Debates of Dec. 10th, 2012

Foreign Investment

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Liberal Party will know that terms and conditions are made public when it is proper to do that and not in circumstances where it involves confidential commercial information.

I repeat that I am very pleased to see the positive reaction of markets and Canadians to the government's announcement. I think we have provided a large degree of clarity to the markets on future matters, while at the same time making it very clear that the government will exercise discretion to ensure that whole industries of the Canadian economy are not subject to takeover by foreign governments.

National Defence

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister keeps repeating that no money has been spent on acquisition, but several hundred million dollars has been spent on the F-35 fiasco. It is as if it were not real money because the product does not exist yet. The reason that it is such a fiasco is because the Conservatives never defined Canada's needs, they never went to public tender, so there is a basic question of public management involved. Are they going to go to public tender and give it to the lowest conforming bidder, yes or no?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as I have said repeatedly, the government is following a seven-step process to ensure that Canada will have new fighter aircraft when the air force will need those aircraft.

In the meantime, for some years, in fact even under the preceding government, Canada has been involved in the development of new fighter aircraft. Canadian companies, based actually in his city, have hundreds of millions of dollars of contracts for that work and the government has no intention of ripping up those contracts. If he does, he can go explain that to the workers in Montreal.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, this is the biggest procurement contract for the air force since the Second World War. Contrary to every other major military contract where we obtain guarantees for regional economic industrial benefits, there are none here. There are zero dollars, zero cents. The Conservatives can talk all they want about no money spent on acquisitions, but the reality is that this has been a fiasco and a debacle from day one.

Is the government going to call an open, public process for tendering, yes or no?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, in the development of the F-35, Canada is part of an international consortium in which we compete for various contracts and for contract work. Some 60 contracts have been signed that involve Canadian companies working on and competing for that work, much of that in the city of Montreal. If the leader of the NDP does not think that means any dollars to the people in Montreal, he can go to those workers and tell them that.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The hon. member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue.

[Hélène LeBlanc, NDP, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is even more confusion and an even greater lack of transparency from this government—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order, please. The member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue.

[Christine Moore, NDP, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, again with regard to the F-35s, the Conservatives approved a statement of operational requirements containing requirements that only Lockheed Martin could meet with its F-35. The Conservatives have already spent $700 million on the F-35 joint strike fighter jet program, but they still refuse to formally cancel the sole-source F-35 purchasing process.

How much more money and time will the government have to waste before it wakes up and holds an open and transparent tendering process to replace our CF-18s?

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has indicated and we have indicated for some time, no money has been spent on the acquisition of any new aircraft to replace the CF-18s. We are committed to completing our seven-point plan and moving forward with our comprehensive and transparent approach to replacing Canada's aging CF-18s. Our seven-point plan includes a review of all options, which will not be constrained by the current statement of requirements.

[Christine Moore, NDP, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it will be a seven-point failure if there is no new statement of operational requirements and if there is no open and transparent bidding process. The reality is that $700 million of taxpayer money has already been spent on the F-35 money pit.

The Minister of National Defence was more than available for a photo-op next to the F-35. Now, not so much.

When will the Conservatives admit their failure in this military procurement case?

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that no money has been spent on the acquisition of any new aircraft for the replacement of the CF-18s. We will not purchase a replacement until our seven-point plan is completed, including an independent verification of costs and a full options analysis. This options analysis is a full evaluation of all choices available, not simply a refresh of work that was done in the past.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, first it was $9 billion, then $16 billion for the F-35s, and then the Conservatives attacked Kevin Page when he said it was $30 billion. Now it could be almost $46 billion.

In 2011, just last year, the Minister of National Defence said, “Let me repeat it. $9 billion. I have no idea where these other figures are coming from. They’re simply made up—or they’re guessing.”

If the minister still believes the number is $9 billion, will he stand now and explain himself?

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, we have established the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat—

[Some hon. members]

Oh! Oh!

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order, please. The hon. Minister of Public Works has the floor.

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Edmonton—Spruce Grove, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we have established the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat to ensure that there is maximum due diligence and transparency in the decision leading up to replacing our CF-18s. At this time no money has been spent in the acquisition of any new fighter aircraft and no money will be spent until our seven-point plan is completely implemented.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, it is another sole-source contract.

Leaking audits and cabinet documents is no way to run a country. The sole sourcing will simply not work. The costs are out of control and the Conservatives need to admit that their approach has totally failed. It was the Minister of National Defence who oversaw this boondoggle. He has been the one pushing for the sole sourcing of the F-35, regardless of the costs. If he still believes in a sole-source contract, will he get up now and defend it?

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat is in place to ensure transparency and due diligence in the decision to replace our CF-18s. At this time the government has not spent any money on the acquisition of any new aircraft, and we will not spend any money on the acquisition of any new aircraft until the seven-point plan is implemented. That includes not only an independent audit of DND's updated cost estimates on the F-35 but also a full options analysis on the aircraft available to replace the CF-18.

Foreign Investment

[Hélène LeBlanc, NDP, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources confirmed this morning that the transaction would not have been approved under the new guidelines.

Friday's decision by the Conservatives adds to the confusion. The Conservatives have still not defined the net benefit for Canada. They have created a new category: exceptional circumstances for foreign governments that want to buy Canadian companies.

There is one more term that is not clear. Can the Conservatives tell us what they mean by “exceptional circumstances”?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Industry and Minister of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, we have clarified the guidelines, as we promised we would.

I think the hon. member will understand, because it is very clear. When we talk about oil sands, people can expect that these resources will not be taken over by foreign interests or foreign governments. I think that is clear enough.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are asking these questions because they know, after these last few months of sheer incompetence, Conservatives cannot be trusted to manage foreign investment. The Conservatives just want to sell out Canada.

Conservatives claim they will limit foreign state control of the oil sands and yet the FIPA with China will do the opposite. They did not get reciprocity. They gave away national treatment rights to companies such as CNOOC. The Conservatives do not even seem to understand the agreement they signed. They approved the CNOOC takeover of Nexen and they signed the Canada-China FIPA, which gives special rights to CNOOC. Why were they so irresponsible?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, there are so many errors in that question, I do not know where to begin. Let me just say this. We know the position of the other two parties. We know the extreme position of the Liberal Party, which rubber-stamped every single foreign investment when it was in office. We know the position of the NDP, which is to be against every single foreign investment.

Canadians expect that our government will be open to foreign investment for the benefit of this economy but in a way that preserves Canadian jobs and protects Canadian interests. Only we have the balanced, reasonable approach that Canadians—

[Some hon. members]

Oh! Oh!