Debates of May 21st, 2013

Nuclear Terrorism Act

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we agree to apply the vote and the NDP will vote in favour of the motion.

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals agree to apply and will vote yes.

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc is in favour of the motion.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Green Party will be voting yes.

[Peter Goldring, Independent, Edmonton East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will be voting yes.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #684

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I declare the motion carried.

(Bill read the third time and passed)

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons With Disabilities

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the concurrence motion.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #685

Committees of the House

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I declare the motion carried.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Airport Security

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to pursue a question I first asked on February 15, which is in relation to the loss of RCMP services at a number of class 2 airports in British Columbia and elsewhere. The response I got from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety at the time was that the deployment of RCMP assets was an operational decision of the RCMP and not related to a decision of this particular administration.

It is a loss for the airport in Victoria, which is actually in Sidney, B.C. in my riding. The presence of these RCMP officers was enormously helpful. With dedicated RCMP officers at the Victoria airport, there was coverage seven days a week. Now if there are problems at the airport, the local RCMP detachment based in Sidney would have to juggle other calls and demands in order to come to the airport. It is a busy airport and the RCMP presence was very important for security.

As well, the RCMP presence was withdrawn from Kelowna. Although Kelowna is in quite a spectacularly beautiful part of Canada, in the Okanagan, it happens to be, according to security experts with whom I have consulted, something of a thoroughfare for the smuggling of drugs and weapons. It is in an area where there are significant markets in northern Alberta and, without the RCMP detachment at the Kelowna airport, there is a concern that there will be an increase in drug dealing and other offences.

This comes at the same time as significant cutbacks in border security agents. According to the union representing the border guards, the Canada Border Services Agency has had cuts of up to 1,000 people. A lot of us saw the news coverage of the loss of the canine division, which was very efficient, effective and accurate at detecting the presence of illicit drugs and narcotics and so forth at borders. We have lost the canine division, we have lost the workforce of Canada Border Services agents who worked with that canine force, and we are losing security along the Canada–U.S. border at the same time that these cutbacks at the RCMP have lost us protection in our airports.

I have to say that I find this rather baffling, coming from an administration that has fashioned itself as being tough on crime and as being one that wants to protect Canada and Canadians from the threats of violent crime and the threats of illegal and illicit activity. This is in fact not just affecting particularly the Canada Border Services agents, not just affecting so-called backroom arrangements, agents and operations, but actually will affect the front-line operations of border security agents in such a way that the president of the union feels that smugglers will get the upper hand.

It really would be appropriate for the federal government to revisit these ill-advised cuts and to restore and replace the presence of RCMP officers in the class 2 airports, such as in Victoria and in Kelowna, and at the same time to revisit the cutting of border security agents. These are ill-conceived cuts that will cause far more damage through the loss of security than they can possibly gain in austerity.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands for providing me with the opportunity to respond to some of her concerns. Like other police services across Canada, the RCMP in British Columbia provides on-site policing at airports. Airport security in Canada is designated into three tiers across the country.

Tier 1 includes larger airports with policing detachments such as Toronto, Montreal, Calgary, Vancouver and similar other larger centres. The policing detachment in each tier 1 airport is provided by the police of the jurisdiction in that municipality where the airport is located.

Tier 2 airports are located in medium-sized municipalities that include cities like Kelowna or Victoria.

Tier 3 airports are located in small communities across Canada and do not have dedicated police presence as part of their security measures.

Security assessment of all airports is a continuous effort of Transport Canada.

The funding for airport security measures is paid directly by Transport Canada to the airport authorities and the municipality.

The RCMP provision of policing services under contract is conducted through co-operation with the municipality and the chief operating officer in each airport.

Total security operations for each airport include various measures, for example, perimeter fencing, employee security passes and controlled access zones. Budget allocations by Transport Canada are based on the assessment to determine the risks and need for security at each airport.

In 2012, Transport Canada estimated that existing security measures as a whole at tier 2 airports, including Kelowna and Victoria, other than dedicated police officers and detachments, were sufficient to ensure public safety at these airports.

We have confidence in Transport Canada's assessment that the overall security package at Canadian airports, including Kelowna and Victoria, provide maximum security and safety measures for all Canadians. Let me assure the House that the policing presence at Kelowna and Victoria airports is ongoing through routine patrols and by responding to all emergency 911 calls for service.

With that being said, I thank the member for her query and I now anticipate her follow-up.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, certainly when we lost the RCMP presence at the Victoria airport, the Victoria Airport Authority said it found the presence of the RCMP extremely important to the airport. It is hard to quantify the benefit of having officers present because, as the airport authority officials noted at the time in the Times Colonist, their mere presence at the airport may in fact have offset and prevented crimes from occurring.

With all respect to the hon. parliamentary secretary, I suggest to him that his three tiers are not enough. We have to have airport security as a priority and border security as a priority. When the unions that represent border service agents say they think smugglers will get the upper hand, Canadians should be worried.

When the RCMP officers are pulled from our airports for austerity reasons, I think we should all be concerned. It is a small amount of prudence for a large amount of benefit.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the RCMP as the police of jurisdiction will continue a police presence at the Kelowna and Victoria airports with routine patrols and in response to 911 emergency calls for service. I assure the member that the RCMP is well equipped, well trained and well positioned to continue to carry out this essential function. We will support our national police force in so doing.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

Order. Pursuant to Standing Order 81(4), the motion to adjourn the House is deemed to have been withdrawn, and the House will now go into committee of the whole for the purpose of considering votes under Natural Resources in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2014.

I will now leave the chair for the House to resolve itself into Committee of the Whole.

[For continuation of proceedings see part B]

[Continuation of proceedings from part A]

(Consideration in committee of the whole of all votes under Natural Resources in the main estimates, Mr. Joe Comartin, in the chair)

Natural Resources—Main Estimates, 2013-14

[The Chair, NDP, Joe Comartin]

Tonight's debate is a general one on all of the votes under Natural Resources. Each member will be allocated 15 minutes.

The first round will begin with the official opposition, followed by the government and then the Liberal Party. After that, we will follow the usual proportional rotation.

As provided in the motion adopted earlier today, parties may use each 15-minute slot for speeches or questions and answers by one or more of their members. In the case of speeches, members of the party to which the period is allotted may speak one after the other.

The chair would appreciate it if the first member speaking in each slot would indicate how the time will be used, particularly if it is to be shared.

When the time is to be used for questions and answers, the Chair will expect that the minister's response will reflect approximately the time taken by the question. Members need not be in their own seats to be recognized.

I also wish to indicate that in committee of the whole, all remarks should be addressed through the Chair, and I ask for everyone's co-operation in upholding the standards of parliamentary language and behaviour.

Finally, I would remind hon. members that according to the motion adopted earlier today, during the evening's debate no quorum calls, dilatory motions or requests for unanimous consent shall be received by the chair.

We may now begin tonight's session.

The House, in committee of the whole, pursuant to Standing Order 81(4)(a), the second appointed day, consideration in committee of the whole of all votes under Natural Resources in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2014.

The hon. member for Burnaby—New Westminster.

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

Mr. Chair, I would like to let you know right off the bat that I will be using my full 15 minutes for questions. We have lots of questions.

I will start with the minister. The information from the Parliamentary Budget Officer's integrated monitoring database shows that by the third quarter of the last fiscal year the department had spent 108% of its budget for internal services, the so-called back office expenses.

Can the minister tell us what the total amount of overspending on back office services was in the last fiscal year, and if money is being used from these estimates to cover the gap?

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to point out that we are the first government in Canadian history to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Canada is now halfway towards our goal of reducing emissions by 17% by 2020.

While our economy grew over the last six years, our emissions have decreased. Expanded protection of parks in Canada has been increased by 50%. We have created the world's largest freshwater protected area, Lake Superior. We have expanded Canada's green conservation area by over 10 times. We have increased pipeline inspections and audits. New fines have been imposed for companies that break environmental laws. We have strengthened—

[The Chair, NDP, Joe Comartin]

Minister, the time allocated for your speech has to correspond with roughly the same length as what was received from the questioner. We will go back to the hon. member for Burnaby—New Westminster.

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

Mr. Chair, I hope the minister does not continue to not respond to a very simple question that he should be capable of answering.

I will give him an easier question. What is the department's budget for advertising for the 2013-14 fiscal year? I would like a response, not a speech.

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Chair, this is a critical moment in the development of our natural resources, and therefore we have allocated a significant amount of money for advertising. Under vote 1, the main estimates for this year, the number is $16.5 million.

It is common practice for governments to use advertising and public information to communicate with Canadians. Providing Canadians with the facts helps them to make informed decisions. This is a fact-based ad.