House of Commons Hansard #21 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was insite.

Topics

EthicsOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Oak Ridges—Markham Ontario

Conservative

Paul Calandra ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs

Mr. Speaker, again, the documents released in court yesterday quite clearly show who the investigation is about. It is about Senator Duffy and Nigel Wright.

What the documents also show is a contrast in leadership styles between this Prime Minister and anybody in that caucus. As soon as the Prime Minister knew about this, he ordered his staff to participate, to assist, to hold back any emails. That is unlike the Liberal Party, which when faced with a crisis in its government decided to lie, cheat, and misplace $40 million, which we still have not found.

I will take this style of leadership, this style of openness, and the leadership given by our Prime Minister day in and day out to anything the Liberals ever have to offer.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have been saying for years that Canada is halfway to meeting its 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target. However, yesterday, the minister admitted that Canada is only a quarter of the way there. The Conservatives' approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and to the Senate is the same: keep the status quo and tell lies.

When will they take action and make major polluters pay?

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Oshawa Ontario

Conservative

Colin Carrie ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, exactly the opposite is true; our approach is working. Thanks to our actions, carbon emissions will actually go down close to 130 megatonnes from what they would have been under the Liberals.

Now let us contrast our approach with the NDP approach. Its approach would be a $20 billion carbon tax. Let us take a look at what this would do to hard-working Canadian families. It would be a tax on electricity, a tax on transportation, a tax on heating their homes, a tax on clothes and groceries for their kids, and the list goes on.

What we know is that our approach is working and Canadians do not want a $20 billion carbon tax from the NDP.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, all that hot air from the parliamentary secretary is not going to help us reduce emissions.

One would think that if a past environment minister had to make up numbers to prove to the world that Canada is taking action on climate change, the present one would actually act. Instead, the minister's most notable contribution to her first climate change conference was to demotivate global action on climate change so much so that civil society walked out of the talks today.

Do the Conservatives understand that it is their actions that made the international community leave those talks?

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Oshawa Ontario

Conservative

Colin Carrie ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, again, the opposite is true. Our government has taken a leadership role to international climate change efforts. We have been clear that any international agreement must be fair and effective and include commitments by all major emitters.

That said, Canadians will be proud to know that our leadership on the world stage is being recognized by our international partners. Just yesterday, after concluding Canada's national statement at COP 19, the minister was approached by an Angolan representative, who personally thanked her for Canada's efforts.

Our government is committed to protecting the environment. We are committed and we will get results—

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

The hon. member for Trinity—Spadina.

Rail TransportationOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

NDP

Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON

Mr. Speaker, five months ago the government refused the NDP's request to work together to improve rail safety. This week, the Minister of Transport finally took a step forward, but Canadians will only be warned after the dangerous cargo has already rolled through town, and rail companies' safety protocols are still kept secret.

Why will the Conservative government not tell municipalities before the trains arrive, what is in them and what safety measures are in place? What is there to hide?

Rail TransportationOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Essex Ontario

Conservative

Jeff Watson ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, as the member well knows, this minister issued a protective directive directing rail companies to share information with municipalities. It ensures that companies who transport dangerous goods provide municipalities with information on the nature and volume of dangerous goods the company transports by rail through that municipality.

We did that by working with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, which said that the protective direction “sends a clear message that the Government of Canada fully agrees that local governments need to know basic information about dangerous goods being transported through their communities”. That was from the president of FCM.

Rail TransportationOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

Mr. Speaker, they always come up with half measures. The Minister of Transport should implement all the Auditor General's recommendations. She has taken a step in the right direction by requiring the transmission of information about dangerous goods being transported through municipalities. However, it would be much better to have the information before the trains travel through town, not after. What is more, there still is no deadline for the phase-out of the DOT-111 tank cars that are deemed unsafe.

Will the Minister finally work with us to put in place a real policy for rail safety ?

Rail TransportationOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Essex Ontario

Conservative

Jeff Watson ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, the member would know that the minister and this government have been taking consistent action in light of the tragedy at Lac-Mégantic with new protective orders with respect to the testing and classification of crude oil products, and the communication of that important information; emergency directives on the transportation of dangerous goods by rail; and now a new protective directive on information-sharing with municipalities. All of that was done with our partners in the provinces and the FCM.

It is the FCM that said very clearly, “the federal government have now responded, and we commend them for it”.

Firearms RegistryOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Conservative

LaVar Payne Conservative Medicine Hat, AB

Mr. Speaker, Canadians know that the only party that stands up for the rights of law-abiding hunters, farmers, and sport shooters is the Conservative Party. We have passed legislation to end the wasteful and ineffective long gun registry once and for all, and delete all of the records. However, today the Supreme Court decided to hear the Government of Quebec's attempt to hold on to the outdated and useless data.

Could the Minister of Public Safety please update the House on the government's position on this matter?

Firearms RegistryOral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Lévis—Bellechasse Québec

Conservative

Steven Blaney ConservativeMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Medicine Hat, Alberta, for her excellent question.

We accept the Supreme Court's decision, and we will continue to put in place measures to make our streets safer. We will also respect our hunters, farmers and sports shooters.

We will vigorously defend our legislation, which was passed by the elected members of this Parliament and the Supreme Court.

National DefenceOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

NDP

Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday the Chief of the Defence Staff said that when it comes to cuts in the size of the regular force, “direction has not been given to us yet”.

The government once promised 75,000 regular force members and 35,000 reservists. We are not close to that now.

Can the minister confirm if the number of uniformed members of the Canadian Armed Forces will be cut?

National DefenceOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Niagara Falls Ontario

Conservative

Rob Nicholson ConservativeMinister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, I cannot. Budget 2012 states that we will maintain CAF regular force strength at 68,000 and reserve force strength at 27,000.

All the cuts that the member was talking about were done by the Liberals and supported by the NDP. That is what I think he is referring to.

National DefenceOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

NDP

Élaine Michaud NDP Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, of course, we still do not have an answer.

The Chief of Defence Staff has not been given clear direction on closing military bases or reducing the size of the Canadian Armed Forces in order for the Conservatives to balance the budget in time for the election. There is total confusion, and the Minister of National Defence is to blame. Soldiers in Valcartier and their families want answers. Will the government close bases or facilities or not? If so, which ones?

National DefenceOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Niagara Falls Ontario

Conservative

Rob Nicholson ConservativeMinister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, bases that were cut were done by the Liberals and supported by the NDP.

The member talks about confusion. The confusion is all within that caucus.

The Chief of the Defence Staff stated, “Certainly the government has not indicated a desire to cut numbers.” As a matter of fact, as I indicated in budget 2012, the force strength will be at 68,000 and the reserve strength at 27,000.

We will support our men and women in the armed forces.

VeteransOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

NDP

Élaine Michaud NDP Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is not just military personnel who want an explanation; veterans want one, too. The Conservatives' new disability allowance system discriminates against hundreds of veterans.

Instead of taking action and helping veterans, the Minister of Veterans Affairs is asking a committee to clarify the government's legal obligations to veterans. Instead of worrying about their legal obligations, the Conservatives should be worrying about their moral obligations. Will the minister improve the disability allowance system?

VeteransOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Vaughan Ontario

Conservative

Julian Fantino ConservativeMinister of Veterans Affairs

Mr. Speaker, it seems that no matter what one does to improve the quality of life and support for veterans and their families, that member is obviously not on side.

This is certainly a move that we are making to enhance the quality of life and support for our veterans. The member can contribute to that ongoing effort if she wishes, as we have done all along.

The comprehensive review of the new veterans charter is a step forward. It is a continuation of our good work, which over the last five or six years has added some $5 billion in programs and services for our veterans and their families.

VeteransOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

NDP

Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS

Mr. Speaker, by the time all Canadians go to bed tonight, we will lose 150 World War II, Korean, and modern-day veterans either to illness or through the aging process. Two-thirds of those impoverished veterans and their families will not qualify for the Last Post Fund because the litmus test is still at $12,000 for the entry level. That is what the Liberals gave us back in 1995; before that it was $24,000. Twenty years later it is still at $12,000.

Allowing these families and the heroes of our country to have a dignified burial and cremation service is the last chance for a grateful nation to say “goodbye and thank you”. Will the government now raise that litmus test so that more veterans and their families can have the dignified service they so rightly deserve?

VeteransOral Questions

2:50 p.m.

Vaughan Ontario

Conservative

Julian Fantino ConservativeMinister of Veterans Affairs

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question and his demonstrated concern for the welfare of our veterans and their families.

I also thank the Parliamentary Budget Officer for highlighting how our government doubled the financial limit of the funeral and burial program. We will continue to work with veterans' groups to ensure the Canadian funeral and burial program remains one of the most generous of our allies.

I urge the hon. member and all interested parties, who can in fact contribute to any changes they would wish to make, to appear in front of the parliamentary committee delving into the new veterans charter.

EthicsOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Liberal

Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC

Mr. Speaker, we know the Prime Minister's lawyer, Benjamin Perrin, assured Nigel Wright there would be no written evidence of the deal to repay Mike Duffy's fraudulent expenses.

When a lawyer does not want something put on paper, it is because he or she has something to hide. In this case, it was the fraud squad's job to wipe the Prime Minister's fingerprints off the deal.

The Prime Minister can no longer pretend he did not know what all his senior staff were up to. When will he finally tell Canadians the truth, 17 years from now?

EthicsOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Oak Ridges—Markham Ontario

Conservative

Paul Calandra ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs

Mr. Speaker, finally, we can agree on something. It was extraordinarily inappropriate for the Leader of the Opposition to wait 17 years to talk about a bribe that he was offered.

I am usually, of course, very critical of this member's questions and that still remains the same, but at least on that one point we agree. The Leader of the Opposition should not have waited 17 years to disclose that he was offered a bribe. He could have saved the people of Quebec so many years of misery. That is not the standard of leadership Canadians expect. That is why this Prime Minister is in office today and will be for a long time to come.

EthicsOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Foote Liberal Random—Burin—St. George's, NL

Mr. Speaker, with the PMO under RCMP investigation, court filings show that the Prime Minister's claim that no one in his office was informed about the Wright-Duffy deal is patently false.

His entire senior staff appears to be one big fraud squad: Woodcock, Rogers, van Hemmen, Hilton, Hamilton, and, of course, Conservative senators Gerstein, Tkachuk, Stewart Olsen, and LeBreton.

If the Prime Minister is truly angry about this scandal, why do all of these people still have their jobs?

EthicsOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Oak Ridges—Markham Ontario

Conservative

Paul Calandra ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, and as the report clearly outlines, the Prime Minister showed incredible leadership. The moment he found about this, he went into his office and ordered that his office and the PMO co-operate, that all emails be preserved and that they assist the RCMP in this investigation. That is the standard of leadership that Canadians expect. That is the standard of leadership they got from this Prime Minister.

At the same time, this is about Nigel Wright. As these documents completely show, it is about Nigel Wright and Senator Duffy. The Prime Minister did not know about this. Had he known about it, he would have never endorsed such a scheme.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:55 p.m.

NDP

Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Mr. Speaker, here is a standard of leadership. A billion litres of toxic coal slurry was released into the Athabasca River from an abandoned coal mine.

The federal government is responsible for regulating industrial facilities to prevent such catastrophic incidents. The obvious response to a disaster of this scale is to ensure no other industrial facilities along this river pose similar risks.

Has the government taken immediate action to ensure no such incidents occur, including in the oil sands?