David McGuinty

[Business of Supply, February 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pick up on some of the comments made by the parliamentary secretary in his speech and pose a couple of pointed questions in a timely fashion.

First, could the parliamentary secretary let the House and Canadians know what the status of European Union regulations is on regulating large final emitters? He claims that his government is the only government to have done so or to have projected to do so.

Second, could he tell us how much the international emissions trading system will be worth when it is fully operational under the Kyoto protocol?

Third, will the government introduce a cap and trade system or not to achieve our greenhouse gas reduction targets?

Fourth, could he help Canadians understand why his government's own officials in Environment Canada and Finance Canada recommended to the government that it not bring in a tax deductible transit pass because the economics simply were not there to justify it?

[Business of Supply, February 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to participate in this debate. I want to commend our leader of the official opposition for an extraordinary speech in which he has laid bare for Canadians the actual conduct of the new minority government. I want to pick up on a few of the points made by the Minister of the Environment.

Chiefly, I would like to go to the theme of misrepresentation. The minister has misrepresented yet again, as Ronald Reagan used to say, “here he goes again”. There they go again. The Conservatives misrepresentation game is something that Canadians are catching onto, and I would recommend that the Minister of the Environment get a new writer. For example, let me quote from the commissioner of the environment's report of 2006. She writes:

Even if the measures contained in the previous government's 2005 plan had been fully implemented, it is difficult to say whether the projected emission reductions would have been enough to meet our Kyoto obligations.

The minister should give the full quote and not misrepresent the facts to Canadians.

He speaks about regulating through CEPA. He talks about us, as a government, not having regulated through CEPA. Is the minister aware of the fact that the Kyoto protocol became international law in 2005?

Another question for the minister is this. Is it true the minister is flying to France tomorrow to find his made in Canada solution?

I have another question for the minister. The Prime Minister was asked 18 times in a row yesterday if he was misleading Canadians over the past 10 years, or was he misleading Canadians on his new-found position on climate change.

[Business of Supply, February 1st, 2007]

A made in Canada solution?

[Points of Order, January 31st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the Minister of the Environment for his extensive detailed research into my background. I thank him very much.

I would remind him on this point of order that the kind of conduct he is pursuing is conduct unbecoming of a Minister of the Environment. He should understand that Canadians are watching; his constituents and my constituents are watching. This does not advance the cause of climate change one iota. In fact, what the Minister of the Environment should do is prevail upon his boss, the Prime Minister, to answer the question.

[Points of Order, January 31st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, during question period the Prime Minister was asked 18 times whether he was misleading Canadians then or misleading them now on climate change. In answering those questions the Minister of the Environment continued misleading the House of Commons and Canadians by taking out of context comments I have made in the past as a professional. This is precisely the kind of conduct that Canadians have come to count on from the new government.

I would ask the Minister of the Environment to table the documents. I would ask all Canadians to understand these comments were taken out of context.

I would ask the Prime Minister again to answer the question as to whether he was misleading Canadians then or whether he is misleading them now.

[The Environment, January 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it looks as though the Minister of Natural Resources is trying to rebuild his image. However, Canadians will remember that it is this same minister who abolished the EnerGuide program and who is now proposing a watered down version. It is this same minister who also abolished the incentives to produce wind energy and who is now coming up with a weaker version of the program.

When will the minister stop being arrogant and admit that he was wrong to abolish all these programs last spring?

[The Environment, January 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have been demanding action from the government over here for at least a year. It is now clear that the Prime Minister did not have the political will to do anything. He was even prepared to sacrifice his first Minister of the Environment to disguise his own failures. It is pathetic.

Thanks to the former Liberal government, the new Minister of the Environment has every tool he could conceivably want at his disposal to fight climate change. Will the minister act now and not wait for a so-called clean air act and declare greenhouse gases to be toxic and strictly cap all of these emissions in Canada immediately?

[RCMP Commissioner, December 8th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the commissioner's original testimony did not hold water and each witness who came to the committee subsequently poked more holes in it. The commissioner and the committee knew there were problems, but what Canadians are concerned about is why the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety did not.

Does the Prime Minister, a practising information czar, really expect Canadians to believe he knew nothing of this matter until Monday of this week? How is it that this one particular file slipped through his iron grip, and why is he now desperately distancing himself from it?

[RCMP Commissioner, December 8th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, if there is one thing this Prime Minister is good at, it is the excessive control he has over communications. Whether it be speeches, announcements or travel allowances, everything is controlled by the Prime Minister's Office.

Now he would have us believe that he learned that the RCMP commissioner was going to change his testimony just this week, when his Minister of Public Safety knew about this more than a month ago. Who is telling the truth?

[Bionorth 2006, November 20th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, today and tomorrow the 13th annual Bionorth Conference, “Canada's International Biotechnology and Life Sciences Conference and Exhibition”, will be held in Ottawa by the Ottawa Life Sciences Council.

Canada is an international leader in research and development. Since 1995, the city of Ottawa has attracted over 50% of all incoming venture capital to Canada.

This year Bionorth focuses on competing in a global market. Now, more than ever, investments in education and research put us ahead. For that reason, I am very disappointed that the Conservative government has not made innovation a priority. Where is its plan?

Our government's innovation strategy fostered an outstanding business climate. The private sector today spends more than $3 billion a year in life sciences research and development, producing well over 70,000 Canadian jobs.

Innovation is at the core of Canada's economic success. Where is the minority Conservative government?