Debates of April 23rd, 2013

International Trade

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, it is pretty rich, this coming from the NDP, a party that is looking to give special breaks to Chinese manufacturers but will not actually protect Canadians who want to invest in China.

This treaty is intended to create jobs and growth in Canada by protecting Canadian businesses in China. It will give Canadian investors in China the same types of protections that foreign investors presently have in Canada.

Our government has been clear. Unlike the NDP, our focus is on creating jobs and economic growth right here at home.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Canada-China FIPA ties the hands of Canadian governments, exposes taxpayers to huge liabilities, and fails to effectively help Canadian investors break into China's market. Now, by delaying approval without any explanation, Conservatives are creating confusion and hurting our economy.

Conservatives claim to be proud of this agreement, yet will not move to implement it. Why is that? If there are no problems with this FIPA, why is it still sitting on the Prime Minister's desk six months after it was eligible to be ratified?

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian investors have applauded this treaty. It sets out a clear set of rules under which Canadians make investments in China. It also sets out a clear set of rules under which investment disputes are resolved. Sadly, the NDP is proving once again that it is opposed to trade and investment.

On this side of the House, we will continue to focus on the priorities of Canadians and not the special interest groups that the NDP represents.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP is opposed to incompetence. Only the Liberal Party is buying the Conservatives' explanation here.

Maybe the government is delaying because the FIPA allows Chinese companies to sue Canada in unaccountable tribunals, holding hearings in secret; or because it allows state-owned enterprises to undermine Canadian ownership of natural resources; or maybe because it does nothing to remove existing barriers keeping Canadian investors out of China.

When will Conservatives stand up for Canada and admit it was a mistake to sign the Canada-China FIPA?

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP has consistently opposed our agenda to open up new markets for Canadian investors and exporters--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order. I will ask members once again to wait until the minister has finished answering before they applaud.

The hon. Minister of International Trade.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP has consistently opposed our agenda to create jobs in Canada and to drive economic growth through trade and investment.

On this side of the House we are going to continue to focus on the priorities of Canadians. Unfortunately, the NDP just does not get it. It is anti-trade and anti-investment. It has no credibility on those issues.

Government Programs

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we recently learned that the Conservatives gave $20 million to a number of universities and schools, many of which have policies that are inconsistent with the Canadian charter, particularly with respect to homosexuality. The Canadian Association of University Teachers put a fine point on it: taxpayers' money should not be used to fund schools with discriminatory practices.

What criteria are the Conservatives using to decide which institutions to fund?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Minister of State (Small Business and Tourism)]

Mr. Speaker, all post-secondary schools accredited by the provinces and by our government under the knowledge infrastructure program have followed the same rules. The student code was not a factor in obtaining funds under the program. We focused on the goal of the program, which is to create jobs for the future in the knowledge industry.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we would like to know what those rules are.

The government cannot claim to oppose discrimination while at the same time funding private institutions with discriminatory policies. We have asked repeatedly why Crandall University received $6 million in this year's budget. Three weeks after this was announced as a highlight, the government cannot seem to find that page in its own budget. This is an institution that has been a constant source of controversy for its anti-gay hiring policies. Funding it should be unacceptable in Canada.

Does the minister really stand behind this policy of giving public funds to private institutions with discriminatory policies and practices?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Minister of State (Small Business and Tourism)]

Mr. Speaker, as I said in French, all accredited post-secondary institutions in Canada were eligible for funding under the knowledge infrastructure program.

In the 240 colleges and universities that benefited from that program, the student codes were not considered as criteria for receiving funding.

Employment

[Ted Hsu, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, middle-class families are paying more and more to send their kids to college and university. This year, we have the largest tuition increases in almost ten years. At the same time, the Conservative government is cutting funding for the summer jobs program by 25%. These are jobs that help students pay for their education.

Why is the government doing less to help students work, while families and students are paying more for tuition?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Mr. Speaker, that was a question without facts at all. In fact, we increased the dollars that went into the youth employment strategy, including adding thousands of new internships that will help students get the experience in the job they need for long-term careers.

We have gone beyond that to help students get the funding they need to afford post-secondary education. We introduced the Canada student grant program that helped three times more students than did the previous Liberal program.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Conservative incompetence has plunged Canada into debt, squandering the future for many young people. Mounting student debts and dwindling employment prospects are making it impossible for young people to prepare for the future.

Youth unemployment is up five points and the government's only response has been to slash the Canada summer jobs program, in spite of what the minister says. The Prime Minister has clearly failed.

When will the Prime Minister call on experienced people, like teachers, labour market specialists and camp counsellors, to finally learn how to create a national youth employment strategy?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Mr. Speaker, in Canada, the youth employment strategy is designed to help students. In fact, tens of thousands of students right across the country get the experience they need to help them get jobs in the future and also to earn money to pay for their post-secondary education.

In the most recent budget, we attached another 3,000 internships to help students get more experience, particularly students who have had problems finding a job. We are there to help the students. It is too bad that the Liberals do not support those efforts.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister needs to understand that her strategy, insofar as she has one, is not working, especially not for young people.

The number of jobs for young people has declined by 212,000 since the recession. In October 2008, there were 76,800 unemployed young people in Quebec. Now there are 86,600. That is 12,800 more unemployed youth in Quebec. Here is my suggestion for the minister.

Instead of cutting the number of summer jobs, why not increase it? Will the minister create at least 12,100 summer jobs in Quebec this year, as was done in 2006?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Mr. Speaker, this summer, over 30,000 students will have summer jobs thanks to our Canada summer jobs program.

We are also helping students find jobs in many other ways, and we have created over 3,000 internships for students in this budget. The Liberals should support them.

The Environment

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources and his sidekick the Minister of the Environment ought to read the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's scientific report.

In a letter sent to the State Department yesterday, the EPA was hugely critical of the analysis of the Keystone XL project. Keystone XL would increase greenhouse gas emissions in the United States by 19 million metric tonnes a year.

Does the Minister of Natural Resources agree with this report?

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, our government respects the U.S. process and we remain hopeful that Keystone XL will be approved on its merits. Canada is the environmental choice to meet the U.S. demand for energy. The approval of Keystone XL would create jobs, economic prosperity and energy security for both our countries. We will continue to pursue opportunities to diversify markets as a strategic priority.

Why is the NDP always looking for ways to oppose this job-creating project?

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, it was days ago that the Minister of Natural Resources was dismissing climate concerns. He said, “I think that people aren’t as worried as they were before about global warming of two degrees”.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has now joined the chorus of people who disagree with the minister. The EPA says that over a 50-year period, extra emissions associated with Keystone XL could be as much as 935 million metric tons.

Does the Minister of Natural Resources accept this scientific assessment of the EPA?

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, it is a scientific fact that the oil sands represent one one-thousandth of global emissions and the Keystone XL pipeline would represent less than half of that.

What the focus should be on is coal, which represents in the United States over 30 times the emissions that the oil sands represent. As we know, Dr. Andrew Weaver said that the total impact on global warming of the oil sands would be 3% of 1° in 300 years.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Speaker, one fact is clear. We stand up for science and the Conservatives vote against science every time.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was so worried about this pipeline that it said the State Department study was insufficient. It got an F. This is the same study that the minister was praising. The Conservatives' utter failure to address climate impacts is causing major problems in the U.S.

Natural resources are important for our economy. When will the minister recognize that denying the dangers of climate change is actually very bad for business and is bad for Canada?

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, we have said, repeatedly, that we will not go ahead with any project that is not safe for Canadians and safe for the environment. Why is the NDP is opposing a project before it has received final environmental review?

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear: the Conservatives' ignorance is hurting our economy. They are still lacking the political will to regulate greenhouse gas emissions in the oil and gas sectors at a time when our most important trading partner is wondering if our oil is worth it.

When will the Conservatives put regulations in place to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? When will they make polluters pay? When will they finally start to take responsibility?