Brian Masse

[Petitions, June 12th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition to the Minister of Justice regarding animal cruelty.

The Criminal Code has not been updated significantly since 1892 with regard to animal cruelty. Recently in Windsor we had a case where an animal was abused. A.K. had his ears cut back. It was that case which prompted the petitioners to ask that the law be updated.

The petitioners are calling on Parliament to act immediately and to provide a new modern animal cruelty act to protect animals in this country.

[June 11th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, that really does not solve the problem. The problem is that we have to protect consumers. Of course we want clean energy and efficiency in terms of people switching to alternative energy, but consumers do not need to be gouged in the process. There should be a net benefit in terms of switching that we can take advantage of, but we do not.

How is the government program measuring up? Statistics Canada recently came out with statistics showing that Canadian consumers mostly shrugged off the effect of rising gasoline prices on their driving habits, never mind their overall behaviour. The only concession drivers made to higher prices was to switch from premium grade to regular grade gasoline. What happens is people produce worse products. That does not take away the fact that the refining profit margins have gone up significantly. In the last year they have gone up as well. That is what we are talking about, putting those resources back into Canadians' pockets so they can make better decisions about their habits.

It is important to note that the government can put up a website and a few other things, and I even include driving habits in my literature in order to educate consumers about all those different things, but the reality is—

[June 11th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in the House and speak about gas prices and refining profits with regard to consumers being hosed across this country.

I asked a question in this chamber about the fact that the Conservative government was allowing the price of phone calls to go up as well, once again hurting consumers. It has actually allowed the rates to go from 25¢ up to $1 for local telephone calls if we use a card.

I specifically want to go back to gas prices. My specific reference relates to the issue of refining profits. It is important to note that Statistics Canada in its fourth quarter report, which is a month old approximately, noted that profits of oil and gas extraction companies exceeded $31 billion for the first time ever in 2006, up 2.3% over 2005 levels.

Crude oil prices peaked in the summer of 2006, but retreated in the latter portion of the year due to the high inventories and softening demand. Nevertheless, the average crude prices for 2006 were well ahead of 2005.

That is important to note because what we have witnessed is that refining profits moved exponentially up in the system and the actual cost to consumers has gone up significantly.

The government's claims that it is a world market and it cannot do anything about it is absolutely erroneous. There are different policies, also voted in the House of Commons, to create a watchdog agency, which the government could implement to bring some accountability and independent analysis to the subject matter.

The Competition Bureau currently does not have the mandate to delve into that layer of responsibility, so we need that updated. The minister's own briefing, which I obtained through the Access of Information Act, indicated that reviewing the Competition Act should be a priority for Canadians and the ministry, but the minister has yet to do so.

It is important to bring to light some information. Just today at the industry committee we started our first hearings on gas prices. One of the things that was interesting was that Natural Resources Canada brought out a breakdown of the different price increases and percentages. Sure enough, the profits for refining markets back in 1996 was 9.1% of the price of gasoline. Ten years later, that is 24.3%

That is unbelievable, given the fact that we witnessed refining being limited and reduced in this country in many respects. PetroCanada in Oakville, for example, was shut down because it did not want to invest in that. PetroCanada now buys its gas from Esso overseas in Europe and imports it.

It has also started purchasing gasoline from Esso in Sarnia, for example, so when Sarnia had the fire, consumers across Ontario in particular and across the country had to pay that differential because there was no competition and no excess refining capacity. PetroCanada stations were affected just as fast as Esso stations when the refining capacity dropped because of the fire.

I know that there are some promises of investment into the industry itself, but we have not seen the real proof.

My question to the government is this. Why does it not bring some accountability to this file? The Prime Minister questioned the previous prime minister, the member for LaSalle—Émard, about why he would not live up to votes in the House of Commons and chastized him for that. Why does the government not live up to the vote we had in the House of Commons on gas pricing and a petroleum monitoring agency, and do something to support consumers and bring transparency and accountability to this file?

[June 4th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, what is important to note is we are talking as much about a specific issue, being the profit margin of oil and gas companies, which have received record profits over the last number of years, as we are about the Prime Minister once again saying one thing and doing another. He criticized the member for LaSalle—Émard, when he was the former prime minister, for not living up to democratically held votes in the House of Commons.

How does the parliamentary secretary personally feel about that? Does he view that votes in the House should be upheld by the majority? Should we follow through on them? They are simple motions that we pass, calling for accountability with respect to the oil and gas industry. It was not radical. It has been called for by consumer groups. Canadians have asked for independent investigations and for the Competition Bureau to have the ability to investigate properly with a modernized law, something that can be done fairly for the oil and gas companies and for Canadian consumers. Canadians deserve this.

Therefore, once again, how does the parliamentary secretary feel about votes?

[June 4th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise to speak to an issue to which many Canadians want answers, and that is a review of the pricing of gasoline in the country.

We have seen a series of different pilfering with absolutely no accountability on this issue. The New Democrats have been calling for a public inquiry about this issue and also for accountability for consumers.

It is important to not this. Even as the price of gasoline has been rising, statistics show that we have not had a lesser use of oil and gasoline products in the country. Until we get a reduction through principles and a program that Canadians will have for the environment, they do not need to be bled dry by the oil and gas companies, which have record profits.

It is interesting, the House passed a motion, calling on the government to amend the Competition Act, which is very important to provide the right tools to do the job. The act has not been reviewed comprehensively since 1969. When I asked a question of the minister of that time, I noted that date was the time of the Woodstock festival. This was a comment from the minister's briefing book, which I obtained from the Freedom of Information Act. The act was built upon that era in time and had not really been reviewed.

It is important to note that the motion called for a petroleum monitoring agency, something for which the New Democrats asked. We voted on that motion in the House of Commons and it passed.

Interestingly enough, since the time the motion passed, the government has done nothing. The Prime Minister, when in opposition, attacked the member for LaSalle—Émard for not respecting a motion passed by the House, calling for an inquiry into the Air-India tragedy. He said:

Will the Prime Minister respect this vote and immediately call a public inquiry into the Air-India tragedy?

Back in 2005, the nowPrime Minister said this to the National Post on May 11:

This is a corrupt party which is in the process of ruining the country's finances and which is now ignoring the democratically expressed will of the House of Commons. This government does not have the moral authority to govern this country.

He followed that two days later with this comment to Canada AM, “It would seem to me the obvious thing and, frankly, the government's lost three votes now in a row. And the fact that they won't listen to the will of the House of Commons I think is fairly disturbing from a democratic standpoint”.

In the past the Prime Minister has called for the House, the chamber, when it votes its conscience, to live up to that.

In the past, New Democrats have had motions passed, whether it be child poverty, our firefighters or seniors. Votes for a whole series of groups and organizations have been passed and the government has done nothing.

Why is the current Prime Minister not living up to his own words when he expected actions on votes in the House of Commons? Why are we not getting that action now, especially when consumers across the country are continuing to be fleeced by the oil and gas companies? He simply cannot stand by and do nothing.

[Committees of the House, May 31st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the member for Burnaby—New Westminster a question about the Great Lakes.

One of the interesting things that was recently brought forth by the United States was to actually turn the Great Lakes into firing ranges for gunboats, which would have put lead and other types of contaminants in the water, as well as safety hazards.

The New Democratic Party was the only party to actually make a submission opposing this. I want to ask him what his confidence is in the government's negotiations because what was interesting was that the government's response was late. It was past the deadline, so it actually had no official commentary made to the United States. Luckily for ourselves, many Canadian and American organizations and groups actually opposed this, got submissions in and we had that ceased.

I would like to ask him what his confidence is in the government in terms of negotiations, when it cannot even meet a simple deadline to protect one of the most important water sources on this planet.

[Manufacturing Industry, May 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it would be irresponsible for the minister to say that he adopted the recommendations. He did not even get past recommendation one of the industry committee report. As for rhetoric, about 150 families will go home tonight, people who do not have a job and a paycheque for the next week. There is no rhetoric about that.

Part of the problem is the government continues with the policies of the previous one. Right now the government is more interested in South Korea shipping cars into Canada than Canada having the same treatment.

Why is it going to protect jobs in South Korea as opposed to growing them in southwestern Ontario? Stand up for Canada for a change. Do something different.

[Manufacturing Industry, May 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government has failed Canadians and working class families across this country. It has failed to invest in technology for a green auto strategy. It has failed to produce an auto plan. It has failed to stop a single plant closure across this country. Jobs are outsourced, there are foreign takeovers, factories are moving to Mexico, and still there is no plan.

How many more working families have to suffer before somebody over there gives a damn and does something about it?

[Manufacturing Industry, May 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Windsor—Tecumseh and I marched with thousands of Windsor and Essex County residents in support of the need for provincial and federal action to protect the manufacturing heartland of this country.

The “Our Jobs, Our Communities, Our Future” rally demonstrated that Canadians are concerned about their jobs and the community consequences.

Consider the following facts. In four and a half years we have lost 250,000 manufacturing jobs in Canada. Over the past 10 years we now have a trade deficit of $16 billion. Manufacturing accounts for 17% of the Canadian economy and is the highest value added sector, and trade agreements have decimated workers. Despite these facts, Liberal and Conservative policies have jeopardized this valuable industry and our national security.

Canadians want to compete, but how can we when Canada has the most open market in the world, yet places no expectations on other countries who dump into our market, have tariff and non-tariff barriers, subsidize their products through poor labour and environmental policies, and we have a dollar and energy prices that compromise our competitiveness.

The New Democrats believe it is time to show action and vision. Consider a new auto pact, challenge nations that undercut fair competition with dollar manipulation, and enhance social programs and sectoral strategies.

Consider these alternatives for a brighter future, one that proudly says Canadians are the best in manufacturing, and want and will compete in the world market, but it is government that has to provide them the tools to do so.

[May 28th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, that simply is not acceptable. Right now we have a $2.6 billion trade deficit with South Korea. Our largest export right now is wood pulp, which is 25¢ per pound, versus Korean vehicles that are shipped into Canada at $15,000 each.

It is important to note that under Liberal and Conservative auto policy we have gone from being a manufacturer with a surplus and a net export to having a deficit, and we have dropped to 10th in the world. That is unacceptable.

As well, with the shutting of the tariff, we see state sponsored Korean automotive companies like Hyundai and Kia getting tens of millions of dollars. On top of that, the government has brought in feebates that will also provide Canadian taxpayer money to these foreign state owned companies. That is unacceptable and it puts auto workers and Canadians out of work.

A prophecy that comes to the conclusion here is when the Minister of Industry himself said that the auto industry would collapse under a Conservative government.