Geoff Regan

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, May 12th, 2014]

With regard to the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between Canada and the European Union: what were the costs to the government incurred in relation to government travel to Brussels for the announcement of the agreement on October 18, 2013, broken down by (i) department, (ii) individual, (iii) itemized expense?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, May 12th, 2014]

With regard to the free trade agreement between Canada and the Republic of Korea: what were the costs incurred in relation to government travel to the Republic of Korea for the announcement of the agreement on March 11, 2014, broken down by (i) department, (ii) individual, (iii) itemized expense?

[Questions on the Order Paper, May 12th, 2014]

With regard to government appointments: what is the name of each person receiving an Order-in-Council Appointment since January 1, 2006, and for each such appointment, what is (i) the position to which they were appointed, (ii) the location or region of the appointment, if applicable, (iii) the term of the appointment, (iv) the remuneration or compensation of the appointment?

[Petitions, May 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of a large number of Nova Scotians who believe that health care is a fundamental right for all Canadians, these citizens believe the government's cuts to health care in my province to be crippling. They are concerned about the fact that changes to health transfer payments mean that funding will be on a per capita basis. That means that Nova Scotia will receive $23 million less than the province would have gotten under the previous health accord. Obviously, the folks who signed this petition do not think that is fair, and they are calling on the Prime Minister to work with Premier Stephen McNeil to develop an alternate funding formula that does not punish Nova Scotia this way.

[Foreign Investment, April 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his comments.

I mentioned a few moments ago the worry about the consequences of a shortage of medical isotopes that this situation could lead to. Unfortunately, the one region that has been left out of plans to produce medical isotopes using new technology and to be part of the experimentation going on right now in those new technologies is my region of Atlantic Canada.

I have written to the minister about the exclusion of Atlantic Canada's only medical isotope production facility—the only area that is really doing work in this field—from the isotope technology acceleration program, or ITAP. The federal government has now invested more than $50 million in the development of an alternative supply of medical isotopes, and I am informed that none of this funding has been invested in Atlantic Canada. This is unacceptable in a region where the supply of medical isotopes is precarious.

Like many others, I am concerned that patient care for residents of Atlantic Canada will be jeopardized should the Conservatives neglect to invest in the region under ITAP.

[Foreign Investment, April 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have a few moments to rise and speak about this question that I raised in the House not too long ago.

In my view, the Conservative government has once again proven its incompetence when it comes to reviews under the Investment Canada Act. It is unclear, in fact, whether the interests of vulnerable Canadians are being properly protected.

I asked a question about Nordion and what is happening with it. I am thinking of those Canadians who rely upon medical isotopes for medical diagnosis and treatment.

Despite repeated promises to make the Investment Canada Act more transparent and to provide a clear definition of net benefit, we have another case that is shrouded in secrecy and uncertainty. I am talking about the $800 million deal for a United States company to acquire Kanata-based Nordion.

Before the government approves this deal, we should know the criteria it will use to assess the transaction, but we do not. Since the sale means that Nordion, which supplies medical isotopes, will become private, there should also be some assurances given to Canadians who rely on medical isotopes.

Sterigenics Inc., which wants to acquire Nordion, is a sterilization services company, and it is owned by a Chicago-based private equity firm. Nordion's CEO says the transaction delivers value to shareholders and is a good, strategic fit. We take him at his word.

However, we still need to ensure that it is also in the best interests of all Canadians, and especially those who need a safe and secure supply of medical isotopes.

According to media reports, Sterigenics said its initial focus will be on the use of cobalt-60, a radioactive isotope used to sterilize medical equipment.

Nordion officials said Sterigenics is supportive of Nordion's continued efforts to secure a long-term supply of medical isotopes.

However, before the deal goes through, the government would have to also lift foreign investment restrictions that currently apply to Nordion. These restrictions prevent non-residents from controlling more than 25% of Nordion, which of course is involved in the nuclear industry in Canada.

There are measures in the Conservative omnibus budget bill to remove that restriction, so some may think that the government approved the deal even before it reviewed it, because it has these measures in the budget bill and it has not even reviewed the deal yet.

Of course, the Conservatives will say the sale is a net benefit to Canada, because it just happens to define what net benefit means.

This decision has been and continues to be worrisome, and we are all too aware of the consequences of a shortage of medical isotopes.

I look forward to hearing the answer to this important question from the government side.

[Business of Supply, April 10th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member was talking about the government's bill to amend the Elections Act coming back to the House and how he is keen to have further discussion on it. The difficulty is that there has been no sign whatsoever of the Conservatives listening to any of the witnesses so far, particularly people like Marc Mayrand, of Elections Canada; the Commissioner of Canada Elections; the commissioners of elections for provincial governments; the former auditor general, Sheila Fraser; and even an expert witness from Britain. We have become international now.

So many witnesses are attacking this bill. We have a situation where the Commissioner of Canada Elections is trying to investigate alleged fraudulent actions in the last election by Conservative members of Parliament. The Conservatives are making it more difficult for the commissioner to comment on those elections and are making it harder for that person to investigate those elections.

In view of these actions, will the member agree that they really ought to change this bill, in terms of what it does in allowing members who have committed fraud to get elected, to the elect more crooked Conservatives act?

[The Environment, April 4th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, all week, the Minister of the Environment has avoided questions on the impact of climate change. She has simply read from her pre-approved cue cards. I would like to give her a chance to show that she can think for herself.

What is the minister's response to the new report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?

[Foreign Investment, March 31st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the plan to sell Nordion shows the lack of transparency in the Investment Canada Act review process. Canadians who rely on medical isotopes hope that this agreement will be approved only if it is in their best interest.

Will the minister add to this government's incompetence or will he publicly announce the criteria on which he will base his decision?

[Offshore Health and Safety Act, March 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I know that the other parties like to go back eight, ten years, and so forth, and talk about what the Liberal government did at that time. It is quite a while ago now, so it is interesting that they continue to do that, but it is a good sign when they try to throw barbs in our direction and challenge us on things. They are certainly paying attention and must be concerned about our party.

The fact is, if we do go back that long, I was very engaged, particularly as the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, with concerns about search and rescue and the Coast Guard. I very strongly supported measures to improve the situation for our Coast Guard. In fact, we announced funding for new Coast Guard vessels, which took quite a while for the following government to bring to fruition.