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 #143 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was agreements.

Topics

EthicsOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

I would remind the hon. member for Toronto Centre to address his comments through the Chair and not directly at his colleagues. I would ask all members for a little order. There is a lot of yelling and heckling both when the questions is being put and when the answer is being put.

The hon. minister now has the floor.

EthicsOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southeast Alberta

Conservative

Jason Kenney ConservativeMinister of Citizenship

Mr. Speaker, last year I was honoured to receive a mandate from 76% of the voters in Calgary Southeast to work hard for Albertans. I and every minister and every member of Parliament in this Conservative caucus are working very productively with our provincial governments from coast to coast, including the Government of Alberta.

We are standing up to the opposition of the Liberal Party that wants to force Alberta wheat farmers into the Wheat Board, that wants to bring back the gun registry and that wants to shut down our energy industry. We will stand up against those who oppose the legitimate aspirations of Albertans and westerners.

EthicsOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, one can only imagine what the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism would have called the deputy premier of Alberta if he had received 80% of the votes from Calgary Southeast. I can imagine how much further he would have gone.

However, there is a minor point of principle, which I will refer to the minister through you, Mr. Speaker. I would ask the minister if he would agree with Preston Manning who once said, “when you're deep in a hole, the best thing you can do is stop digging”. Why does he not stop digging and say “I'm sorry”.

EthicsOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southeast Alberta

Conservative

Jason Kenney ConservativeMinister of Citizenship

Mr. Speaker, once again, we have a very strong working relationship with the Government of Alberta. We are getting things done for Albertans.

We are moving forward with the strongest economy in the history of the province. We are respecting Prairie grain farmers. We are standing up for the resource sector. Albertans support that. We will continue to deliver for Albertans.

The EconomyOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been busy lecturing G20 countries under the Mexican sun. But he and his Minister of Finance refuse to come clean on the impact of their Trojan Horse. Seniors, the unemployed, fishers and all Canadians will feel the effects of this bill for years to come.

Do they realize that preaching responsibility abroad while acting irresponsibly at home is pure and simple hypocrisy?

The EconomyOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Saint Boniface Manitoba

Conservative

Shelly Glover ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I would say that voting against Canadians is hypocrisy.

The NDP voted against health measures such as increases in Canadian health transfers. The NDP voted against the environmental measures in our bill, which will better protect fish habitats and increase economic opportunities. They voted against jobs. That is hypocrisy.

We will move forward with our plan, create jobs and ensure our prosperity. Our Prime Minister is doing the same thing in Europe.

The EconomyOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, there they go again, lecturing and blaming others but refusing to face their own failures.

While the Prime Minister spends his time at the G20 wagging his finger at others, the Conservatives are ramming through their budget cuts that will hurt Canadians.

Will the Conservatives stop making phony accusations against the official opposition, the Parliamentary Budget Officer and the EU, stop muzzling their own MPs and level with Canadians about cuts to services that will hurt Canadian families?

The EconomyOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Saint Boniface Manitoba

Conservative

Shelly Glover ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I stand very proud with my united caucus, the Conservative Government of Canada, which has put forward a budget that will help to create jobs, will sustain our prosperity and will focus, like the laser, on economic growth here in our country.

With regard to the NDP and the opposition, it is very disappointing for all Canadians to see that they are focused on tearing down this country, and are not focusing enough on raising our profile, which is what our Prime Minister is presently doing at the G20.

International TradeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is a basic principle of negotiation that one does not communicate desperation to adversaries, and yet that is exactly what the Prime Minister has done in the trans-Pacific partnership.

In their panic, what exactly have the Conservatives given away? Did we agree to have no voice on past decisions and no real power in future negotiations? Did we agree to big pharma's demands that will raise health care costs or changes that sell out dairy, poultry and egg farmers?

Since I cannot ask Nigel Wright, maybe I will ask the minister. Canadians deserve to know, what is the price Canada paid for entry to the TPP?

International TradeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

South Shore—St. Margaret's Nova Scotia

Conservative

Gerald Keddy ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member continues to amaze me.

International TradeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

International TradeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

Order, order. We will just wait until the parliamentary secretary finishes the answer and then we can applaud. The hon. parliamentary secretary.

International TradeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS

Mr. Speaker, I have never had that ability to make a pig's ear out of a silk purse, but the hon. member obviously does.

The reality is that we did not give away anything to get to the table.

International TradeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Romeo Saganash NDP Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC

Mr. Speaker, clearly, fair international trade is important for our country's prosperity. The NDP has always recognized this fact.

However, we need agreements that will benefit Canadians, not agreements that will compromise their rights and interests. We cannot trust the Conservatives on this. From the buy American act to the softwood lumber agreement, the Conservatives have failed miserably every time they have had the opportunity to stand up for Canadians' rights and interests.

Will the Conservatives commit to bringing this new agreement before Parliament?

International TradeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

South Shore—St. Margaret's Nova Scotia

Conservative

Gerald Keddy ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade

Mr. Speaker, NDP members do not support trade. They did not support the free trade agreement with the United States. They did not support NAFTA. They did not support Chile. They did not support Peru. They did not support Puerto Rico. They have not supported Panama and have yet to support Jordan. They never supported the European free trade agreement and have not supported CETA with the European Union.

The NDP's position on trade is very clear. Our side's position on trade is extremely clear. We are pro-trade. We engage in trade in the best interests of all Canadians.

National DefenceOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the chair of the Military Police Complaints Commission wrote the Minister of National Defence asking him to take a “common sense approach” to the investigation into the death of Corporal Stuart Langridge. He agreed with our understanding of the law of solicitor-client privilege and asked the minister to waive the privilege in the interests of justice. DND lawyers at the commission pointed out that only the minister can grant access to these documents.

Will the minister co-operate with the commission and allow a full and comprehensive inquiry to take place?

National DefenceOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated a number of times, we continue to support this arm's-length process. We have given additional funding.

Parliament has been unequivocal in expressing its intent that the Military Police Complaints Commission can and should accomplish its stated mandate without access to privileged communication between lawyers and their clients. This was restated in the second independent review of the military justice system recently tabled in the House by myself where Mr. Justice Patrick LeSage said, “The jurisprudence on solicitor-client privilege is clear and established. I see no reason to recommend change.”

There is much precedent from the Supreme Court on this issue. The member is a lawyer. He knows full--

National DefenceOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

The hon. member for St. John's East.

National DefenceOral Questions

June 19th, 2012 / 2:30 p.m.

NDP

Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL

Mr. Speaker, I guess we can take that to mean that the minister does not want to co-operate and will not help this family get to the truth.

These are very simple matters. The commission chair has asked the minister to release information on first, the legal reasoning why a suicide watch was not given to Corporal Langridge; second, who decided to deny next of kin status to Langridge's family and why; third, the rationale behind DND's flawed investigation.

Why is this too much to ask? Why will the minister not allow this civilian oversight to take place? Why will he not let justice be done?

National DefenceOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence

We have supported the process, Mr. Speaker. We have given additional funding to see that the process is arm's-length and remains transparent and functional. The pettifogger opposite knows that full well.

Mr. Justice Binnie in the Supreme Court also spoke of this issue, as did Madam Justice Arbour in the case of Lavallee, where she said, “Indeed, solicitor-client privilege must remain as close to absolute as possible if it is to retain relevance.”

There is much precedent on this issue. This issue is currently being heard by an arm's-length hearing. The member opposite wants to interfere with that and bring the matter before the courts.

National DefenceOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

NDP

Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence refuses to co-operate, but that is not surprising; it is becoming a habit for him.

The Conservative mismanagement of the F-35s is matched only by the many problems with this aircraft. The Conservatives should have set up an independent team to review the program. Unfortunately, they decided to reappoint those that the Auditor General found to be responsible for this mismanagement.

Why do the Conservatives insist on mismanaging the F-35s?

National DefenceOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Edmonton—Spruce Grove Alberta

Conservative

Rona Ambrose ConservativeMinister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for Status of Women

Mr. Speaker, the secretariat is made up of four deputy ministers; a committee of assistant deputy ministers; senior officials from Finance, Privy Council, Treasury Board; the National Security Advisor for Canada, a respected academic, and also independent advice from a former auditor general.

They have put their terms of reference on a website. They are undertaking a work plan right now which they will also share transparently on a website. Let us let them do their job. We look forward to their conclusions.

National DefenceOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

NDP

Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives do not have even an iota of rigour or accountability.

The seven-point plan had not even been released before the Conservatives stopped following it.

The F-35 secretariat, which became the national fighter procurement secretariat, is not a committee of independent experts.

Data on the costs exist. Real independent experts are available. The Conservatives have no more excuses. What are they waiting for to publish the real costs associated with the F-35s?

National DefenceOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Edmonton—Spruce Grove Alberta

Conservative

Rona Ambrose ConservativeMinister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for Status of Women

Mr. Speaker, the member knows the information as to why the secretariat is going outside for expert advice to independently validate the cost estimates that the Department of National Defence will put forward. We agree with that. We think it should do this job thoroughly and comprehensively. It has latitude within its terms of reference to bring in experts to help it.

In addition, all of those members who I have listed on the secretariat are accountable to this process, so they must be involved.

National DefenceOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Kellway NDP Beaches—East York, ON

Mr. Speaker, what are we talking about here? The Minister of National Defence has the costing figures. They come out of the joint strike fighter program office and make their way to DND through a very rigorous process. He has had them for years and he gets new updated ones annually.

Now we learn that the secretariat itself is being denied these costing figures. Welcome to the team, jackets forthcoming.

The only thing transparent about the F-35 secretariat is that it is another effort to subvert accountability. Why are the Conservatives refusing to hand over these costing figures and finally show some accountability?