Bob Rae

[Aboriginal Affairs, January 30th, 2012]

If the federal government's position is that it is required to consult aboriginal groups, I would like the Prime Minister to tell us how it is fulfilling this requirement when witnesses are attacked in court by both the Minister of Natural Resources and the Prime Minister. I see two different approaches by the government.

[Aboriginal Affairs, January 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, that allows me to ask the Prime Minister a question with respect to the Enbridge project and the position of the first nations communities that are affected by that project. The National Energy Board review does not actually have complete jurisdiction with respect to first nations issues.

I would like to ask the Prime Minister in particular if he contemplates some additional process that will involve a direct crown-first nations discussion with respect to the impact of this project on first nations.

[Government Programs, January 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, my ability to listen to the answers is not the problem. The problem is that the answers change. It depends on what is happening. If it is an election period, we hear a lot of promises.

The demographic shift did not happen overnight. The demographic shift was a factor during the election, and that is when they made their promises. Not just the Prime Minister, but every member of the Conservative Party made exactly the same promises. That is why we are calling it the politics of abandonment and deceit.

[Government Programs, January 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister of Canada cannot have it both ways.

On exactly the same day as the Prime Minister was giving his statement in Davos, the President of the Treasury Board was reassuring everyone that there would be no cuts to the provinces and there would be no cuts to transfers to individual seniors.

What the Prime Minister is saying today and what we are hearing very clearly from the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development is the exact opposite.

It is the Davos renege. It is the politics of deceit and abandonment that--

[Government Programs, January 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, in fact, the Prime Minister did address this question during the election campaign. The Prime Minister stated categorically during the leaders' debate and as recently as November that the government would not be touching transfers to individuals and transfers to seniors. He explicitly said that.

Now the minister comes up with the Davos answer.

There is an election answer and a Davos answer. Which is it? Is the Prime Minister committed to sustaining seniors or is he committed to breaking his election promises and breaking faith with the people of Canada? Which is it?

[Democratic Reform, December 13th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I thought it was a socialist conspiracy. That is what the Prime Minister said the last time we talked about it. I knew the Minister of Foreign Affairs would take that sophisticated approach to this serious problem.

My final question for the Prime Minister is with respect to the question of the addition of seats in the House of Commons, a $100 million additional expenditure starting in 2015.

When the Prime Minister was fighting this issue a while ago, he took a completely contradictory position to that. He said that it was time to cap the size of the House of Commons and time to save money. Why is that not his position today?

[The Environment, December 13th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I asked a very simple and direct question to the Prime Minister of Canada regarding climate change and scientific evidence. I asked a very simple question, and the Prime Minister of our dear country refused to respond.

I will ask the question again: does the Prime Minister accept the scientific evidence regarding climate change? Yes or no? That is the question.

[The Environment, December 13th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister started his 10-year battle of Kyoto in 2002, he told Canadians scientific evidence on climate change was contested and contradictory, thereby giving credibility to climate change deniers such as the one who just applauded across the way.

Is that still the position the Prime Minister of Canada holds about the issue of climate change?

[Canadian Wheat Board, December 12th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, because the Federal Court has ruled with respect to the Wheat Board question that the minister acted outside the framework of the law, I wonder if the government could tell us why it is proceeding with the legislation in the Senate when the matter is now back before the courts. Why not wait for the matter to be disposed of by the courts before pursuing this law any further?

[Aboriginal Affairs, December 12th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the question remains unanswered because the minister did not answer my question and everyone knows it.

The Auditor General published three reports—one in 2003, one in 2006 and one in 2008—as well as a final report when she left office. In all these reports, she clearly states that everyone agrees that the current system, the status quo, does not work and that the third party management system is dysfunctional because it does not enhance people's capacity.

Why are the reports not being acted upon?