Debates of Feb. 7th, 2013

Canadian Grain Commission

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2) and section 4 of the User Fees Act, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, a copy of the Canadian Grain Commission's proposal to Parliament for user fees and service standards. User fees will be payable as soon as the proposal comes into force.

I look forward to hearing what my colleagues have to say about this important proposal.

Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans' Health

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I am pleased to table on behalf of the Minister of Veterans Affairs, in both official languages, the report of the Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans' Health. The report is entitled “Depleted Uranium and Canadian Veterans: A Review of Potential Exposure and Health Effects”.

Interparliamentary Delegations

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise this morning pursuant to Standing Order 34(1). I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the reports of the Canadian delegation of the Canada-United States Inter-parliamentary Group respecting its participation in the following two meetings: first, the Pacific NorthWest Economic Region, PNWER, 22nd annual summit held in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, July 15-19, 2012; second, the 66th annual meeting of the Southern Legislative Conference of the Council of State Governments held in Charleston, West Virginia, July 28 to August 1, 2012.

Procedure and House Affairs

[Joe Preston, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 40th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs in relation to the report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Business of the House

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to move the following motion:

That, at the conclusion of today's debate on the opposition motion in the name of the member for Parkdale—High Park, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion be deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested and deferred to Tuesday, February 12, 2013, at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to propose this motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

(Motion agreed to)

Sex Selection

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition signed by hundreds of constituents from the Waterloo region.

The petitioners call upon the government to notice that sex-selective abortion has created a global gender imbalance causing girls to be trafficked in prostitution. They call upon Parliament to support Motion No. M-408 and condemn sex-selective abortion.

International Co-operation

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I rise today to table a petition on behalf of Larry Martin and the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace.

The petition is signed by hundreds of local residents who are urging the government to demonstrate international responsibility by recommitting Canada to contribute 0.7% of GDP to overseas development and to prioritize responsive funding to NGOs that Canadians support, which have had their funding cut by CIDA.

I am pleased to table this petition this morning and look forward to the government's response.

Sex Selection

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions to present today on three different subjects.

The first petition is from a number of Canadians from the London and Guelph areas, almost 70 in total. The petitioners point out that Canada is a nation that has long promoted the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law. They point out that preventing the birth of baby girls through sex-selective abortion is an affront to the dignity and equality of women and girls and has denied millions of girls in Canada and throughout the world a chance to be born merely because they are girls.

The petitioners call upon the House of Commons to condemn discrimination against girls through sex-selective pregnancy termination.

Abortion

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is from more than 130 Canadians from the Guelph and London areas, who point out that Canada is the only nation in the western world to have no law restricting abortion and is in the company of China and North Korea in that respect.

The petitioners call upon Parliament to speedily enact legislation to deal with that.

Migrant Workers

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by 27 of my constituents who remind Parliament that temporary foreign and seasonal workers play an important role in the economy but are vulnerable to exploitation, abuse and substandard working conditions.

The petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.

Development and Peace

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I recently took part in a press conference in Sherbrooke organized by the diocesan council of the Eastern Townships to protest the funding cuts made to Development and Peace. The Bishop of Sherbrooke, Bishop Luc Cyr, was there, as were many others.

Basically, the petitioners asked me to present a petition calling on the government to demonstrate international responsibility by recommitting Canada to contribute 0.7% of GDP to international development assistance. They want the government to prioritize responsive funding to those NGOs that Canadians support and that have seen their funding cut by CIDA. Finally, in the spirit of global solidarity, they want to ensure that CIDA restores the full funding amount of $49.2 million requested by Development and Peace over the next five years.

Sex Selection

[Leon Benoit, Conservative, Vegreville—Wainwright, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition on behalf of people from Viking, in my constituency.

The petitioners call upon the House of Commons to condemn discrimination against females occurring through sex selection pregnancy termination. They note that CBC did a program that exposed this practice in Canada. They note that 92% of Canadians believe that sex-selective pregnancy termination should be illegal. The petitioners also pointed out that all parties in the House supported ending this practice.

The petitioners call upon the House of Commons to condemn discrimination against females occurring through sex selection pregnancy termination.

Questions on the Order Paper

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Opposition Motion—Parliamentary Budget Officer

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

moved:

That this House: (a) reaffirm the essential role of the Parliamentary Budget Officer in providing independent analysis to Parliamentarians on the state of the nation's finances, trends in the Canadian economy, and the estimates process; and (b) call on the government to: (i) extend the mandate of current Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page until his replacement is named; and (ii) support legislation to make the Parliamentary Budget Officer a full, independent officer of Parliament.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Beauharnois—Salaberry.

I am pleased to rise in the House today to move this opposition motion in support of the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

The position of Parliamentary Budget Officer was created in 2006 in the wake of the sponsorship scandal. Despite their promise to create an independent parliamentary budget office, the Conservatives refused to grant the PBO the same independence and the same authority as other officers of Parliament, such as the Auditor General.

Our current PBO, Kevin Page, has himself asked why create a budget office and ask for independent analysis right in the legislation if we do not even want it. Why indeed?

In an unfortunate and frustrating pattern, the government has responded to the PBO's efforts for fiscal transparency by refusing to release costing estimates on a wide range of its key policy areas, including the F-35 procurement deal, G8 and G20 security costs, the contentious omnibus crime bill and the OAS cuts. Meanwhile, following its mandate, the PBO has continued to produce its own independent costing analysis in the face of limited co-operation from federal departments and harsh backlash from the Conservatives.

Last spring, Mr. Page told The Hill Times, “We've always tried to be fearless in terms of tackling difficult issues”. While I certainly appreciate his tenacity and commitment to providing Canadians with the real costs of government policy, his job should not require so much courage. Instead, our government should be committed to ensuring that fiscal transparency and accountability are standard operating procedure here in Ottawa.

In our parliamentary system, the power of the purse is ultimately meant to rest with the House of Commons. In order for parliamentarians to be able to act responsibly on behalf of our constituents and all Canadians, we must have access to the financial costs and implications of legislation before we vote, and the current government is certainly not in the habit of providing answers.

In fact, last year, the Treasury Board directed government departments not to include details about upcoming spending cuts in their annual plans and priorities reports. Of course, having this information unavailable to MPs necessarily means that it is also unavailable to the public, a fact that raises important questions about the democratic process in our country.

How can Canadians engage with the parliamentary process that has so many real impacts on their lives if they are not given the information to do so? Would we ask a family to buy a home without knowing the cost of a mortgage? Of course not. Why should it be any different with the laws and programs that govern our lives? The bottom line is that Canadians and their MPs need more information about government spending than they are currently getting. When they are not getting the information they need from the government, an office like the PBO becomes the go-to source for financial analysis.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer plays an invaluable role in our federal government, and Canadians are facing a PBO cliff. We have heard about the fiscal cliff in the U.S. We are facing a PBO cliff here in Canada when Kevin Page's term ends on March 24.

The official opposition is deeply concerned by the lack of progress that has been made in finding our new PBO. Last week I met with the Parliamentary Librarian, who confirmed that a selection committee has yet to be formed. The firm that will be doing the head hunting for this essential position has only just been hired. Selection processes for these kinds of positions often take between six and twelve months. In fact, the selection process for our first PBO lasted eight months. It is clear that it is highly unlikely we will have a new PBO in place by the end of Mr. Page's term. It is equally clear that the Conservatives are in no rush to ensure that the work of the PBO continues unabated during the selection process.

Unfortunately, the legislation governing the Parliamentary Budget Officer does not extend the mandate of the PBO to his employees. The legislation also fails to provide for an automatic interim process to take effect when a new PBO is sought. Instead, Canadians and their MPs must wait for an order in council appointment for even an interim PBO to be put in place.

Our government should be committed to fiscal transparency, and the legislation governing the Parliamentary Budget Officer should effectively support its mandate. However, the necessary political commitment to the PBO is not fully met in the existing legislation. For instance, under the current law, the Parliamentary Budget Officer serves at the pleasure of the Prime Minister, a constraint by which no other officer of Parliament is bound and one that could promise serious consequences for a PBO whose independent fiscal analysis displeased the PM.

We have seen the Conservatives engage in a consistent campaign of attacks on the credibility of Kevin Page, despite the fact that his analysis has consistently proved to be on target. The official opposition is deeply concerned that the government will attempt to appoint a new PBO who is more lapdog than watchdog. That is not what Canadians need. We need a strong, independent Parliamentary Budget Officer, not another person who talks government talking points.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer is also currently an officer of the Library of Parliament, not of Parliament itself. There have been real issues with this arrangement, including a lack of congruence between the roles of the two bodies. The official opposition has significant concerns that this issue will come to the fore should there not be an interim PBO, especially considering the fact that since the mandate of the PBO does not extend past the individual who is in that position today, the rest of his staff are considered employees of the Library of Parliament. Will these library employees be allowed to make public reports on costing and economic estimates on behalf of the PBO? Who will come before the committee, especially the finance committee, or answer questions from MPs and the media about the work of the office?

The Conservatives have made a habit of attacking the PBO when he is actually acting fully within his mandate as outlined in the legislation. How will they react to public servants making public reports on the PBO's behalf, when there is no legislated mandate that extends to them? How can we address these issues and ensure that there is no gap in the crucial information for MPs and the Canadian public? The answer is simple. Extend Kevin Page's term until a replacement is found. We need a thorough and transparent process.

Over the last couple of weeks, when asked about the PBO, the Conservatives have repeatedly said that they support the ongoing existence of the office. That is hardly the same as expressing a commitment to support the office's independence or to work to improve fiscal transparency. It is very troubling.

Budget transparency should be paramount in our parliamentary system. Canadians and their MPs deserve to know the real costs of policy and legislation, and the PBO must have sufficient power and independence to meet this goal. It is critically important that there be no gaps in the vital work done by this office. It is especially crucial that the PBO be strengthened and supported in future. I am pleased to move the following motion:

That this House: (a) reaffirm the essential role of the Parliamentary Budget Officer in providing independent analysis to Parliamentarians on the state of the nation's finances, trends in the Canadian economy, and the estimates process; and (b) call on the government to: (i) extend the mandate of current Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page until his replacement is named; and (ii) support legislation to make the Parliamentary Budget Officer a full, independent officer of Parliament.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her speech about the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

Of course, she recognizes that in our Parliament, which is the Westminster system that we have inherited from the United Kingdom, it is the Crown that is responsible for making budgets, not Parliament. Parliament approves budgets that come from the Crown. I wonder if she would like to comment on that role. She seems to be saying in her remarks that the opposition members, individually, should have their fingerprints all over the budget, creating a system of what are called earmarks in the United States. Does she believe that it is an appropriate format for making budgets?

I would like to comment on another aspect and add a secondary question. To what extent are opposition members using the Parliamentary Budget Officer role for partisan purposes, as opposed to trying to clarify and use it for information?

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

There you have it, Mr. Speaker, for all Canadians to see.

The issue is accountability, on which the Conservatives rode into government, on which they rode into Ottawa. The notion was that there should be independent financial oversight for the good of all Canadians, because Canadians put their trust in the government and send their tax dollars here. They want to know that there is proper oversight and that those tax dollars are wisely spent.

The Conservatives rode into office on the issue of accountability. They created the position of the Parliamentary Budget Officer to provide that independent oversight. It is right in his mandate. Now they are saying maybe not, maybe that it not a role for parliamentarians.

The whole point of having the PBO was so governments would not fudge numbers or hide their intent with deficits, with surpluses or with certain spending allotments for partisan purposes. It was to provide independent oversight. That is what we believe the PBO has done so diligently. That is why the position and the current occupant needs to be maintained until we have a new person posted through a transparent process.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Parkdale—High Park for tabling this very important motion.

As she has pointed out to the House, one of the most significant roles and responsibilities for elected members of Parliament, whether they are on the government side or in opposition, is to scrutinize spending. We have a responsibility to make sure that taxpayers' dollars are spent appropriately.

As she is aware, both the President of the Treasury Board and the Minister of Finance have objected to the PBO delivering in his role in an effective manner. The statement made by one of the Conservative members, the member for Edmonton—St. Albert, is rather shocking. While he has commended the PBO for his valuable role in scrutinizing spending, he has stated that the fact that the data and the information could be released publicly would deter government members from seeking his services.

I wonder if the hon. member could speak to the issue of the role of the PBO and the fact that he has had to resort to the courts to get that information to make it available to all members of Parliament.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Edmonton—Strathcona for her work on the government operations committee.

It has become, sadly, a hallmark of the Conservatives that they lack accountability. They use massive omnibus budget bills to ram through legislative changes without proper debate, oversight and transparency. Clearly, they want to do the same when it comes to a budget and when it comes to the spending of taxpayers' dollars.

We believe that we need transparency and accountability. In fact, we have seen that the PBO's numbers have often proven right when the government's numbers have proven to be not worth the paper they are written on. I cite the F-35 procurement.

We need accountability and oversight. I do not know what the government is afraid of.