Debates of Dec. 7th, 2015

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Sherbrooke and congratulate him on his election victory in that riding.

Our position has been clear from the beginning of the election campaign, and nothing has changed. We proposed a moratorium on the installation of community mailboxes and we will examine possible solutions going forward with Canada Post.

[Arnold Chan, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Mr. Speaker, let me first congratulate you on the assumption of your role in the chair. I look forward to working with you, along with all hon. members, in your new role.

Let me also congratulate the member for LaSalle—Émard—Verdun on your election and for your maiden speech in the House. As you noted in your speech, you will have very big shoes to fill, given the predecessors who have occupied your riding in the past.

As I was listening to your speech, I noted that you gave a very colourful description that shared with all members what a wonderful riding you represent. In many ways, it reflects my riding of Scarborough—Agincourt.

Related to his discussion on public infrastructure, in particular public transit, how does the hon. member see that unfolding in a way that would allow less reliance on cars and movement toward a greener, more prosperous way to move our residents around?

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I thank the hon. member for Scarborough—Agincourt for his kind remarks in his opening. I would remind all hon. members that when they are directing comments that they direct them to the chair and use the third person when referring to other hon. members.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Scarborough—Agincourt for his warm congratulations, and I return them in kind.

LaSalle—Émard—Verdun is on the fringe of the city and the suburbs. Therefore, anything we can do to increase rapid transit, train service, bus service, or extend and improve the metro, will help to reduce car traffic and increase our greening of Montreal. Those are precisely the kinds of infrastructure investments that the riding needs.

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Calgary Signal Hill.

Yesterday was a day of remembrance to commemorate what happened at École Polytechnique in Montreal, and I would like to recognize the women who were the victims of that terrible event. It is important for everyone to remember that on December 6, 1989, our lives were once again marked by tragedy. I thought it was important to remind everyone before I begin my speech.

I also want to thank the voters in the beautiful riding of Lac-Saint-Jean, which used to be Roberval and later became Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean. They have placed their trust in me for a fourth time.

As the official opposition, we welcome the openness announced by the new government. I want to congratulate the government and give our assurance that we will work with it in the interest of the Canadian public. Of course we are ready to get to work in the House to advance the issues, to keep taxes low for Canadians, and to put more money back into their pockets.

However, we are concerned about what we heard in the throne speech because many of the Liberal government's promises could end up costing Canadians a lot of money. We agree with the new government that the voices of all Canadians matter. That is why we will be the voice of Canadian families and taxpayers in Parliament and why we will hold the government to account on its policies, which will most certainly result in tax hikes for families and more debt for future generations, as well as centralization of power in Ottawa at the expense of provincial jurisdiction.

We will request that the government explain, in an open and transparent manner, how it intends to manage the economy. The Liberals must explain to Canadians how they will pay for all of the promises they have made.

Already the Liberals have announced that they will not respect their own $10-billion deficit limit. The government must be transparent with Canadians and tell them exactly how large a deficit it wants to run and for how long.

That is particularly important because reports like the one from the C.D. Howe Institute—which was, until recently, run by the Minister of Finance—are already suggesting that changes to federal taxation might make it difficult for national tax revenue to cover the cost of keeping those promises.

There could be a shortfall of more than $4 billion over and above the deficit that was already announced. We will see how this turns out, but we cannot spend money we do not have. When people spend more than they earn, sooner or later the bank will come get the keys to the car or the house. That is exactly what those people want to do.

The Conservative Party has always been in favour of low taxes, cost cutting, and sound economic management. Under our government, federal tax revenues relative to GDP were at their lowest level since the Second World War, over 50 years ago.

The government has laid out its plan for the coming years. We will make sure it also has a plan that includes a return to a balanced budget, as promised.

Not only are the new government's many commitments terribly short on economic and fiscal details, but a number of the commitments on infrastructure, education, and health fall under provincial jurisdiction.

I just listened to my colleague talk about infrastructure in his riding. Everything he talked about falls under provincial jurisdiction. The provinces own 93% of the infrastructure in the country. As usual, the Liberals want to interfere in provincial matters and have everything centralized in Ottawa.

Our Conservative government has always maintained solid co-operation and great respect in its relations with the provinces, practising an open federalism. In this respect, we are the only party that honours the spirit of our Constitution and the founding principles of our Confederation.

We are also the only party that made sustained and significant increases to the transfers to the provinces. Our government made sure that equalization payments will continue to grow in relation to the economy.

Under the Conservative government, federal transfers increased by 63% between 2006 and 2015. It is that unparalleled support through the equalization program and the Canada health and social transfers that allowed the provinces to respond appropriately to the needs of their citizens.

What we saw in the Speech from the Throne indicates that the Liberal government's planned spending will most certainly lead to falling revenues for the provinces, and that it also intends to pursue its long tradition of centralizing power in Ottawa against the interests of the provinces.

It is incredible to see that the speech makes no mention of agriculture. How can the Liberal government claim to represent the voice of all Canadians and not make a single mention of the agricultural community?

Canada's agriculture and agri-food sector contributes more than $100 billion to Canada's economy and employs more than two million people. It is the backbone of the Canadian economy. The quality of life of Canadian communities big and small from coast to coast depends on agriculture. That includes helping farmers penetrate new markets through free trade agreements such as the trans-Pacific partnership, which the new government must ratify as soon as possible.

We know that our farmers and their products can compete with the best in the world. We are therefore urging the government to pursue our party's work and defend our farmers' interests.

The Liberal government's reluctance to support Canadian businesses by ratifying the historic TPP is alarming. This agreement is one of the excellent legacies of the previous Conservative government. It opens up some of the largest markets to Canadian businesses and will lead to the quickest growth in the world. Every sector of the Canadian economy will benefit from the TPP, including the forestry industry, which our government always vigorously supported. In the Speech from the Throne, the forestry industry was conspicuous by its absence.

It is also notable that there was no mention of ISIS in the throne speech. How can the government increase Canadians' security, as it has promised, if it does not recognize one of the greatest threats to that security?

ISIS has demonstrated its ability to carry out attacks around the world and has repeatedly called upon its members to target Canadians at home and abroad.

At a time when our allies are strengthening their resolve to defeat this terrorist group, we must stand side by side with our partners. Canada must remain a contributing member of the international coalition's air bombing campaign.

We continue to urge the Liberal government to reconsider its decision and ensure that the Royal Canadian Air Force remains engaged in the fight against ISIS.

We are ready to work respectfully with all of our colleagues in the interest of all Canadians. However, our new government must know that we will be watching it very closely.

We will be carefully monitoring the situation.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate listening to the member's comments. One thing that crossed my mind is that if we were to canvass Canadians, we would find that they are very concerned about Canada's economy. They want us to be moving forward, which is something the Harper government was not successful at doing.

The question that I have—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please. I know we are starting a new Parliament. The hon. member may realize that we do not use members' given names in the House. The hon. member for Calgary still sits in this place. I would ask the hon. member to respect that.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I do apologize.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please. The hon. member would generally stay seated while I'm standing in my place. We will get started again once I recognize the hon. member.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Again, my apologies, Mr. Speaker.

The point is that if we want to drive Canada's economy, we have to invest in the middle class. A healthy middle class means that we have a healthier economy.

I wonder if the member might recognize that by supporting the Liberal Party's initiative to reduce the taxes for Canada's middle class it would give strength to our middle class, thereby giving more jobs for the Canadian economy. We would all benefit when that type of action takes place.

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when we lowered taxes on income, we did it for the whole population. When we set in place a system to help families with kids, we did it for all families.

The Liberals are already cherry-picking. They are deciding which part of the population they want to help in order to get votes. That is not the way we want to work.

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank the member for the speech that he gave here today as our deputy leader. We are very proud of his leadership. He will work with our interim leader.

Already in the newspapers, we are seeing that the Liberals have conceded to flaws in the fiscal plan. They have talked about a secure and dignified retirement, yet they announced today that they are going to cut back on the tax-free savings account, where individuals were able to save and watch their retirement fund grow tax free. We see that the government wants to tax those who are successful and prosperous, and who are, in many cases, job creators.

I wonder if the hon. deputy leader would tell us the importance of a secure and dignified retirement, and why the tax-free savings account was such an important plan for over 11 million Canadians, most of whom are either in the low- or middle-income brackets.

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have heard ideology in many questions and comments since the beginning of this session. In the past, the Conservative government preferred to put more money back in the population's pocket, instead of deciding on its behalf. That is how we were managing the economy.

What my friend and a former minister of the last government is talking about is how we decided to put more money in the population's pocket, helping people have a savings account where they could save on taxes, and the Liberals have decided otherwise. We will see what they do.

We have not yet seen what this government will introduce. However, it is clear that putting more money in Canadians' pockets is part of our DNA. We have always believed that Canadians are just as intelligent as we are, if not more so, when it comes to managing money, including the money paid out under the universal child care benefit and the money we helped them put in tax-free savings accounts. It seems that this new government wants to make those decisions for Canadians.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to stand in this House today as the newly elected member for Calgary Signal Hill. I will talk a bit about the riding in a few minutes. Before I do that, I would like congratulate you, Mr. Speaker, the member for Simcoe North, and the member for Halifax West for your new roles in this assembly in trying to ensure that we maintain those so-called sunny ways referred to by our leader this morning. I would also like to congratulate all 337 of my colleagues who were successful on October 19. We all know that it was a long campaign and it is truly an honour to be representing our constituents. Congratulations to each one of us.

I would like to take a moment and talk about my constituency of Calgary Signal Hill and the support that I received and continue to receive from my family and the volunteers of my constituency. I was fortunate to have sat in the provincial legislative assembly of Alberta for two terms, and those same volunteers and constituents were there when I asked for their support on October 19. I am extremely grateful.

Calgary Signal Hill is a riding that has a new name, but it is primarily made up of the former riding of Calgary West. It has always been a Conservative riding, but we have a little different representation today than we may have had in the past. I look forward to working with each member to ensure that our constituents feel as though they are represented in this House.

On November 11, I participated in the celebrations at Battalion Park. For those who do not know, our constituency of Signal Hill is one of the many foothill ridings I have the pleasure of representing. However, 100 years ago our young troops were being assembled at Camp Sarcee, by the Elbow River. Prior to leaving our country, they had a remembrance of the battles they were going off to fight. They carried 16,000 stones all painted white and marked across the side of Signal Hill. The numbers on the side of Signal Hill are 137, 113, 151, and 51, which are the battalions of those soldiers who went off to war, many of whom did not come back.

We celebrated on November 11 not only to recognize the contributions our soldiers made to preserve the freedom that we enjoy here today but also to recognize the 100th anniversary of this park. There is an initiative to designate it as a national historic site. I would ask the government to seriously consider endorsing this initiative to declare Battalion Park a national historic site.

Standing there on November 11, I just could not help thinking about those soldiers who gave up their lives for the freedom we enjoy today, and then turn that clock ahead 100 years when we have a government that is steadfastly refusing to defend our country against the thugs who are wanting to kill people in this world. We are withdrawing as defenders of freedom where those young men and women were the fighters for freedom 100 years ago. It is shameful. The throne speech, in my view, is shameful. It is shameful for what it does not say.

We had a Prime Minister stand in this House earlier today who had the opportunity to fill in those blanks. Yes, we could have missed some things, he could have said. He could have talked about, as we have mentioned, agriculture, forestry, the economy, pipelines, energy, or any number of things, but no. What did we hear? We heard all this fuzzy good news stuff.

I am really happy that it is not me who has to go back to Calgary and sell this throne speech. I would not want to be the member for Calgary Centre, the Minister of Veterans Affairs, or the member for Calgary Skyview and have to go back and sell this throne speech in a city that has lost 110,000 jobs in the last year. It is shameful.

In some of the response to the throne speech on the other side of the House, there seems to be a view that somehow if we just spend more taxpayers' dollars, we will fix the economy. I even heard a member say in this House that all we need to fix the unemployment problem in the member's riding is to create more federal service jobs. I was shaking my head wondering if I heard correctly. That is hardly the way we are going to fix the economy.

We can fix the economy by working as a government to get out of the way of the private sector doing its job. We can start tomorrow, ensuring that we get access to tidewater for our products from western Canada.

When the price of oil is at $100 internationally, a $20 differential is workable, but when the West Texas crude is selling at $40 a barrel and we in western Canada are getting half that, that is not right. The main reason for that is because we are not moving forward on getting pipelines to the coast, because we are advocating to the environmental groups that continue to stand in the way. All I heard from the Prime Minister today was more support for that kind of standing in the way of development of the private sector.

I am going to conclude by saying that the Minister of Finance will be in for a rude awakening when he starts preparing his budget in a few months. We have heard about taxing the rich crowd. We heard the Prime Minister talking about it again. That so-called rich crowd lives in my riding. A whole bunch of the so-called Liberal-designated rich crowd members are not working today. They do not have jobs.

This particular finance minister has his work cut out for him to bring in a budget that is going to cover all the expenses that we already see in that throne speech. I am not sure where the money is going to come from. As has been mentioned by both the deputy leader and the leader this morning, that deficit is already rising. By the time the budget comes in, I do not know what the number is going to be but it is not going to be pretty.

The Liberal government is going to have to answer for it. It is all the promises that the Liberals are making in that fairytale world that they are living in over there, that world where that bunch actually out-NDPed the NDP in the election. Now, how bad was that?

I will conclude by saying this. Albertans made a decision last spring to elect an NDP government in Alberta. Members should hold the applause. We are in a mess in that province. Unfortunately we elected a couple of those Liberals in the last federal election on October 19.

Thank goodness the majority of the province came to its senses and elected a large number of Conservative members of Parliament who are going to fight to ensure that we have jobs in this province, created by the private sector and not by a bunch of government programs on green technology and stuff that will create nothing. We have seen what has happened in Ontario with hydro. I think there is more of that coming.

[Celina Caesar-Chavannes, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as this is the first time I am rising in this House, I would like to thank the residents of Whitby for allowing me to be here today and to congratulate my fellow members in this chamber for their successful elections.

The member pointed out that it was shameful that we do not join with our partners in eliminating ISIS and defending Canadians. Perhaps we should hold the applause.

I want to ask the member if his party is not up to date with the current strategy that Obama laid out yesterday, the strategy consisting of both hunting down terrorists and training Iraqi and Syrian forces on the ground. President Obama is re-evaluating his foreign policy and he is also thinking of doing things differently rather than continuing with air strikes.

Is the member making a statement to gain political points or is he in fact up to date with current strategy?

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, they will never get me standing in the House and agreeing with very much of what President Obama says or does. Let us forget Mr. Obama and talk about the British House of Commons.

The British House of Commons, just two weeks ago, with the support of the Labour Party, agreed that the British were going to start air strikes in the Middle East. That is the House of Commons of Britain that I want to ensure we emulate, versus a president of the United States who does not have the courage to do a lot of things, including improving the economy by approving a pipeline to the United States. I am never going to be agreeing with that particular president, but with the members of the British House of Commons.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it was a great honour to listen to the member speak so eloquently about his beautiful riding and also about its military history.

There was one line in the throne speech that particularly concerned me. It was about having a leaner military. This is not what we heard during the campaign, but, frankly, it is what a lot of us expected. Not only are we pulling out of the fight against ISIS, but also, going forward, the Liberal government would reduce our capacity to use our military as a force for good in the world.

Can the hon. member comment on what he thinks the government means by having a leaner military, going forward?

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as was mentioned several times, the federal budget deficit is increasing by the day. The member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan is bang on. The Liberals are going to be looking for money wherever they can, and the easy way to do it and the history of past Liberal governments has always been to cut funding to the military. I would not be the least bit surprised. Would it be the right thing to do? Absolutely not.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to stand in the House for the first time since being re-elected. Of course, I thank the good people of Lac-Saint-Louis for putting their faith in me again.

To the hon. member, yes, Alberta is struggling. This is a government that represents all regions of the country and cares about the unemployed in all regions of the country. Does the member not recognize that a middle-class tax cut would benefit local and regional economies across this country by putting more money in the hands of the middle class?

My second point has to do with the fact that a Conservative government was in power for 10 years, and one of its first priorities was to get a pipeline through. It was not able to get any pipelines through in 10 years. What does the member think about that? No pipelines were put through because there was no co-operation with communities.

Does the member not think that it is a positive sign that this Prime Minister has already started reaching out to people, including the premiers, on issues like climate change?

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, frankly I despise that term “middle class”, but we will use it since it is a term that the government wants to use. However, a tax cut for middle-income folks is hardly of value if they do not have a job. That is one of the issues we have in Alberta today.

All I am saying is that in the throne speech we needed to ensure that the energy industry was recognized, and the government failed to do that in either its throne speech or in the Prime Minister's remarks in the House today.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell.

It is an honour to rise for the first time and introduce myself and the great riding of Sudbury.

Before I begin, I would like to take this opportunity to thank my wife and my children, Mylène, Henri, and Théo, for their love and support, which gave me the strength to win my seat in the House of Commons.

I would also like to thank my team of hard-working supporters and all the voters in Sudbury for their confidence in me.

I also want to thank my family and friends in my home town of Kapuskasing in northern Ontario for their ongoing encouragement.

Today, I would like to tell members a bit about my great riding and the vast potential of the region of northern Ontario, and how the speech from the throne, in its elements, will profit it.

Sudbury also is a microcosm of Canada. With a majority anglophone population and over 45,000 French-speaking residents, Sudbury has the third-largest francophone community outside of Quebec and a strong indigenous population. Sudbury was built on the backs of waves of immigrants from Italy, Finland, Poland, Ukraine, and Greece, and today a strong South Asian population. It is a rich arts and culture hub of Northern Ontario, reflecting Canadian diversity.

Sudbury is located in boreal forest in the heart of the Canadian Shield and is rich in natural resources.

As stated in the Speech from the Throne, in Sudbury people see the result of immigrants building successful lives in Canada, and I am proud to stand with this government in working hard to bring in immigrants and refugees to contribute to Canada's economic success.

There is a total of 330 lakes within the city of Sudbury, more lakes than any other municipality in the world. In fact, Lake Wanapitei is the largest city-contained lake in the world. Ramsey Lake, in the heart of my riding, is the second largest lake and provides over 40,000 homes with fresh water. Sudbury is also home to the fourth largest film festival in Canada, the third and eighth largest science centres in Canada, a burgeoning film industry, and a variety of cultural and music festivals, such as the jazz festival, which I am proud to have helped launch.

I am therefore proud to be part of a government that plans to invest in culture and in Canada's creative industry, as set out in the throne speech.

I will return shortly to the many hidden gems that make Sudbury a great place to live, but I want to talk first about what my riding is known for.

Most know that Sudbury is home to one of the largest integrated mining complexes in the world. Without a doubt, it is the richest mining district in North America and is one of the leading hardrock mining regions in the world. It was a sector largely ignored by the past government and I find it important to raise it today.

From my business office in the centre of the city, I see three headframes, a smelter, and the second-largest smokestack in the world. Nowhere else in the world is the mining industry so pervasive. In fact, there are 5,000 kilometres of underground tunnels. If they were put back to back, they would go from Sudbury to Vancouver underground.

However, the real story of Sudbury's mining industry is its growing mining supply and equipment sector. As new technology and innovation led to new products and processes, these homegrown companies found eager national and international markets looking to improve their productivity. Today, the sector represents more than 300 companies in Sudbury, employing almost 14,000 skilled workers and professionals and generating approximately $4 billion in revenue each year, some 40% of the mineral production in Ontario.

Because of this innovation boom, mining research and development in Sudbury has evolved into a world-class industry all its own. Many of the brightest minds and mining-related sciences are being drawn to Sudbury to be part of one of the world's most advanced clusters of international mining research. Greater Sudbury's innovation cluster is made possible through partnerships involving post-secondary institutions, all levels of government, and some of the world's largest mining corporations.

The long-term sustainability of these mining companies is dependent on the innovative research coming out of facilities like CEMI, the Centre for Excellence in Mining Innovation, and MIRARCO, the Mining Innovation, Rehabilitation and Applied Research Corporation, both located at Sudbury's Laurentian University, as well as NORCAT, the Northern Centre for Advanced Technology Inc., which is the third major innovation partner.

Other world-class research facilities include the SNOLAB, which I will come back to in a moment, and the Vale Living with Lakes Centre at Laurentian University, where I had the great honour of welcoming our then soon-to-be prime minister last August, when he announced $200 million in annual funding in support of technology incubators and research facilities and financing for small businesses looking to grow.

Obviously, when it comes to Sudbury's success stories, it is important to mention environmental restoration.

Sudbury has received numerous awards for its aggressive land reclamation program, including a United Nations Local Government Award and the U.S. Chevron Conservation Award. Over the past 30 years, dozens of community partners have planted over 10 million trees, transforming our sulphur-damaged moonscape into a reforested vista of green. In fact, a prime example of the sustainable transformation of our mining industry and our city's landscape is coming online right now.

Currently, Vale is wrapping up a $1 billion investment in pollution controls to further reduce sulphur dioxide emissions 80% below current levels, well below government standards. When completed, Vale will be in a position to demolish its iconic smokestack. Yes, the second-largest smokestack in the world may be demolished because of the innovation in research that has been done.

In Sudbury, we strive to protect the environment and grow the economy. These have been compatible goals in Sudbury. However, more work is needed, but that is the success of the Sudbury region.

Earlier I mentioned the SNOLAB, and I want to take a moment to recognize it and its staff, particularly Dr. Arthur McDonald, for their historic contributions to humanity's understanding of our world and how it works. I am sure some of my colleagues recall that Dr. McDonald and his colleagues last month won the Nobel Prize in Physics for work largely conducted at Sudbury's SNOLAB.

SNOLAB is an international underground research facility specializing in neutrino and dark matter physics. Located two kilometres underground in the Vale Creighton Mine, SNOLAB has 5,000 square metres of clean space underground for experiments and the supporting infrastructure. It is the perfect example of what we have done in Sudbury to transform our community into a world-class centre of innovation. Sudbury has made tremendous strides and succeeded in diversifying the local economy away from only the mining extraction sector.

Sudbury is a major educational centre in northern Ontario, with two colleges and a university that offer courses in both official languages. The Regroupement des organismes francophones or ROC in Sudbury works to promote Franco-Ontarian culture through theatre, literature, visual arts, music, and books, as well as through a cultural centre that makes Sudbury a veritable hub of Canada's Francophonie.

I am proud to be part of a government that encourages and promotes the use of both official languages.

Looking forward, thanks to the support of the federal government, Health Sciences North is launching the Advanced Medical Research Institute of Canada, which is attracting specialists in medical research conducted on an ongoing basis.

I am also proud to be part of a government that has promised to stand up for Canadians who need support. Seniors, veterans, young people, those suffering from mental illness will be my priority.

My grandfather fought in World War II. He came back physically fine but was never the same. We now know that he suffered from PTSD and my family suffered with him. After his experience, it is important for me to ensure that no veteran or their families have to fight the government for the support and compensation they have earned. It is important that we work as hard to provide supports for people suffering from mental illness as from physical illness.

I want to conclude today by sharing with the House details of the most significant economic opportunities presented to Canadians in a generation, the Ring of Fire. In the far north of Ontario there is unparalleled opportunity for Canada and Ontario to follow Sudbury's lead and continue to diversify our economy and solidify our place as a global leader in mining innovation and technology.

Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to share my remarks.

The numbers on the Ring of Fire speak for themselves. Analysis shows that within the first 10 years of its development, the Ring of Fire will make significant contributions to Canada's economy, and will sustain up to 5,000 full-time jobs annually, create more than $25 billion in economic activity, as well as generate more than $6 billion in government tax revenues. All of this provides a compelling incentive for all governments to invest in this economic opportunity.

I know that along with my Northern Ontario caucus colleagues we will champion this opportunity by standing up for the leaders who are prospecting and investing in northern Ontario; the researchers and innovators whose work allows us to mine, process and transfer ore sustainably; and importantly, the indigenous peoples of that area who have called these lands home for generations, and ensure that they are fully engaged in reviewing and monitoring this project as promised in the Speech from the Throne. We will stand up for the men and women seeking to earn a living and support their families in one of the oldest and most respected industries in Canada, hard rock mining.

I look forward to working with my colleagues in the House of Commons to build Sudbury, northern Ontario, and Canada into a global centre for sustained mining excellence.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as it is my first time speaking in the House in this Parliament, I want to deeply thank the constituents of my riding for placing their trust in me for another term.

I also want to welcome my colleague to this place.

My colleague spoke about one of the cornerstones of his riding being the natural resource industry. Given that, I am wondering if he could explain to the House why his party opposes the mineral exploration tax credit at a time when the natural resource sector is under a great deal of stress. Like him, I also have a riding that is dependent on mineral exploration and the oil and gas sector. Tens of thousands of people are losing their jobs, and yet his party is talking about anything but the oil and gas sector.

In solidarity with the workers in these industries, I am wondering if the member would stand up and support Canada's oil and gas sector and also reaffirm his support for the mineral exploration tax credit.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in the last campaign our leader and our platform were quite clear. We want to invest over $200 million annually in the natural resource sector for research and innovation. I am proud to be part of a government that does not want to see things stay the same but to invest in research and innovation so that the sector will prosper and to make sure that it is environmentally sustainable.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his first speech in the House, and I congratulate him on his election. He spoke about mines, and in particular those in Sudbury. Since my husband works in one of those mines, I know how important natural resources are.

First, why does my colleague think that there was no mention of the Ring of Fire in the throne speech? Second, when will we see some real action on the development of the Ring of Fire? Third, why is there no member of this government who is responsible for FedNor? Will it increase the FedNor budget, and if so, will these funds be fully invested in our communities?