House of Commons Hansard #172 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was c-45.
Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS
Red tape is interesting answer, Mr. Speaker.
Last night the truth was exposed because these changes were actually politically driven. Eighty-nine per cent of the protected lakes and rivers are found in Conservative ridings. Therefore, whoever decided what bodies of water were protected sure seemed to have a riding map handy.
Canadians deserve better than Conservative preferential treatment of their friends. Why are the Conservatives making environmental protection a privilege of the few?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, let me quote the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. It said:
The changes announced today will allow local governments to spend less time processing paperwork for small, low-risk public works projects by removing redundancies, red tape and project delays that result in higher costs for property tax payers.
That is about navigation. We are doing the right thing.
Anne Minh-Thu Quach NDP Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Navigable Waters Protection Act protects the environment. Dismantling the act will affect 99.7% of Canada's lakes. Of the 97 remaining lakes that will be protected, only 89% are in Conservative ridings. What are the chances of that? The protection of natural spaces should not be reserved for millionaires with cottages in the President of the Treasury Board's riding.
How can the Conservatives justify these Duplessis-style environmental protection policies?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, I can hardly believe my ears. To my knowledge, the St. Lawrence River flows near Vaudreuil. It is on the list of waters. The municipalities and the provinces have been calling for these measures for years. We have been asked for inquiries and studies of things that did not have to be considered under the Navigable Waters Protection Act. These changes will affect navigation, period. We are doing the right thing. We believe it is important to help businesses and municipalities cut costs and by cutting red tape.
Anne Minh-Thu Quach NDP Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC
Mr. Speaker, some of the Conservatives' changes are very partisan. The Conservatives' millionaire friends will be able to continue enjoying their view of the lake, but workers and middle-class families will not. That is extremely unfair. It is ridiculous that only 97 lakes in Canada will be protected if their mammoth bill is passed. More ridiculous still, only four of the protected lakes are in Quebec. All Canadians enjoy outdoor activities involving lakes and rivers.
Why are the Conservatives refusing to protect lakes? Why refuse to protect Canada's loveliest outdoor ice rinks?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, I will quote the Federation of Canadian Municipalities:
Municipal leaders have consistently called for common sense reforms in Ottawa that deliver better results for Canadians. We look forward to working with the federal government to turn the reforms announced today into a strong, sensible action plan that strengthens our communities, and protects our waterways and the environment.
We are working on navigable waters, and we are talking about navigation. That is what we are doing.
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
Mr. Speaker, not only are Quebec waters losing protection, but B.C.'s lakes and rivers are an afterthought to the Conservatives. Only 15 lakes in B.C., most of them in the interior, remain protected, while not a single river on Vancouver Island will stay under federal jurisdiction.
The Cowichan, a Canadian heritage river and one of the finest steelhead fishing areas in B.C., did not get a mention in the Conservative budget. The same with the Campbell River and the Bella Coola.
Why are Conservatives allowing so many important B.C. lakes and rivers to be put at risk?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, let me quote the Canadian Construction Association, “This new legislation will certainly help construction companies better predict their own requirements on future construction projects”. That is about navigation. That is not about construction. That is about what we are saying. We want to help the country develop projects, not for small rivers or small places where we do not have to consider the water.
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative omnibus bill has declared open season on Canada's lakes and rivers. Of the 30,000 lakes across this great country, only 97 will be protected, almost all are in Tory ridings and 12 are in the riding of the gazebo king, the member for Parry Sound—Muskoka. He protected Lake Rosseau that is home to Hollywood millionaires. He protected Lake Joseph where a cottage will set one back a cool $5 million.
I love Muskoka, but does the minister really think exclusive lakes of millionaires are worthy of more protection than the lakes in the rest of Canada?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, data from the Canadian Hydrographic Service's nautical charts, Statistics Canada data on freight movement and historical data from the Navigable Waters Protection Program was used to create the list.
That is science talking and we will continuing working this way.
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Mr. Speaker, they talk about millionaires bombing around on their Sea-doos. That is the reason the government is bombing through with this legislation, so the Muskoka minister can cut special environmental deals to his millionaire friends, while the rest of Canada's lake users are told to buzz off. This is an abuse of public trust.
How about we pull out the clauses of the bill? We could set up a new bill perhaps called the “Goldie Hawn property preservation act”. Even better, we could call it “protecting millionaire buddies of the Muskoka minister so he can get re-elected act”. How about some navigation there?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities applauds the federal government for the introduction of amendments to the Navigable Waters Protection Act.
We are doing the right thing. Our transport department is working on navigation. That is what we are doing.
Hélène Laverdière NDP Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' approach to trade policy is both reckless and irresponsible.
The Canada-China foreign investment promotion and protection agreement does not adequately guarantee reciprocity for Canadian businesses and could force Canadian taxpayers to pay millions of dollars in claims.
The Conservatives are refusing to let Parliament study the agreement even though it will be in force for 31 years.
Will the minister extend the October 31 ratification date?
Ed Fast ConservativeMinister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway
Mr. Speaker, I remind the NDP that it had three separate occasions in which it could have debated the treaty in the House. It refused to debate it.
This treaty has been very well received by Canadian investors. In fact, it is fully reciprocal. It is designed to protect and promote Canadian investment by setting out a clear set of rules under which investment takes place and a clear set of rules under which dispute resolutions take place.
Canada's policy will continue to support transparency and public access to any dispute resolution under this agreement.
I remind the member that it was this Conservative government that established a formal tabling policy.
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that the government is able to bring agreements with Jordan and Panama in front of the House, but why not China? The scope and scale of this 31-year investment deal is unprecedented, but it fails to protect Canadian companies and lacks basic reciprocity.
The government controls the House agenda and ratification timing. Will the government House leader schedule the NDP's next opposition day before the deal is ratified?
Ed Fast ConservativeMinister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway
Mr. Speaker, the NDP had three opportunities and passed them up.
I would remind the member opposite that this agreement represents a very significant step forward in protecting Canadians when they invest in China. The treaty will give Canadian investors greater confidence when they invest in China, in turn creating jobs and economic growth right here at home.
What Canadians are asking is this. What has the NDP done recently to promote trade and investment? The answer is a mammoth carbon tax that would be sucked out of the pockets of Canadian taxpayers. Shame on those members.
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, about the two Nigerian students in sanctuary in a Regina church, the Minister of Immigration said yesterday that one of them was not a student and was working. However, the University of Regina said that was not true and at all relevant times both these young women were properly registered as U of R students. The government's only complaint against them is their honest mistake of working for two weeks last year at Walmart.
The Government of Saskatchewan supports these students and opposes deportation. Will the minister now review these cases and agree to a more proportionate sanction?
Jason Kenney ConservativeMinister of Citizenship
Mr. Speaker, I have information in hand from the Canada Border Services Agency indicating that one of the subjects had not attended classes at the university in the winter 2011 semester, was required to discontinue studies based on a failure to meet the academic standards, appealed, the appeal was denied and so forth.
In any event, we have an immigration system that is predicated on the rule of law where laws are enforced independently by highly-trained public servants, in this instance, by agents of the Canada Border Services Agency.
Unlike the opposition, we do not believe laws should be politicized. We think they should be enforced consistently. The fair application of—
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, with respect to these Nigerian students whose only offence was the honest mistake of working for two weeks at Walmart, the minister knows that deportation would destroy their education and damage them for life.
He claims such cases are for independent public servants to handle in a consistent manner. Deportation is not mandatory. There are other remedies. Other people in similar circumstances have been given simple fines, so why deportation in these two cases? How is that consistent with others who have just been given fines?
Jason Kenney ConservativeMinister of Citizenship
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that the member seems to be interposing his judgment for that of our highly trained public servants as it relates to the application of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB
I know the Liberals had a history of this. They had ministers of immigration—
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order, please. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has the floor. I will ask members to allow him to finish answering the question.