House of Commons Hansard #218 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was amendments.

Topics

Public SafetyAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Mr. Speaker, Canada is at risk of significant climatic dangers, including floods, hail storms, ice storms, tornados, wind storms and geological hazards, such as earthquakes and related fires. The 1998 ice storm cost $5.4 billion, and the 1996 Saguenay flood cost $1.7 billion. However, these claims pale in comparison to the losses that could result from a major earthquake and related fires in British Columbia, Ontario or Quebec. The potential economic damage from a major seismic event in British Columbia alone is estimated at $30 billion.

Despite the potential loss of human life, damage to businesses and communities and the enormous economic losses, the Minister of Public Safety refused to answer any of my written questions regarding disaster preparedness, response, recovery and resilience, which are clearly issues of fundamental importance to the health and safety of Canadians.

Canadians will remember the most expensive natural disaster in our history, when an astounding 80 hours of freezing rain coated Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick. The 1998 ice storm downed 130 power transmission towers and 30,000 utility poles. Over four million Canadians lost power, and 600,000 were forced to leave their homes.

This past July, I was honoured to be appointed as one of a handful of parliamentary champions from around the world by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. In September I submitted two detailed written questions to the government focusing on disasters in Canada and our liabilities as taxpayers, as Canada has real risk. For drought, almost 620,000 are at risk. For flooding, it is almost 50,000. For earthquake, it is 34,000. For a tsunami, 165,000 are at risk.

I asked the minister questions on specifically where Canada was lacking in terms of disaster preparedness, response and recovery and what would be needed in terms of funding, human resources and operational requirements going forward. However, instead of answering either of my two written questions, the minister provided two-sentence responses explaining that my questions required “extensive manual research and analysis”. This is simply not good enough when the issue is a matter of public safety and it is within the minister's purview.

When I later questioned the minister in the House regarding his refusal to answer my written questions, the minister simply ducked, saying it would cost the taxpayer in excess of $1,300 just to examine whether an answer was possible. What would be the price tag of an under-prepared government facing the next disaster?

Is this new government policy to cost out each written question before answering, or was this a deliberate attempt by a government to avoid answering questions for which it largely has no answers?

As the leader of our party said, “So you have to ask yourself the question if it costs so much to get that information, that means they don't have it. And if they don't have it, there's a real problem”.

As disappointing as it is that the minister chooses not to meet his own government's accountability guidelines, it is absolutely objectionable that he refuses to answer questions of profound significance to Canadians, particularly those living in disaster-prone areas.

Disasters do not have to happen. It is the job of the minister not to duck questions but to give Canadians real information and to ensure that Canada is a disaster-resilient nation and that we can all take action to reduce our risk.

Public SafetyAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

Simcoe—Grey Ontario

Conservative

Kellie Leitch ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour

Mr. Speaker, one of the government's top priorities is ensuring the safety and security of all Canadians, and that includes keeping Canadians safe from all kinds of disasters. Every year, there are natural disasters that occur in Canada. We have recently seen floods in Manitoba, landslides in British Columbia, forest fires in many regions, in fact, even a landslide in my own riding of Simcoe—Grey. We were all aware of the devastating impact of Hurricane Sandy in the eastern seaboard of the United States. That is why disaster risk reduction and building resilient communities are such an important priority for our government.

Public Safety Canada is responsible for providing leadership and coordination for emergency management activities within the federal government and in collaboration with the provinces and territories, international partners and other stakeholders. The Department of Public Safety works extensively with these key stakeholders on initiatives related to the four pillars of emergency management: prevention, mitigation, preparedness and response and recovery.

Disaster risk reduction is a concept designed to directly support the four pillars approach by analyzing and addressing the underlying risk factors that can lead to disasters. The government previously participated in the World Conference on Disaster Reduction, which was organized by the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. At this conference, 168 countries, including Canada, adopted the “Hyogo Framework for Action”. The role of the framework is to promote a strategic and systematic approach to reducing vulnerabilities and risks to hazards and underscores the need and means for building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters.

In 2009 our government established Canada's platform for disaster risk reduction as part of Canada's commitment to deliver on the Hyogo framework. Canada's platform brings together multidisciplinary stakeholders with the goal of promoting safer and more resilient Canadian communities, including advancing work to reduce risk of vulnerability and impacts of disasters for Canadians, leveraging existing networks to enhance coordination of disaster risk reduction across sectors and enhancing knowledge and information sharing.

Since 2010, Canada's platform has held an annual round table on disaster risk reduction to engage all sectors of society and individual Canadians on ways to foster disaster risk reduction at all levels across the country. The most recent round table took place in October 2012 and it had some 200 participants, representing all sectors, including governments, businesses, NGOs, aboriginal groups and academics.

In accordance with our commitment under the Hyogo framework for action, Canada has also agreed to provide a biannual review of the progress achieved in the implementation of disaster risk reduction activities at a national level. Submitted in 2011, Canada's most recent reporting covered the period of 2009 to 2011.

The member's question that came in the form of a written question regarding disaster risk has been answered and has been subject to a ruling by the Speaker. As was mentioned by the minister and also by my colleagues, the question would have cost Canadian taxpayers in excess of $1,300 just to examine whether the question was possible. In order to answer the 55 sub-questions, it would have cost an untold tens of thousands of dollars.

I can assure the member that Canada's 2011 to 2013 Hyogo framework on action implementation progress report will be finalized in April 2013 and will subsequently be published for public consumption by the United Nations.

Let me assure the member that our government takes the issue of disaster risk reduction seriously. Working with all stakeholders, we will continue to promote disaster risk reduction to ensure our communities are more resilient in all types of disasters.

Public SafetyAdjournment Proceedings

6:25 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Mr. Speaker, I diligently went through the government's report to the UN. Every time the government's response was lacking, I asked a question and the government refused to answer those questions. The minister should provide answers regarding: the percentage of the national budget devoted to disaster risk reduction; the current value of the government's infrastructure; the government's liabilities; and the requirements for putting in place a national alerting system that would warn Canadians of imminent or unfolding threats to life.

When a building collapses after an earthquake, while we think of it as a natural disaster that we cannot control, we can take action to reduce risk. Have earthquakes occurred in this place before? If so, should we build here in the first place? Could we build the building so it would not collapse?

Instead of shutting down legitimate questions, the government must change its thinking and act.

Public SafetyAdjournment Proceedings

6:25 p.m.

Conservative

Kellie Leitch Conservative Simcoe—Grey, ON

Mr. Speaker, strengthening resilience continues to be a priority of our government. Our government takes a comprehensive approach to resilience building, recognizing that reducing and mitigating risks is far more effective than responding after the fact. The impact of disasters worldwide in recent years reminds us of our continued need to pursue effective disaster, mitigation and risk reduction initiatives in addition to responding quickly and in a coordinated manner when disaster strikes.

That is why our government has developed the federal emergency response plan and is committed to discuss disaster mitigation with provinces and territories. We continue to be committed to the safety, security and resilience of Canadians. Supporting disaster risk reduction is just one way the Government of Canada is working to meet these commitments.

Veterans AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:30 p.m.

NDP

Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON

Mr. Speaker, last week I asked for a more detailed answer from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs. Oddly enough, it was the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources who stood to answer my questions. He clearly is not familiar with the file and suggested that I was changing the focus of my question. I assure the House that I was doing no such thing.

The focus of my question was how the government abandons the care of our veterans. I was struck by the words of the parliamentary secretary, because it was evident that he was unfamiliar with the file, just as it is also clear that the members opposite are not interested in caring for our veterans or making them a priority.

Back in November, I asked this question of the government:

Mr. Speaker, the government is failing our veterans and trying to hide it from Canadians. The minister would not even tell the Parliamentary Budget Officer how many jobs would disappear from Veterans Affairs or how veterans' services would be impacted by Conservative cuts. What we do know is that injured Canadian Forces members might have to fight the government in court just to get a fair pension.

When will the Conservatives stop playing these games and help veterans get the services and the pensions they deserve?

The minister's response was that veterans can access everything online now.

It amazes me that this is the Conservatives' solution. Many veterans struggle with technology. Not everyone has access to computers or the Internet. If there is an issue, an online form is not helpful; a staff person behind a desk or on the phone is helpful. The cuts have meant that offices are closing and that wait times on the phone are getting longer and longer.

I also find it troubling that in his answers, the minister used the same old excuses for inaction by saying that it is the opposition preventing our veterans from getting faster service. Instead of actually answering the questions, the minister tried to shift blame away from himself and his caucus.

With a Conservative majority government, a government that cuts off debate at the drop of a hat, I wonder how the opposition can possibly prevent the government from acting. What we are doing is calling out the government on its poor policy, imploring it to use some sense and compassion and imploring it to treat our veterans with the respect they deserve.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources suggested that the official opposition votes against everything. That is not true. I do not vote against everything. I vote with my conscience, I vote with integrity, I vote for what is best for Canadians and for veterans.

The bills that the government has introduced to supposedly help veterans have been highly problematic and ineffective and have not made the needs of veterans a priority.

We ask veterans to put their lives on the line on foreign soil. They face great danger, risk of injury and death. They are exposed to chemicals and other hazards. They do all this in the service of our country. The very least we can do is ensure that when they come home, they are looked after and their needs are met. They should not have to fight for long-term care. They should not have to fight in courts for their pensions. They should not be ignored.

Veterans AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:30 p.m.

Mississauga—Brampton South Ontario

Conservative

Eve Adams ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs

Mr. Speaker, no government has done more for veterans than this government in the last 60 years. If a veteran requires a home visit from a case manager, a veteran will continue to receive that home visit.

As the Prime Minister has demonstrated time and time again, we are providing Canada's veterans with the services and benefits they deserve in a quick and effective manner. In fact, through our Conservative government's cutting red tape for veterans initiative, we are providing veterans, Canadian armed forces personnel and their families with better and faster service in more modern ways.

We implemented the veterans transition action plan. This plan has led to more job opportunities than ever before for veterans.

We have increased accessibility of veteran services by providing 600 points of service, where previously there were only 60 points of service.

We have also launched the new benefits browser and the My VAC Book, which puts detailed information about veterans' benefits and services at the fingertips of veterans, so they know what benefits are available to them and their family members.

Our government recently announced that the veterans independence program will change its delivery model. Veterans will no longer have to submit numerous receipts many times a year. Instead, they will receive upfront payments for those services. Across Canada, this single change will eliminate more than 2.5 million transactions between veterans and the civil service.

Our government is also going to great lengths to help veterans with new career opportunities. Helmets to Hardhats Canada brings union, private and public sector employers together to match veterans with employment and training opportunities in the building and construction trades. Veterans Affairs Canada has enhanced employment opportunities within our department, and the Minister of Veterans Affairs has asked me to reach out to Canadian employers to invite them to offer priority hiring to our veterans. The hire a veteran initiative seeks to create many more job opportunities for Canadian armed forces personnel and veterans as they seek to move from the military to civilian careers.

Finally, I am very proud to say that our government has ended the practice of deducting veterans' disability pensions when calculating their earnings loss and Canadian armed forces income supports. We have worked quickly to make the changes to veterans benefits, to put more money in the pockets of veterans and their families.

We are doing the very things that veterans have been telling us they want, and we are very proud to be delivering. Whether through the new veterans charter or the veterans transition action plan, our Conservative government remains firmly committed to providing veterans and their families with the support they need when they need it.

Veterans AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:35 p.m.

NDP

Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives make it sound just lovely, do they not?

I would like to ask a few more questions. What about the fact that those deductions to pension benefits only came about because veterans took the government to court? They took it to court. They had to take to the courts of this nation to get the benefits they had earned.

What about the benefits to the quadriplegic veteran we met last year in the House? This individual could not get the benefits or support he needed and the government offered him a job. He is a quadriplegic. He cannot take that job. The Conservatives' offers of jobs and work do not meet the needs of this particular individual.

What about all the denials for VIP? We have had letter after letter from veterans and their partners about the inability to get VIP. What about the widows of veterans who are called gold diggers by the government? What about the government's refusal to provide long-term care for modern-day veterans?

All of this adds up to a disrespect for veterans, and no matter what Conservatives say or what spin they put on it, our veterans are not being treated with dignity and respect.

Veterans AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:35 p.m.

Conservative

Eve Adams Conservative Mississauga—Brampton South, ON

Mr. Speaker, there is hyperbole and then there is just pure misinformation.

As the member opposite ought to know, in fact, Veterans Affairs is going above and beyond any court-stated position on the earnings loss benefit. We are providing far more than was ever demanded of us.

Additionally, when it comes to VIP benefits or a host of other services we provide to veterans, the NDP has actually voted against all of them. Every cheque that lands on a veteran's kitchen table to pay for hydro or groceries, the NDP consistently votes against. It has even voted against providing tuition assistance to the orphans of deceased armed forces members. That is the NDP record. Anyone is welcome to look it up. It is available in black and white. I am happy to send the information to any viewers who might be watching.

Our Conservative government, by comparison, is providing more for veterans than any government in the last 60 years, and we are very proud of the support we provide to veterans. They have served our nation and we stand firmly behind them.

Veterans AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:39 p.m.)