourde ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, our government supports linguistic duality across Canada and has kept its promises.
We are providing unprecedented support for the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality by investing $1.1 billion, the biggest investment ever in Canada's history.
