House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2015, with 38% of the vote.
Regional Economic Development June 14th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked the government tough questions about why the Ring of Fire project has been suspended.
All I got from the parliamentary secretary was a laundry list of places he has visited. The people of northern Ontario deserve better. They want answers about why, after five months of so-called leadership from Ottawa, the project is further from realization than ever before.
Enough with the spin. What is the minister going to do to get this project back on track?
Canadian Museum of History Act June 14th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague something.
I realize that the bill is a little more complicated than the question I will ask him. However, I think that what the Conservatives are doing with the Canadian Museum of Civilization is rather silly, for lack of a better word. I am concerned about many things, but especially about the name change.
If I go to my riding, Nickel Belt, and talk to people about the Canadian Museum of Civilization, they know exactly what I am talking about. Now, the government is changing the name to the Canadian Museum of History. History and civilization are almost the same thing. That is why I think that what the Conservatives are doing is rather silly. Furthermore, they are spending a lot of money on the name change.
I know that my colleague proposed many amendments to this bill. I would like him to talk a little about the amendments he presented and explain the reason for some of the amendments.
Regional Economic Development June 13th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, under the Conservatives, in the span of five months, the Ring of Fire project has gone from stalled to completely suspended. The minister's inaction means end runs on environmental assessments, needless court challenges and sidelining first nations.
The minister needs to step up and take responsibility for leaving the Ring of Fire project mired in uncertainty. How is he going to fix this mess?
Regional Economic Development June 13th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the Ring of Fire provides a unique opportunity for the economic development of northern Ontario.
If this project comes to fruition, it will help contribute to the sustainable improvement of our economy and have a positive impact on first nations and local communities. However, the Conservatives are dragging their feet and unable to establish clear rules for the proper management of the project, which is now faltering.
What will the minister do to get the project back on track?
Navigable Waters Protection Act June 13th, 2013
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-536, an act to amend the Navigable Waters Protection Act (Trout Lake).
Mr. Speaker, it certainly is a pleasure for me to introduce this private members' bill today, which would amend the Navigable Waters Protection Act in order to protect Trout Lake in the beautiful community of North Bay, the gateway to northern Ontario.
I want to thank my colleague from Timmins—James Bay for seconding this motion.
There are some reasons I want to protect this lake. First, Samuel de Champlain, the famous explorer, paddled Trout Lake 400 years ago. It is historic. Also, the pristine waters are another source of the drinking water for the residents of North Bay. A natural gas pipeline that borders both sides of Trout Lake is being considered for a switch to bitumen, and that worries the people of North Bay.
Another reason I want to present this private member's bill is that, unfortunately, when the Conservatives changed the Navigable Waters Protection Act, they did not include North Bay and Trout Lake. As we know, Trout Lake, as I said a while ago, is the drinking-water source for the community of North Bay. I do not know where the MP for Nipissing—Timiskaming was when this decision was taken. However, I want to assure the people of North Bay that even though their MP, my good friend sitting over there, was not looking after their best interests, they do not have to worry, because the NDP will look after their interests.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I find that question coming from a Liberal member ironic.
The Liberals were in power for 13 years before the current government and they did nothing at all. In fact, in the last century, the Liberal Party had been in power longer than any other party and the needs of first nations did not improved, thanks to that party.
Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I guess I was right when I said that the member from British Columbia and her staff had done more for first nations than the entire Conservative caucus put together, and the member just proved the point.
When I was talking about turning on the tap, I was referring to him, his home, his hotel or apartment. When he wants safe drinking water, all he has to do is turn on the tap. Unfortunately, because of the Conservative government, first nations cannot turn on a tap, and that goes on for days and decades. Unfortunately, the Conservative government has done nothing to solve the problem.
Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in the House today. For the second time in two days we will be addressing first nations issues. I would like to advise the Speaker that I will be sharing my time.
Today I am speaking with the help of the MP for Nanaimo—Cowichan, who has done a tremendous amount of work on the first nations file. It almost seems to me that she does more work for the first nations than the entire Conservative caucus put together.
The regulations the government wants to impose may incorporate by reference provincial regulations governing drinking and waste water in first nations communities. However, the expert panel on safe drinking water for first nations expressed concern about using provincial regulations, since that would result in a patchwork of regulations, leading to some first nations having more stringent standards than others.
These regulations would overrule any laws or by-laws made by first nations and limit the liability of the government for certain acts or omissions that occur in the performance of its duties under regulations.
New Democrats want to see safe, clean water and water systems that work for first nations communities, but imposing this legislation is not the solution. The federal government cannot simply unload its liability to first nations without providing the funding to bring the systems up to new standards.
First nations oppose the act because of the new liability provisions for first nations governments and the language around the non-derogation clause that is formulated to possibly be a first step to erode the constitutionally protected rights.
The delivery of safe drinking water to on-reserve first nations communities is critical to the health and safety of first nations Canadians, but for more than a decade, many first nations have lacked adequate access to safe drinking water. Bill S-8 is the second legislative initiative to address safe drinking water on reserve. Its predecessor, Bill S-11, did not proceed to third reading as a result of widespread concerns and subsequently died on the order paper when Parliament was dissolved on March 26, 2011.
Bill S-8 retains several of the features of former Bill S-11, particularly in areas to be covered by eventual federal regulations. Non-derogation language is still included in the proposed legislation, expressly allowing for the abrogation or derogation of aboriginal and treaty rights in some circumstances.
It also provides for the incorporation, by reference, of provincial regulations governing drinking water and waste water.
The text of the bill would not, on its face, adequately address the needs of first nations to build capacity to develop and administer appropriate laws for the regulation of water and waste water systems on first nations lands.
New Democrats agree that the poor standards of water systems in first nations communities are hampering people's health and well-being. They are also causing economic hardship.
However, this legislation would make first nations liable for water systems that have already proven inadequate, without any funding to help them improve their water systems or give them the ability to build new ones more appropriate to their needs.
In addition, although there is a slight wording change, there is a clause in this legislation that would give the government the ability to derogate from aboriginal rights.
A provincial regime of regulations would not do enough to protect first nations communities. The patchwork system of provincial laws was rejected by the government's own expert panel on safe drinking water for first nations. We need a national regulatory system.
Regulations alone will not help first nations people to develop and maintain safe on-reserve water systems. They need crucial investments in human resources and physical infrastructure, including drinking water and sewage systems and adequate housing.
This is not a difficult problem to solve. It just requires political will and adequate investment.
The Assembly of First Nations submitted the following to the Senate committee:
Bill S-8, as part of ongoing process started with Bill S-11 prior to the CFNG, continues a pattern of unilaterally imposed legislation and does not meet the standards of joint development and clear recognition of First Nation jurisdiction. The engagement of some First Nations and the modest changes made to the Bill do not respond to the commitment to mutual respect and partnership envisioned by the CFNG.
The AFN also passed resolution no. 58/210 at its special chiefs assembly in December 2010 calling on the government to: ensure appropriate funds were available for any regulations implemented; support first nations in developing their own water management system; and work collaboratively with the AFN in developing an immediate plan on the lack of clean drinking water.
This resolution also puts the government on notice that the AFN expects any new water legislation to comply with first nations constitutionally protected and inherent treaty and aboriginal rights, the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People and the report of the expert panel on safe drinking water for first nations.
Chiefs of Ontario, the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs and Treaty 7 nations in Alberta have signalled continued concerns with the proposed legislation, citing, among other things, the need to address infrastructure and capacity issues before introducing federal regulations.
In 2007, Dr. Harry Swain, chair of the expert panel on safe drinking water for first nations, told the Senate committee on aboriginal peoples that:
This is not...one of those problems in Aboriginal Canada that will persist for ever and ever and ever. This is one that can be solved and it can be solved with the application of a good chunk of money for a limited period of time,
The expert panel on safe drinking water for first nations argued that “Regulation alone will not be effective in ensuring safe drinking water unless the other requirements...are met...both human resources and physical assets”.
In 2011, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada released its “National Assessment of First Nations Water and Wastewater Systems--Ontario Regional Roll-Up Report”. The results show that 1,880 first nations homes are reported to have no water service and 1,777 homes are reported to have no waste water service.
In 2011, the Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada commissioned an independent assessment on first nations water and waste water systems. The report clearly states that a significant financial commitment to infrastructure development will be necessary. It will cost $4.7 billion over 10 years to ensure that the needs of first nations communities in water and waste water systems are met. Instead, the Conservatives committed only $330 million over two years in 2010 and nothing in 2011.
I would just remind members of the House that most of us take for granted the fact that we own homes. When we are not in our riding we either live in a hotel or have an apartment. Every day, if we need a drink of water, we just turn on the tap. We take it for granted. Some first nations communities just cannot do that. We had a fine example of that lately in Montreal when there was a boil water advisory. People were shocked that they had to boil their water. All we have to do is think about the first nations that have to do that day in, day out every day of the year and have done so for years.
Petitions June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the second petition, again from residents in my community, calls on the Conservative government to reverse the changes to the old age security program, which they say are a direct attack on the poorest seniors who rely on money for daily living expenses.
As we know, the Conservative government has raised the age of OAS eligibility to 67 and these petitioners are calling on the government to return the age to 65 because a lot of seniors live in poverty.
Petitions June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure this morning to present two petitions. The first one is from residents of my riding of Nickel Belt. It concerns high-grade mining. Some miners, not all, will mine high-grade ore, leaving behind the lower grade ore. Then once the high-grade ore has been mined it is not profitable to go back and get the low-grade ore.
The petitioners are calling on the House of Commons to establish legislation enforcing guidelines that guard against unchecked and irresponsible high-grade mining.