Debates of June 6th, 2013

Aboriginal Affairs

[Jonathan Genest-Jourdain, NDP, Manicouagan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives just lost another member of their caucus, but that has not stopped them from avoiding being held accountable.

While the Conservatives just announced new cuts to funding for aboriginal organizations, which will affect health programs in particular, a study released today on suicide risk factors in Nunavut shows that the suicide rate there is 10 times higher than the Canadian average.

How can the minister think these new cuts put him in a better position to deal with this crisis?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, if the member did not rely on notes prepared by others, he would know that those announcements were made in September 2012, which was quite a while ago.

The answer is the same. We want to ensure that project funding—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order. The hon. Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, we want to ensure that project funding for aboriginal organizations is focused on the delivery of essential services and programs in key areas such as education, economic development and community infrastructure. That is what we will continue to do.

Food Safety

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, since the outbreak of E. coli at Brooks, Alberta, Liberals have been telling the Minister of Agriculture that it was triggered by inadequately trained CFIA inspection staff, a failure to exercise CFIA oversight responsibility at the plant and inadequate inspection practices. These facts are now confirmed by the independent review of the XL crisis.

Would the minister finally agree with these findings, and by when will he implement all the report's recommendations? Canadians deserve to know a date.

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the question from the member opposite, because it gives me a chance, again, to say we accept all of the recommendations. We thank the panellists for the great work they did.

We will continue to bolster the CFIA in its food safety regime. We continue to do that through budget after budget. We have added 20% to the personnel. Of course, we are focused on making sure that we improve the inspection regime with education. We strengthened food safety rules, and we improved the communication to Canadian consumers. We are getting the job done.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, what date? This is the second major food outbreak on the minister's watch, and nobody believes food safety is his foremost priority. The report's primary finding was that the E. coli outbreak was entirely preventable and that it was a lack of a strong food safety culture at the CFIA that directly led to the outbreak.

It is time for the minister to overcome his contempt for transparency. Does he finally have the decency to apologize to Canadians and immediately call for an independent, comprehensive audit of the CFIA's resources, which should have been done years ago?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, of course, we welcome suggestions from everyone on how to bolster our food safety system. The panel also noted that generally, both food safety governance and management of this incident were sound.

CFIA is doing its due diligence. It is continuing to work on lessons learned from this particular incident, but I am happy to tell Canadians that the incidence of this particular type of E. coli is down some 60% from what it was just a short time ago.

Access to Information

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a very simple question for the Prime Minister.

Why did the government amend Bill C-461 in order to hide information on salaries under $480,000?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, in fact, all salary ranges for public servants are already disclosed. That being said, we have expanded access to information to an additional 70 agencies and crown corporations, including the CBC.

Nobody has done more for transparency than this government.

Member for Edmonton—St. Albert

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last night, the PMO spokesperson was making up new policy on Twitter. He said that byelections are needed when a member leaves a caucus, even to become an independent. But when the Conservatives had an opportunity to support my bill to ban floor-crossers and force them to face byelections, the Conservatives opposed it. They welcomed David Emerson and Wajid Khan when they betrayed their constituents to join the Conservative caucus.

Let us try. Will the Conservatives now support the NDP's bill to ban the practice of floor-crossing, yes or no?

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Edmonton—St. Albert did resign from caucus, and the people of Edmonton—St. Albert did elect a Conservative MP. The member himself said just a month and a half ago on one of his blogs, “I'm elected as a Conservative Member of Parliament. My constituents expect me to support the prime minister and the cabinet”.

We do think he should do the right thing by him and by his constituents: run in a byelection as an independent.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

[Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, Conservative, Miramichi, NB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday Radio-Canada announced a rebranding campaign that would remove the word “Canada” from its name.

Can the Minister of Canadian Heritage please tell the House what our government thinks of this change?

[James Moore, Conservative, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

I spoke with the president of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation today and made it very clear that Canada's public broadcaster should be obviously Canadian.

In the Broadcasting Act, Canada's public broadcaster's name is the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation; in French, Société Radio-Canada.

I said to Hubert Lacroix, the president of the CBC, today that Canadian taxpayers will support a Canadian public broadcaster only if it ensures that the Canadian public broadcaster is Canadian in content, in name, in both official languages, in every part of this country.

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is on the same subject.

We were very disappointed to learn that Radio-Canada, the CBC French-language service, will be dropping its traditional designation and rebranding itself as “ICI”. This institution, widely known to all francophones and francophiles across Canada and around the world, has been with us and informing us for decades.

As the minister said, and we are very proud of it, will he stand by his position that this decision can be reversed?

[James Moore, Conservative, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, I know it is always difficult to ask a question that was just answered, but I appreciate my colleague's support on this.

As I just said in English, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Société Radio-Canada in French, is Canada's public broadcaster. It must carry clearly Canadian content in Canada's two official languages in every part of this country.

It must be proudly Canadian in content and in name, period.

Agriculture and Agri-Food

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the community pasture program is a 75-year-old success story of resource conservation that helped smaller western farmers thrive in the face of market uncertainty and that conserved threatened grasslands.

Saskatchewan farmers want the pastures saved, and they fear the lands will fall into the hands of speculators. They just need time to pursue options. Will the Minister of Agriculture commit to stopping the sell-off and support farmer-led efforts to save these lands critical to their livelihood?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, that is the exact procedure that is in play. It is a six-year transition. The land has always and will continue to belong to the Government of Saskatchewan and the Governments of Alberta and Manitoba.

We have never owned that land. We simply managed it when those provinces did not have the resources to do it. They certainly do now in that they run their own pastures. They are now going to take over the management of these lands as well, and we welcome that.

Justice

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the previous Liberal government instituted a justice system that put a greater emphasis on the rights of criminals than on the rights of victims. Our government promised to change that.

To further stand up for victims, I introduced Bill C-478, the respecting families of murdered and brutalized persons act. This bill would give judges the discretion to increase the parole ineligibility period for murderers who abduct, rape and brutally kill their victims. Unfortunately, the opposition refused to put victims first.

Could the Minister of Justice please reiterate the government's position on my bill and its reaction to yesterday's vote?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the opposition parties are always trying to hide the fact that they are soft on crime. Over the years, there is no end to the excuses as to why they vote against legislation that would better protect victims. Yesterday was certainly no different.

This legislation will end repeated parole hearings for Canada's most violent and dangerous criminals, ensuring that victims are not constantly re-victimized by their own criminal justice system. I am proud that our government always puts victims first. Why is it so impossible for the Liberals and the NDP to do the same thing?

Health

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Quebec Stevedoring, the Port of Québec and the Minister of Transport are passing the buck and trying to find out who is to blame for the dust that is falling on Limoilou.

Now Quebec City is to blame because its hydrants do not have enough pressure.

When will the minister come to Quebec City to see how badly the port, for which he, as minister, is responsible—and I mean responsible—needs federal investment to update its facilities in order to protect public health?

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable. Now the water pressure in Quebec City's water system is the federal government's responsibility.

The hon. member absolutely does not understand how this works. Does he think we needed an invitation from an NDP MP to go to the Port of Québec? That happened a long time ago.

He met with the representatives of the port in April and they explained everything to him. He said he was satisfied, but today he still does not get it. If he cannot figure this out, then let him come see me and I will explain it to him.

The Environment

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

Mr. Speaker, in 2001, the Prime Minister wrote a famous letter to the former premier of Alberta in which he urged him to act “to limit the extent to which an aggressive and hostile federal government can encroach upon legitimate provincial jurisdiction”. Six days ago, the provincial government of British Columbia said no to the Enbridge project. It said that Enbridge had completely failed to demonstrate any evidence that it knew how to clean up a spill or even knew what would happen with the bitumen and diluent.

Will the Prime Minister confirm that under no circumstances will the federal government become the aggressive and hostile government that approves a project as long British Columbians say no?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the project in question, of course, is subject to a joint review panel process. Obviously, we believe in the rule of law and in adjudicating these things based on scientific and policy concerns. The government will obviously withhold its decision on the matter until we see the results of the panel and its work.