Brian Masse

[Business of Supply, March 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, my question for the parliamentary secretary is about the automotive industry.

The minister and the government have cut the eco-auto rebate program. This was the incentive program of $116 million, a disastrous program that did not have an effect on the positive influence to buy vehicles.

We have a transition in the auto industry which is an opportunity to get greener technologies. At the same time the government is cutting the $116 million, it is going to keep in place the $50 million tax on the companies. It has rolled out a new program worth $50 million a year, but at the end of the day it has actually cut the automotive sector back by $8 million per year, and it continues to keep the $50 million tax in place.

What is the government preparing to do, given that the United States is going to be instituting loan guarantees and a series of other initiatives to secure the new green auto industry? The fact is that what we have shown is the government actually cut the $116 million, which the Minister of Finance did not roll over into initiatives, and it has only introduced a $250 million five year program, which once again will be funded by a tax on the industry itself.

[March 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that the minister himself has recently written to a number of different border operators, people in the community and so forth, one of them in particular being Mayor Bradley, and basically has said that it is up to them to figure it out for themselves.

That is unacceptable. We need to have at least some support from the minister to make sure that there is going to be the adherence of a policy for everything from emergency vehicles, as well as to fire and rescue and so forth. That reciprocal arrangement is very important from the leadership level because we have seen different departments in the United States basically run roughshod over the government.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has introduced new policies, and the American Department of Transportation and Homeland Security all at different times have introduced things without even consulting our government.

We need the Minister of Public Safety to live up to his words. He recently tabled a bill to amend the Customs Act and said, “Stopping illegal activity and protecting Canadians from threats to their health, safety and security is a key priority for this Government”.

If it is a key priority, why does the minister not show some leadership and make sure he is going to do it for all--

[March 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to raise another aspect regarding the border. There seemed to be a blood pressure competition in the previous exchange, but I will start by laying out some of the facts and hopefully, encourage the government to take some action on a very serious issue.

In the past there were arrangements with emergency service providers in many communities on the Canada-U.S. border. Before 9/11 there was often the exchange of patients to hospitals, as well as fire and rescue services that helped each other out on the other side of the border. The city of Windsor, for example, was prevented from burning because Detroit firefighters came over to help. We have reciprocated as well during various emergencies.

There was a troubling incident on November 12 when Mr. Rick Laporte was being transported to an American hospital for heart surgery. It was a very delicate matter and he was detained for five minutes because of border procedures. An automatic system triggered which stopped him from proceeding, which was very dangerous because of Mr. Laporte's condition. Fortunately, he has recovered and is doing well. We wish him and his family the best.

What prompted my question to the minister was the pattern of behaviour that we have seen. The week before the incident with Mr. Laporte, firefighters from Quebec who were going to assist in a fire at the Anchorage Inn in New York were detained for 15 minutes and the inn burned to the ground.

We have been trying to get the government to establish a formal protocol and policy with the United States. The minister has refused, which is very perplexing.

Many mayors across the country have asked for support. In particular, Mayor Bradley from Sarnia has been doing a very good job of pushing this issue because there are protocol arrangements with firefighters in Port Huron. The minister wrote back to the mayor.

It must be understood that this is not just about Sarnia, Windsor, Sault Ste. Marie or Fort Erie. There is a whole series of communities that have, or did have, these types of protocols in place and which are now endangered.

The government said that each municipality or service should negotiate its own agreement with the respective department in the United States. That is ridiculous. We need some leadership from the Minister of Public Safety on this issue. He needs to show some conviction and address this issue.

I was really concerned that the minister did not bring in Mr. Chertoff or Mr. Wilkins, the American ambassador, to discuss this issue at a high level, to get the political will from the Department of Homeland Security and other border service agencies in the United States to get their heads around this. We do not need municipal services in jurisdictions all across this country trying to do one off negotiated agreements. We need a strong set of rules in place because it is important for these services to interchange.

I live in a community on the border. Thousands of people traverse the border every single day, and I can see the heightened level of problems. For example, after we learned of Mr. Laporte's case, we discovered that in the last number of years 10 ambulances had been stopped. We know it is possible, for example, for Windsor to send information and so forth to the department to get the clearances but at the same time we do not need separate municipal agreements across this country with different services. It is not supportable.

I am asking the government to look at the situation and for the minister himself to show leadership and conviction on behalf of all municipalities to put these agreements in place.

[The Budget, February 28th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think so. I just want to say that as New Democrats we did not actually have enough votes to prop up his government, and others voted against it. I just wanted to make sure that the record was clear on that.

[The Budget, February 28th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I am a little bit puzzled by my colleague's speech in the sense that he talks about the concerns raised in the budget and that the budget does not meet the needs of Canadian.

We have heard the commentary all day long that it is supportable because Canadians do not want an election, but the co-chair for the Liberals' election campaign basically told reporters that the Liberals will provoke an election when they think they can win. The bottom line is that simple.

Why is my friend not willing to address the issues that he feels are important, whether it be poverty, the manufacturing crisis, education or health care? Why are all those people who are affected by those issues disposable because the Liberals want to pick a time when they can win an election as opposed to debating this in a democracy?

[The Budget, February 28th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my hon. colleague a question. I share the border as well. Windsor is very close to Sarnia.

The budget did mention a 10 year passport which is important. I have had a motion for a 10 year passport for the last couple years. I have been pushing that forward as well as reducing the price so it is free for veterans and half price for seniors. It is disappointing that it could not be added in the budget, when that is done in other nations. I do not understand why it is taking three years, given that the United States has a 10 year passport as does the United Kingdom. I would like the member to expand on that question.

Coupled with that, there was no discussion related to border policy. There are concerns regarding emergency vehicles and historic agreements between our communities. I know her community has one. In the past for example, firefighters were able to travel on both sides of the border in times of emergency. Our city was saved from a fire once by Americans coming across the border. Likewise we have helped them out in the past.

The Minister of Public Safety is taking the position that this is a municipal issue and we should work individually with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, whereas we know there are several communities across Canada that actually need an agreement.

I ask for the member's comments about those subjects.

[The Budget, February 28th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague mentioned the eco-Auto program of $114 million. This was a feebate program that was brought in with the help of the Liberal bureaucracy in the past. For those who are not familiar with it, the program allowed Canadian money to go to Japan, South Korea and to other places in the world because we shoved money outside of our country as we rebated this program. The program had no impact whatsoever on the auto market at all. All the studies that came in showed the exact opposite.

However, what is truly amazing about this budget is that the Conservatives closed that window for the automotive sector. We told them not to start this program like that and that it was fine to get rid of it and we would support that, but they started a new fund for the auto program that is deficient. It is less money.

During a time right now when there are executives, union leaders and communities demanding some type of official program that is accountable and transparent to win over projects going to the deep south, to Mexico, South Korea and to China, we actually are cutting funding by $40 million over five years.

I do not think the Minister of Finance has read his own budget or does not understand it because there will be less money going to the automotive industry when this budget passes than what it had in the past.

Why would my colleague support that? His provincial members have been crying out against the government asking it to do what the member for LaSalle—Émard would never do, which is an issue in itself, but the provincial McGuinty Liberals have been basically in a public embroiled battle with the minister. There are insults, name calling and innuendo back and forth to do something. This is sending a terrible message to industry investors.

Why is my colleague not supporting his provincial colleagues who are making this call that there needs to be action on this? Why is he supporting this budget? On that alone, we are losing opportunities. I would like to see the member stand and support defeating this budget to ensure that Canadian jobs will be protected.

[The Budget, February 28th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative agenda, supported by the Liberals, is making the wrong choices for the automotive industry. The budget is cutting overall automotive spending by 14% per year, and will be a $40 million cut after five years alone.

There is nothing in the budget for parts suppliers nor for tool, die and mould making. There is no plan on auto policy. There is nothing for trade to open up markets.

Why has the government abandoned the automotive workers of Ontario and misled the public? Will the Minister of Finance explain why he is cutting funding to the automotive industry when workers, employers and the communities supported by the auto industry have demanded intervention?

[Windsor Police Service, February 26th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, this Thursday marks the last day of Glenn Stannard's tenure as the city of Windsor police chief. After almost nine years in that position and 38 years as a Windsor police officer, he is going to retire.

Chief Stannard comes from a family dedicated to serving the public. His grandfather Walter, father Donald, uncles George and Earl and cousin Dave were all police officers, and his cousin Kim and daughter-in-law Kristina are both on the force today.

Glenn Stannard was appointed to the Windsor Police Service on May 1, 1970. He was promoted through the ranks within the Windsor Police Service and has worked in all divisions, including patrol, investigation and administration. He was appointed chief in 1999.

As former deputy chief Roger Mortimore stated, Chief Stannard “is a down-to-earth, unpretentious individual who made the force absolutely better”.

Chief Stannard endeavoured to deploy the latest technology of modern policing while expanding and deepening outreach to the community.

Chief Stannard is a past president of the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police. He has been involved in various organizations in the community, including junior achievement and the Special Olympics. The Governor General invested him with the Order of Merit and he is also a recipient of the Queen's Jubilee Award.

I extend congratulations to Chief Stannard for his work. All in the community celebrate him and congratulate him on his retirement.

[February 12th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the parliamentary secretary's comments. However, in other countries, when there has been a security breach of an individual's personal information, they are required to let that person know. Canada does not have a law like that.

Other countries, including the United States, have due diligence in their laws. An individual should not have to learn that their personal information was stolen when a news story breaks. The custodian of that information, the government in this case, should tell the individual, offer an apology, and correct the situation.

The government has apologized for not letting those Canadians know that their information was at risk. They should not have learned about it through the mass media. It should have been done in a personal way.