Debates of March 8th, 2013

Public Safety

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order, order. The hon. member for Gatineau has the floor.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Oh, Mr. Speaker, we will get to that conversation later.

According to a report just days before the $1.8 billion McGill contract was awarded, Arthur Porter was already involving SNC-Lavalin in discussions about future McGill projects in Kuwait.

It is clear Conservatives made a mistake in trusting Mr. Porter and promoting to a national security role. It is the government's responsibility to make sure its appointments do not put our national security at risk.

When will the government admit Mr. Porter's appointment was its own mistake, and when will it remove him from Privy Council?

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, security clearances have not been relaxed under our Conservative government. In fact, we have introduced more rigorous checks for these types of appointments.

Arthur Porter submitted his resignation some time ago. The responsibilities that he held have nothing to do with the allegations he is facing now.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will take this as a factual admission, not necessarily a verbal admission.

The member's defence of this man is rather pathetic.

The Conservatives appointed Mr. Porter to head the Security Intelligence Review Committee in 2008, and he resigned in 2011.

During that time, he contributed generously to the Conservative Party's election fund and did business with SNC-Lavalin and its former executives, Pierre Duhaime and Riadh Ben Aissa.

What do all those people have in common? They have all been charged with fraud, corruption and misappropriation of funds in multiple scandals.

Despite all of those revelations, Mr. Porter is still a member of the Privy Council. Why?

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Porter has resigned, and the responsibilities that he held have nothing to do with the allegations that he is being charged with.

If we are going to talk about individuals who sat on the SIRC committee and who made donations, why do we not talk about donations that were made to the New Democratic Party by the current leader of the Liberal Party who, before he sat on SIRC, made several donations to the NDP?

Telecommunications

[Lise St-Denis, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Mr. Speaker, access to cell phone and Internet service is improving, but is still not optimal. In my riding, a number of people who live north of the Saint-Maurice River have no service.

How will the government support the 600,000 Canadians living in outlying areas who still do not have cell phone service?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Industry and Minister of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. I would like to remind members that we made a very important announcement for the future of Canada's wireless sector yesterday. There will be a 700 MHz spectrum auction, which will be very effective. Rules about roaming and tower sharing will be tightened. We will also ensure that there is a fourth player in all parts of the country to foster competition and, we hope, to provide better rates for consumers.

I would like to remind members that, in 2009, the House adopted the broadband Canada program, which connected more than 220,000 Canadian households to high-speed Internet. My colleague definitely belongs to the wrong party because his party voted against this program, which has been very successful in Canada.

Parliamentary Budget Officer

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, with just three weeks left before Kevin Page retires, the government finally released a job description for the next Parliamentary Budget Officer. Shockingly, the new budget officer will be required to achieve consensus among parliamentarians before releasing reports. Fat chance of that happening. Government MPs like to pretend things will cost less than they really do. The budget officer protects against that, but cannot if forced to achieve consensus among the same people doing the pretending.

Why are the Conservatives manipulating the job description to suit their partisan agenda?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, President of the Treasury Board and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member may have heard me say this before: we intend to see a non-partisan, credible source of opinion on fiscal matters in the next Parliamentary Budget Officer. It is the Library of Parliament that is leading the search for a new PBO.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, telling the truth is no longer in the job description.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer does not need to achieve consensus—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order. The hon. member for Guelph now has the floor.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the budget officer does not need to achieve consensus. The budget officer needs to do rigorous independent analysis of the numbers presented to parliamentarians, not co-operate with the PMO spin machine. The Auditor General job description did not require consensus. The Ethics Commissioner job did not require consensus. It required them to act with integrity and speak the truth.

Why are the Conservatives looking to hire a lapdog to do their bidding, rather than working hard to protect Canadian tax dollars?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, President of the Treasury Board and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario]

Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. member is in a grumpy mood ever since he was tagged with the robocalls in his riding, but we on this side of the House are in a happy mood: there are 50,000 net new jobs throughout the country. We are taking Canada in the right direction and we will continue to do so.

Official Languages

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, after voting against an NDP bill, the Conservatives pompously announced the creation of a committee to examine the issue of French in private businesses under federal jurisdiction. Yet, for a year and a half, the minister has been unable to answer simple questions. Who will chair the committee? What will the committee's mandate be? Who will sit on the committee?

Then, today, the Conservatives suddenly came to the conclusion that regulating this matter was unnecessary. The finding of the Minister of Industry's so-called report was prepared in advance.

Why is the minister taking such an amateur approach to such a serious matter?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Industry and Minister of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP pompously announced a very irresponsible bill, Bill C-315. Rather than introducing bills that have been written on the back of a napkin, we want to check the facts. That is what we did. We set up a committee of independent experts and deputy ministers supported by experts in their departments.

The situation of French in Quebec companies under federal jurisdiction is practically the same as in those under provincial jurisdiction. We are not going to create more red tape—

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The hon. member for Trois-Rivières.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I can take the Minister of Industry's contempt. I am used to it. However, I cannot take it when the government attacks the rights of workers.

The minister needs to deal with the issues under his jurisdiction in a more rigorous and transparent manner. His report indicates that 12 out of 1,760 companies were consulted. One does not need a university degree to figure out that the sample is not representative and that the minister just does not get it. A report that refers to the fact that employees have access to their collective agreement in French as a best practice when that should be a right is not worth much.

Will the minister go back to the drawing board and recognize that his inaction is creating two categories of workers?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Industry and Minister of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is trying really hard to hide the fact that he did not conduct any analyses. He is trying to start political squabbles in the House. The Orange Bloc is spouting the same old rhetoric as the Bloc Québécois. What is more, the Orange Bloc wants to increase red tape and impose a carbon tax while it is at it, increasing taxes by $50 billion. Do hon. members know what that does? It brings productivity to a halt, prevents companies from doing business and kills jobs.

Our policies on this side of the House have generated 50,000 new jobs in the month of February. That is what Canadians want.

Canada Revenue Agency

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives do not seem to understand that part of the job of government is to actually serve Canadians.

Tax time is just around the corner. So far, the Conservatives have already stopped letting Canadians file by phone, and with very little warning, they have stopped mailing tax forms out. Now the estimates show another $100 million in cuts coming to the CRA.

While the Prime Minister's appointed senators fudge their paperwork, honest, hard-working Canadians are trying to play by the rules. Why are the Conservatives making it so hard for Canadians to even file their taxes?

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, the way Canadians file their taxes is changing, and we are changing to meet those needs. We certainly encourage Canadians to file online, and more and more are taking advantage of that opportunity in a safe and secure way, but they can still use paper. They simply need to go to the post office or pick up the phone. We are accepting paper filing.

It is important to acknowledge that last year, 1.3 million packages were mailed out that were not used.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are creating a lot of confusion by changing the rules about filing taxes. Forms are no longer being mailed out, it is no longer possible to file by phone, and the Conservatives have even changed the rules about filing online.

Where will taxpayers go for help? Will they go to their local CRA office? No, those were shut down in March. Will they go to their post office? No, because the Conservatives shut many of them down with their massive cuts. Even the ones that are still open do not have enough French forms. What is worse, the volunteer program that helps community groups has been axed.

Why are the Conservatives making it so difficult for Canadians who simply want to play by the rules?

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, it is really important that CRA adapt to the changes in terms of how Canadians are filing their taxes. There still is a very robust volunteer program that is supported by CRA in terms of helping seniors.

I do think it is important to recognize again that 1.3 million packages were mailed out that were never used. I think that is a waste. Certainly, the post office is still available. If they simply pick up the phone, packages will be mailed out. Again, CRA is there to meet the needs of Canadians.

The Economy

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Mr. Speaker, many of my constituents work in the auto sector. It is a major contributor to our region's economy and employment. Could this fine Minister of Industry update the House on employment and the economy?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Minister of Industry and Minister of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, finally, a relevant question in the House this morning. I thank the member for Oxford for asking such a good question.

Today, General Motors announced a $250-million investment in the CAMI assembly plant in Ingersoll, Ontario. Moreover, as I said earlier, 50,000 new jobs were created in February. This good news once more highlights that our government's record speaks for itself. We stand by our plan for creating jobs, growth and long-term prosperity.