House of Commons Hansard #223 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was c-55.
Ted Menzies ConservativeMinister of State (Finance)
Mr. Speaker, there is excitement in the air. The NDP just cannot wait until Thursday. It is only three more sleeps, but I would encourage the hon. member to be patient.
I will not speculate on what is going to be in the budget, but I will tell the hon. member what is not going to be in the budget, and that is the tax increases the NDP would foist on all Canadians: a $21 billion carbon tax and $56 billion in increased taxes. That will not be in the budget.
Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON
Mr. Speaker, I guess that non-answer means they are just going to keep rewarding their insider friends, but that is okay, because NDP members will keep fighting for Canadians.
We see that Conservative priorities are actually costing Canadians. Worse still, the Conservative agenda is actually harming the Canadian economy, with our economy now forecast to grow at a snail's pace. Will the Conservatives stop priorities that only reward their friends and start working for the priorities of all Canadians?
Ted Menzies ConservativeMinister of State (Finance)
Mr. Speaker, our friends are Canadians. Our friends are Canadian companies. They are ordinary Canadians who work for those companies.
The hon. member talks about how it actually could help Canadians, but I will read a specific quote for the leader of the official opposition, who does not like quotes. This is from the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters. It states:
If federal tax rates had not been reduced, Canada's unemployment rate would have exceeded 9% in 2009 during the recession. Today, our unemployment rate would be higher than that of the United States, with 200,000—
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, the budget is not the only place where the Conservatives' poor choices come to light. They are using the social security tribunal to reward party friends. They have stacked the Senate as much as possible, so now they are opting for plan B.
Four defeated candidates in Quebec City—who no doubt share the same Conservative prejudices against the unemployed—were handed jobs with fat, $120,000-a-year salaries. They are politicizing the appeal process by making it available by teleconference, and only twice a month.
Why are they rewarding party friends and punishing those most in need?
Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Skills Development
Mr. Speaker, our government makes appointments based on merit.
The social security tribunal positions were broadly advertised. The appointed members went through a rigorous, competency-based selection process. They had to meet specific experience and competence criteria required to do the job.
Chris Charlton NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON
Mr. Speaker, not a week goes by without the Conservatives packing another board full of their pals. This time, their appointments to the new social security tribunal include donors to the Conservative Party, Conservative candidates and a former PC cabinet minister. The decisions made by the members of this tribunal directly affect the livelihood of out-of-work Canadians. Apart from being a friend of the Conservatives, what qualifications do tribunal members need to have, and what is the process for appointing them?
Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Skills Development
Mr. Speaker, our government makes appointments based on merit. The positions for the social security tribunal were advertised very, very broadly. Members went through a rigorous competency-based selection process, where they had to meet specific experience and competence criteria required to do the job.
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
Mr. Speaker, last week the NDP leader attacked Canada's national interests on the world stage. In a move that was criticized by premiers, media and even members of his own party, the NDP leader argued against the pro-Canadian Keystone XL project that would create thousands of jobs on both sides of the border. The consequences of this trip were alarming. Hours after meeting the NDP leader, senior Democrat Nancy Pelosi voiced doubts about the Keystone project.
Could the President of the Treasury Board inform the House what the government is doing to defend this pro-Canadian project?
Tony Clement ConservativePresident of the Treasury Board and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario
Mr. Speaker, last week I joined the scores of provincial premiers, fellow cabinet ministers, Conservative caucus members, and indeed I joined union leaders, who had gone to Washington to argue in favour—
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order, please. The hon. President of the Treasury Board has the floor.
Tony Clement Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON
—to argue in favour of the Keystone XL pipeline, a pipeline that will bring thousands of jobs and opportunities for Canadians. At the same time, the NDP leader was in Washington pouring cold water on the project. He does not care about the jobs. He does not care about union members getting jobs. He is in it for the extremists in the NDP.
Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, this weekend we saw yet another example of how the government undermines our scientific research capacity here in Canada when it ordered the dismantling of the research cabins at the Experiment Lakes Area.
The Conservatives claim that the Experimental Lakes Areas will be handed over to a third party, but no third-party organization will want to take it over when they have to rebuild the facility. Why do the Conservatives insist on sabotaging any prospect of transfer or future use of this site?
Gary Goodyear ConservativeMinister of State (Science and Technology) (Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario)
Mr. Speaker, we did make a decision to end the Experimental Lakes project as a federal facility, but we have made other decisions, and those are to fund science and technology in this country at historic levels. That includes hundreds of millions of dollars in climate change research, in water, in freshwater research. All of that funding was voted against by the NDP.
Scientists know who supports research. It is this side of the House, not that side.
Laurin Liu NDP Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Experimental Lakes Area cost $2 million, and the Conservatives spent $21 million in media monitoring and $16 million in budget advertising. Given the choice between science and propaganda, the Conservatives chose propaganda.
With cuts to infrastructure, the Conservatives are seriously compromising the future of the Experimental Lakes Area because the new owners will have to rebuild the research facilities.
Why are they attacking research and environmental protection?
Gary Goodyear ConservativeMinister of State (Science and Technology) (Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario)
Mr. Speaker, nothing of the sort has happened. In fact, this government has funded, since 2006, almost $8 billion additional dollars for science, technology and research. We now have more fellowships, more scholarships. We have hundreds of millions of dollars going into climate change research, into research in the Arctic, into funding buildings and research facilities at colleges and universities, all of which the NDP vote against.
I would encourage the opposition to get on side, because we are now considered number four in the world in scientific—
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, let us continue talking about the Conservatives' bad choices.
The support services for Canadian Forces personnel and families should be a priority for the Conservatives. However, we have learned that the Canadian military family resource centres will be subject to major budget cuts as of April 1st. These centres are extremely important for supporting and meeting the needs of the families of our men and women in uniform.
Why are the Conservatives choosing to abandon military families?
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, that is in fact not true. I was meeting with military families this morning, as I do regularly. The military family resource centres across the country have expanded their scope and their ability to reach out to help military families when they need it.
We have seen historic investments, across the board, in infrastructure, in personnel, in progress, in readiness, in all of the ability the military have to not only serve our country at home and abroad but to also support their families—historic levels—all of which were opposed by this member and her party.
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
Mr. Speaker, the reality is that in Nova Scotia alone, we are looking at a 27% cut to military family resource centres, as Halifax and Cape Breton will be facing a shortfall of over $300,000. In fact, one Mike Duffy equals the cost of the cut to military family resource centres. These Conservatives will stand up for a Mike Duffy, but they will sit down when it comes to military family resource centres.
Why do these family centres, which look after the families of our heroes of our country, have to face the brunt of this government, when it comes to its fiscal mistakes, on the backs of these people?
Return that--
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence
Wrong again, Mr. Speaker. In fact, what we have seen time and time again from the member and members of the NDP is that they oppose all of the investments we made; whether they be in equipment; whether they be in the infrastructure, where members train, work, live and raise their families; whether they have been in the programs that support them. It is the same with Veterans Affairs; we have made historic, significant investments across the board. We have seen $500 million more going to the army annually.
What is consistent, though, is the opposition and the efforts by the member and his party to oppose these investments and improvements for the military and their families.
Carolyn Bennett Liberal St. Paul's, ON
Mr. Speaker, concerns are being raised by first nations that new federal contribution agreements include a clause that prohibits challenging government legislation through the courts. Surely the new minister understands how completely inappropriate it would be for the government to hold first nations funding hostage to such an undemocratic condition.
Will the minister confirm today whether any Government of Canada contribution agreements with first nations contain a direct or indirect threat to bar their access to the courts?
Greg Rickford ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Speaker, these accusations are completely false. Changes to the funding agreements are solely administrative and do not create new obligations for first nations. Our department is in contact with concerned first nations and encourages any first nation with questions and concerns to contact its local regional office.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is using government resources in order to promote Conservatives' right wing, anti-immigrant agenda. Canada Border Services Agency is the law enforcement agency responsible for upholding border security. It has now—