House of Commons Hansard #240 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was environment.

Topics

Employment InsuranceOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Employment InsuranceOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

The hon. Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development.

Employment InsuranceOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Haldimand—Norfolk Ontario

Conservative

Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Skills Development

Mr. Speaker, budget 2013 has helped create jobs and develop the skills necessary to fill these jobs.

We will continue to work with the provinces and territories to introduce new programs, such as the Canada job grant, to connect people with available jobs.

EmploymentOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, at the risk of committing sociology, which I know has now joined the list of cardinal sins among the Conservative cabinet ministers, I wonder if the minister responsible could please explain the answer to a simple question.

When youth unemployment is getting worse, which it clearly is and we can show the statistics that prove that, why is the government actually spending less on its programs to help young people find a job?

EmploymentOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam B.C.

Conservative

James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is free to commit sociology any day he likes. It is a lovely expression of, I know, his desire to study these things.

When it comes to youth unemployment in this country, of course it is very important. Supporting Canada's youth is something we have taken seriously with regard to programming and with regard to tax policy. As a matter of fact, since 2007 when we formed government, 400,000 Canadian youth have received apprenticeship grants from our government, but in budget 2013 we take it a step further. Not only do we have the apprenticeship grants, but now we have the Canada jobs grants. We want our youth to have the skills necessary, but now match them with the jobs by those who are creating jobs in the private sector. We are working together with the private sector and with other levels of government to ensure that our kids do have that prosperous future.

EmploymentOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, the government can create as many programs as it wants, but the facts of the matter remain, and that is the problem.

The problem is that unemployment is still higher among youth. The statistics are very clear; nobody can argue with the facts. Nevertheless, the Conservatives are spending less money to tackle this problem. Why?

EmploymentOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam B.C.

Conservative

James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

Mr. Speaker, we will have to agree to disagree. They think the equation is very simple: spend more money; get results. It is not as simple as that.

We have to invest money effectively and responsibly to get results for our young people. That is what we are doing.

Budget 2013 introduces a new program to work with the private sector and people who create jobs in order to get the jobs that our young people need.

That is what we are doing. This is an effective and responsible program that is guaranteed to produce results for our young people.

Foreign AffairsOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, intelligence officials, both in Israel and in the United States, have stated publicly today and over the last two days that they believe there is a very good possibility that chemical weapons have been used against the civilian population in Syria. I am sure all members of the House regard this as an enormously serious problem and a great challenge to the whole world.

Can the government please tell us what Canada now intends to do when faced with this growing body of evidence?

Foreign AffairsOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Calgary East Alberta

Conservative

Deepak Obhrai ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, we are very much concerned with these reports, and remain in close contact with our allies. Our government has been consistently very clear on this issue. The international community will not tolerate the use of chemical weapons by Assad on the Syrian people. Ultimately, Assad and his supporters will be held accountable.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

April 25th, 2013 / 2:30 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, newspapers around the world, from The New York Times to The Guardian, refer to the Minister of Natural Resources as Canada's oil minister.

That is understandable, since he denies the threat of climate change. All that matters to him is selling oil at any cost. He is even willing to sell control of our natural resources to the Chinese government.

Canadians deserve better than successive governments that deny that climate change exists.

When are the Conservatives going to stop denying that climate change exists and put in place real sustainable development policies?

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Thornhill Ontario

Conservative

Peter Kent ConservativeMinister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, it has been fascinating today to watch the New Democrats and the Liberals squabble over which opposition party has done or will do less to address climate change.

Our government is the first Canadian government to actually reduce greenhouse gases. We have decoupled emissions from economic growth. We have increased penalties for those found guilty of breaking our environmental laws. We have implemented a world-class monitoring system of the oil sands, and launched a web portal to allow scientists and all Canadians to look in.

Our government can balance protection of the environment with protection of the economy.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, that desperate spin does not hide the fact that only the NDP has sustainable policies and that is why Canadians need an NDP government in 2015. Conservatives failed in the climate change fight. They failed to make polluters pay for the pollution they create, they failed on a balanced approach to resource development, and Conservatives are happy to leave the bill to future generations. Canadians deserve better.

Will the minister stop denying climate change, start acknowledging the danger in the rise in global temperatures, and support the NDP motion to combat climate change now?

The EnvironmentOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Thornhill Ontario

Conservative

Peter Kent ConservativeMinister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources has made it clear on any number of occasions in any number of venues just how important this government considers the climate change challenge to be. At the same time, the NDP would pick the pockets of hard-working Canadians with a $21-billion carbon tax. That would not guarantee the reduction of a single megatonne of greenhouse gases.

Our government has a plan. The NDP has no plan, other than to exploit hard-working Canadians.

Fisheries and OceansOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Robert Chisholm NDP Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

Mr. Speaker, that kind of attitude is not going to help us deal with global warming in this country.

The government is also walking away from its fisheries responsibilities. In the midst of the public outcry over Bill C-38, the government claimed it “consulted with fishermen”, but now we learn that the people it consulted with were the oil and gas, mining, and nuclear power companies. Not one fisheries organization did it consult with.

I want to ask the minister, will he come clean and admit to Canadians who he is really looking after?

Fisheries and OceansOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission B.C.

Conservative

Randy Kamp ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and for the Asia-Pacific Gateway

Mr. Speaker, the changes to the Fisheries Act that Parliament made last year are common sense changes to focus DFO on the protection of commercial, recreational, and aboriginal fisheries through the management of the threats that they face. The degradation of habitat is one of those and we are engaging in a process to put in place a policy and a regulatory framework to support those.

Fisheries and OceansOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

NDP

Robert Chisholm NDP Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

The point is, Mr. Speaker, Conservatives are not being straight with Canadians. That is the fact.

Former Conservative fisheries minister Tom Siddon reminded the minister that protecting our fisheries is his only job. The minister has put coastal and rural communities at risk by sabotaging the most basic protections for our fisheries. He then misled Canadians about who he has consulted.

I want to ask the government, when will the minister start doing his job and stand up for the women and men who depend on the fishery and the coastal and rural communities that rely on it?

Fisheries and OceansOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission B.C.

Conservative

Randy Kamp ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and for the Asia-Pacific Gateway

I am surprised, Mr. Speaker, that the member would be opposed to focusing DFO on the protection of Canada's commercial, recreational, and aboriginal fisheries. That is exactly what we did in Bill C-38 and Bill C-45 and we are continuing to focus on that. As we put together the policy framework to support those changes, we are engaging and talking to our key stakeholders.

EthicsOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, at least things are crystal clear: the Conservatives always side with big oil, while the NDP supports workers, fishers and families.

The former Conservative minister from Newfoundland and Labrador Peter Penashue boasted about having held up a project in Newfoundland, and not just any project: the replacement of an outdated and dangerous bridge. He tried to create divisions that would serve him, while putting the safety of motorists in danger. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador deserve better. They deserve a change and that change is coming.

Do the Conservatives think it is okay for a minister to use a crucial, priority project to engage in political blackmail?

EthicsOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should read the entire article.

He sourced an article in the newspaper, of course, for his allegation and if he had read down, he would have found the following quote:

The provincial government, it maintains, does not know of any hold up on approval of the Sir Robert Bond Bridge project. An email statement from a transportation and work spokeswoman stated, “The Department of Transportation and Works is not aware of any delays with the approval of the bridge project by the federal government”.

I would encourage the hon. member to read beyond the headline and start to understand the facts.

EthicsOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

NDP

Ryan Cleary NDP St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL

Mr. Speaker, more of the same doublespeak from Ottawa Conservatives, the worst type of Conservatives. Not only is the disgraced former minister, Peter Penashue, pitting the good people of Bishop's Falls against Labradorians and holding the Sir Robert Bond Bridge hostage, he even has the audacity to brag about it. Worse, no one in the government has distanced themselves one iota from this despicable, divisive behaviour.

Is there really no one on that side who will renounce this contemptuous behaviour and attempt to divide the people of my province?

EthicsOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, I resent very much that terrible verbal assault against me. Surely, we can raise the debate in this House of Commons.

We have one member over there who was forced to apologize, but only did it on Facebook, for denigrating our veterans. Another member over there denigrated the role of our courageous sealers on the east coast and across remote communities in Canada. Then they have the audacity to stand up and hurl insults like that. Canadians deserve better and that is why our government is delivering.

National DefenceOral Questions

2:35 p.m.

NDP

Élaine Michaud NDP Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' attitude on this file is unacceptable, just as unacceptable as the attitude of the Minister of National Defence who refuses to answer any questions regarding why soldiers posted in Mazar-e-Sharif do not receive the same danger pay as those posted in Kabul. Once again, the minister refuses to accept responsibility. He blames his public servants, as though he had absolutely no control over his department.

After the lesson he learned yesterday from the House Leader of the Official Opposition, can the Minister of National Defence now explain why he is not treating all soldiers posted in Afghanistan equally?

National DefenceOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, let me repeat again for the member and for the House how this works. Each mission's hardship and risk levels are set and reviewed on a regular basis by a committee composed of officials from the Canadian Armed Forces, a representative of the RCMP, and the Treasury Board. The committee has delegated authority from the Treasury Board. It was the result of an intervention by the government, where we publicly called on the committee to review its hardship and risk assessment.

However, let us look at the record. What the Conservatives have done is consistently advocate on behalf of the Canadian military, both in opposition and in government and we acted on that in government. What we see from the NDP is it votes against the military increases every time.

National DefenceOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

NDP

Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL

Mr. Speaker, the minister has been exposed. Everyone now knows he voted against the troops when he was in opposition. He voted against $49 million for anti-terrorism and against $600,000 for war veterans. Of course this is unfair, but it is just as unfair as every single one of his hypocritical attacks on the NDP.

Here is another chance for the minister to provide a straightforward and honest answer. Why are our soldiers in Mazar-e-Sharif receiving less danger pay than our soldiers in Kabul and when is he going to put a stop to this?

National DefenceOral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Conservative

Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, as I have just explained, this is not a political decision, it is a decision taken by officials, including military officials.

Let us look at the record. Conservatives advocated in opposition and voted for increases in the military. The NDP, on the other hand, in opposition continued to vote against the interests and increases for military spending. We in government have increased spending with respect to trucks, trains, planes, systems, and purchases of new ships, advocacy that allows for programs for the military to continue to increase. The NDP members consistently vote against those increases.