David McGuinty

[Aboriginal Affairs, June 2nd, 2006]

It is too bad the facts, Mr. Speaker, do not actually match the minister's rhetoric.

Treasury Board guidelines continue to require that the government minister do business with aboriginal enterprises and the minister's own website strongly encourages aboriginal businesses across Canada to apply for PSAB contracts.

First we learn that an aboriginal company in Winnipeg is cut off after nine years of successful service. Now, without notice, without consultation and without any reason given, an aboriginal company in my own riding is put at risk, jeopardizing over 100 jobs, $40 million in business, and internal documents confirm our worst suspicions.

Not only has the government thrown out the Kelowna accord but now it is actively undermining successful aboriginal--

[Aboriginal Affairs, June 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, 10 years ago, our government created the procurement strategy for aboriginal business, which has been a great success. The strategy was renewed in 2001 and in 2003. It is up for review this year. However, according to documents I obtained from his department, the minister is preparing to quietly abolish this measure, without warning, without consultation and without reason. He is sabotaging the very essence of the Kelowna accord.

Will the minister explain why promoting the success of our aboriginal communities is no longer one of the government's priorities?

[The Environment, May 15th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the minister knows very well that EnerGuide, a made-to-measure program for Canada, was a huge success.

Can the Minister tell the House when the EnerGuide program fell out of favour with the Conservative government? Was it when the Conservatives were looking for money to finance their budget promises and realized that the coffers were emptying a bit too quickly? Or was it when they abandoned any semblance of financial support for protecting Canada's environment?

[The Environment, May 15th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the government pretends to be looking for a made in Canada solution to global warming. It is really too bad that it has not bothered to look in Canada.

Last week the government cancelled the EnerGuide program that helps Canadians make their homes more energy efficient. According to the World Wildlife Fund, this was an incredibly successful program that has helped hundreds of thousands of Canadian households reduce their energy bills by 30%. CanWest news business editor Bruce Johnstone calls cancelling the program a major and silly “mistake”.

Why would the government abandon a successful, made in Canada program?

[The Environment, May 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of the Environment is clearly unable to defend the environment. She cannot even answer a simple question without resorting to empty platitudes.

Yesterday, she talked about the 53 smog days that Toronto had last year, and she is using this to justify her invisible made-in-Canada plan.

Why does the minister not just admit that cutting $500 million in federal funding and eliminating 12 programs will do absolutely nothing to fight climate change and reduce smog?

[The Environment, May 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, as put so eloquently by the late Hank Williams Jr., the Minister of Finance has finally shown us his “cold, cold heart”.

This morning we learn the minister has told his Ontario counterpart that over $500 million in federal funding to fight global warming has been wiped out. That money was a critical component of Ontario's plan to phase out coal-fired energy production in the province. It would have been the equivalent of taking seven million cars off the road.

Why is the government so intent on making the air Ontarians breathe even worse?

[The Environment, May 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, clearly, Canadians should not look to this government for climate change solutions. This much is clear. We know that the current Minister of the Environment was once appointed by Premier Ralph Klein to fight against climate change solutions, including Kyoto. Last week, Gwyn Morgan, a former CEO in the oil industry who is well known for his opposition to the Kyoto accord, was appointed as a senior advisor to the government.

Will the Prime Minister finally admit to this House that he has no new ideas in mind to fight against climate change and that he is quite content to copy the policies of his home province?

[The Environment, May 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear for those of us who are working on new and creative solutions to global warming that this government simply does not get it. Our Minister of the Environment worked with Premier Ralph Klein to fight and take down Kyoto. Just recently, the Prime Minister appointed Gwyn Morgan, a well-known anti-Kyoto industrialist, as a senior adviser.

After signalling to the world that Canada will not cooperate on Kyoto, the government turns around and slashes and burns 15 programs on climate change. My question for the Prime Minister is simple. Is he taking his lead on his so-called made in Canada climate change plan from Ralph Klein, Gwyn Morgan or Washington?

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, April 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I share the member's concerns and the notion of a clean water act. I can assure the member and the House of one thing. If the government were to withdraw this country from the Kyoto protocol and the leadership role that Canada has played over the last decade, a mounting 128 signatures to join this Kyoto protocol, we would not tackle seriously together and internationally the whole notion of protecting one single atmosphere.

If the Conservative Party and the government do not understand that, perhaps they should speak to the Canadian Council of Chief Executives who overwhelmingly support the Kyoto protocol and whose companies have moved to embrace it over the last 25 years.

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, April 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the first thing I would say to the hon. member is that as a father of four children, I share his deep concern and passion for the child pornography challenges we are facing in the country today. I share his frustration in the limits of the law and the application of the law in terms of arresting the further spreading of child pornography, online or otherwise.

There are risks. We are hearing, for example, in American senate hearings just this week of young people being exposed, at a very young age, to these challenges online. However, as a lawyer, I would also say that it is important for all members to remember that we have to strike a balance here. I believe that the charter is now working for us in terms of its interpretation by the courts. There are some challenges, of course, in terms of sentencing. There are challenges in terms of enforceability, as my local police force reminds me on a regular basis.

Maybe I could just switch the channel for a second and reply to the member that the single most important thing we can do, as a country going forward, is invest in our social and human capital. That means investing in our kids where it counts most. Every child psychologist in the world who is an authority tells us that if we get to our children between the ages of three and seven, we are going to be better prepared for the economic challenges of the future. Even a Conservative government would understand that. I look forward to working with the government on a real child care plan for the country.