House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2019, with 47% of the vote.
Afghanistan May 6th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Afghanistan committee was told by CSIS that it was in partnership with the notorious NDS in Afghanistan and that it had received information from the NDS it could not use because of the methods by which it was obtained. It knows what we all know but what the government refuses to admit, that the NDS tortures people in its custody.
When will the government stop the cover-up, live up to our obligations of international law and stop transferring detainees to the NDS?
Regional Development May 5th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the economy might be doing better on paper, but actual people are still hurting, and the recession is not over in Atlantic Canada, where over 15% of workers are unemployed in Newfoundland and Labrador alone. The activities and businesses supported by the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency are vital to helping our region get back on solid ground.
ACOA promotes innovation and economic development, so why are the Conservatives attacking it? It is the wrong decision at the wrong time. Is it because the Prime Minister himself still thinks there is a culture of defeat there?
Why is the government once again turning its back on Atlantic Canada?
Canadian Forces Superannuation Act May 3rd, 2010
Mr. Speaker, someone said it is not a clawback, but a deduction from one's pension by any other name can be considered a clawback by the person whose military pension is being reduced. I understand that the Conservative Party does not support this bill, but the member for Sackville—Eastern Shore, who has been championing this bill for some years now, and I agree that there ought to be special consideration given for veterans and RCMP officers. One might ask why. There are good reasons why and I will get to them shortly.
I want to echo what the member for Dartmouth—Cole Harbour said. We as parliamentarians are in a very special position in this country. Not only do we get to sit in the House of Commons, in Parliament, but we also get invited on numerous occasions to join with veterans to remember the service they gave and to support their efforts to look after veterans.
The Royal Canadian Legion is one of those organizations. I am sure that many members of the House were at events over the past weekend. I visited and had dinner with Branch 50 at CBS, Conception Bay South, on Saturday night. They are working to rebuild a war memorial in their town. They are moving the one from the old place and building a memorial not only to veterans of the armed forces, but also police and firefighters. It is a combined memorial with a separate place for veterans. They have a private place in the middle of that memorial and there are side memorials for the others. That is a great community effort made by Branch 50 in CBS.
Yesterday afternoon I was on Bell Island celebrating the anniversary of the Battle of the Atlantic with veterans and the community. As some members may know, if they listened to my speech on the occasion of Juno Beach last June, Newfoundland and Labrador was the only place in North America with a direct hit from the German army and navy during the second world war. Four boats were sunk by torpedos from U-boats in September and November 1942 while docked on Bell Island to take on iron ore. The Caribou ferry also sank in the Cabot Strait with a significant loss of life. Again, that was enemy action during wartime, which Newfoundland and Labrador alone experienced in North America.
We do have a close connection with the veterans. The member for Sackville—Eastern Shore has brought that to the House and we offer our support of that. I want to explain why. Aside from the great contribution that veterans, people in the armed forces and people in the RCMP have made to keep our communities and our country in keeping our country safe, they also have families that move around constantly during their careers. A member of the Canadian Forces could move from one base to another and over the course of a career move to many different places. It is the same with RCMP officers who are often moved from one community to another with their families.
This creates a particular family dynamic. It is often difficult for a spouse to maintain an employment career that is equal to those who might be in a stationary workforce. This obviously affects their long-term income as a family and clearly would have, as a consequence, a greater need for retirement income. This is one way to recognize that.
As my colleague from Timmins—James Bay mentioned earlier, we have a government that constantly reminds us and tries to suggest that, among all members of the House, its members are the ones who support our veterans, our troops and the armed forces. However, when we look at something like this, it pales. When there is a real opportunity to make the retirement lives of our veterans and serving RCMP officers better, the government does not support it.
It falls into the category of lip service. It is shameful that the government has taken away the opportunity or is not prepared to grant the opportunity for veterans to continue to receive their full pensions and enjoy their retirement instead of having them clawed back at age 65 when the Canada pension plan kicks in.
The government did not cause this problem. This was a problem that was inherent in the structure of the Canada pension plan when it was introduced in 1966, but it is a problem that it can help us fix. The member for Sackville—Eastern Shore has been working on this for several years. He indicates five years. I have heard him talk about it many times in caucus, in the House and with veterans who are very interested in this issue.
I am sure veterans will be talking to the member from Alberta, whose riding I cannot remember at the moment. They have spoken to me about it. They raise it at events. I am sure when the member speaks, he will give an explanation as to why the government is saying no. Perhaps he will. I hope he is explaining it to the individual veterans who we speak with, who are concerned enough about this issue to sign petitions in massive numbers. More than 100,000 petitioners have signed in support of this.
It is well known in Canadian legions across the country that this action is taking place. I hope people are paying attention to the debate. Not only is it important that we support our troops and recognize they are providing a great service to us, but service to veterans is something that my colleague from Sackville—Eastern Shore has been championing ever since he has been in the House.
This year he is celebrating, along with other nationals of Holland, the liberation of Holland by Canadian troops. My colleague is both a native of Holland and a very proud Canadian citizen. However, also very dear to his heart is the relationship between Holland and not only the Canadian soldiers of today and yesterday but all Canadians. The Canadian people are recognized by the people of the Netherlands for the liberation and the commitment and sacrifice that Canadian soldiers were prepared to make during World War II to liberate them from the Nazi occupation and oppression.
This is one of the things that makes Canadians proud, that other countries respect the sacrifice and willingness that our young men and women were able and willing to undertake for the cause of freedom to fight off Nazi oppression during World War II. It had to be done and our young men and women were prepared to make the sacrifice to do that, in both Canada and Newfoundland and Labrador, which was a separate country at the time. I am sure all members of the House know that. If they do not, they will certainly know it by the time I leave here. It is obviously part of our constitutional history.
It is important to remember that our country is made up of many parts, and we all come together for the greater good and a great cause in the nation of Canada and our place in the world today. However, how we treat our veterans is also a mark of how well we respect the work they do on our behalf throughout their lives and working careers. The same goes for RCMP officers who put their lives on the line to protect our communities throughout their working careers as well.
I would ask all hon. members to support this bill and those who have been speaking against it to reconsider their vote, if it comes to a vote this morning.
Canadian Forces Superannuation Act May 3rd, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have an opportunity to speak to Bill C-201, An Act to amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act. As we know and as veterans, RCMP members and their families across the country know, this has to do with the CPP clawback for veterans and service people.
Royal Newfoundland Regiment April 30th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Royal Newfoundland Regiment, of which all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are very proud and which is celebrating the 215th anniversary of its roots in 1795. New colours were presented by Princess Anne, the honorary Colonel-in-Chief, last Saturday.
The Newfoundlanders were part of General Brock's forces defending Canada in the War of 1812, long before Confederation and even longer before Newfoundland and Labrador joined Canada in 1949.
During World War I, the regiment earned many battle honours and its members were the only North Americans in Gallipoli in 1915. The most famous battle was at Beaumont Hamel in France on the first day of the Battle of the Somme, where the bravery and sacrifice of the soldiers were extraordinary. The event is seared on the national memory of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who mark July 1 as Memorial Day.
Their courage, ability and determination in battle earned them praise as better than the best, and the designation "Royal" was conferred during World War I. The regiment's proud history of more than two centuries continues to this day, with many of its members serving in Afghanistan. They deserve our praise and congratulations.
Mr. Speaker, this is the same kind of non-answer that I got from the Minister of Finance on April 1, and the member talks about something entirely different.
When this Canadian contribution was made, the Newfoundland government also made considerable sacrifices in helping this project work with tax exemptions, tax reductions, a favourable royalty regime, and there was not much in royalties in Newfoundland until the price of oil rose recently.
This transfer is needed to try and redress the kind of imbalance that occurred as a result. It was never intended to be a windfall for the Government of Canada. Newfoundland is supposed to be the primary beneficiary of its offshore resources. Until recently, the Government of Canada was in fact getting 80% of all government revenues from that project and the Newfoundland government was getting 20%.
Will the government recognize that and do the right thing by transferring that share to Newfoundland and Labrador for a reasonable price?
Mr. Speaker, on April 1 in this House, I asked a question of the Minister of Finance in relation to the 8.5% Hibernia share held by the Government of Canada through the Canada Hibernia Holding Corporation and the interest that the Newfoundland and Labrador government has in the transfer to it of that share and the importance of that.
I did not get a very satisfactory answer from the minister. I am here today to provide some background as to why this is important and why it is necessary to do it. First, I will give a little bit of history on the Hibernia project. It was the first of a number of projects in the east coast oil and gas sector. It is extremely important to Newfoundland and Labrador and to Canada.
In fact, in the east coast oil and gas sector in Newfoundland and Labrador alone, the equivalent of over 40% of the Canadian requirement for light crude oil is produced in those three projects that are now operating. That is of substantial importance to Canada's oil security and clearly represents a significant role in Canada's oil and gas production in total.
That particular fact is little known, with the emphasis on western oil and gas and the overweening emphasis on the oil sands projects. It is also interesting to note that the production costs and operating costs per barrel of oil and gas on the east coast are extremely low by comparison to the operating costs of the oil sands. This is something a lot of Canadians do not know. Frankly, from our perspective, it does not receive the kind of attention we think it deserves.
The Hibernia project first started bringing in oil in 1997, but it had a bit of a precarious history. It was discovered in 1980, I believe, and first developed by the consortium, which was working along with various partners until 1992, when Gulf Canada Resources decided it would no longer continue with its 25% share of the project, putting the whole project in jeopardy.
It was a time of economic uncertainty and lower oil prices. Efforts were made to ensure that the project succeeded. I want to give credit and pay tribute to John Crosbie, the current Lieutenant Governor of Newfoundland and Labrador, for helping make that happen. Canada decided to take a part of that share, 8.5%, and put in the money to help that project along. It paid its share of the cost of production, around $430 million.
All of that has now been repaid. The Government of Canada has received over $1 billion in dividends, starting in 2002. It is time that share was transferred to the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. It has expressed a willingness to pay. It would fit in with Newfoundland and Labrador's offshore oil strategy. It now has a share in the Hibernia South development, the White Rose extension and the new Chevron Hebron-Ben Nevis project. It is part of its strategy and also part of the Government of Canada's strategy of divesting itself of certain assets.
It seems to me that the time is right. The province is very interested and I would like to see the federal government tell us when it is going to do this—
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns April 23rd, 2010
With regard to search and rescue (SAR) operations: (a) how many SAR operation reports have been produced since 1980 by the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre in Halifax in accordance with chapter nine of the National Search and Rescue Manual; (b) since 1980, what incidents warranted a SAR operation report; (c) what have been the lessons learned, conclusions and recommendations from each report and what recommendations were adopted from each report; (d) what have been the details of the SAR operation from each report, including a summary of significant decisions and timelines; (e) what is the criteria for warranting a SAR operation report; (f) what are the other methods of documenting SAR operations in the Atlantic region that have been used since 1980; and (g) what are the names of the comprehensive studies conducted by the Canadian Forces in 2003 and 2005 on the location of search and rescue assets, as referred to by the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister of Defence on October 21, 2009, during Adjournment Proceedings in the House of Commons?
Afghanistan April 22nd, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the government's own answer for the delay is that it cannot keep up with censoring documents. Its lawyer compounded the government's arrogance by saying that it will only hand over documents when it is good and ready.
Now we hear the government is weeding out vital information even before it is handed over to the censor. It is censoring the censor. This is a massive cover-up of the government's see no evil, hear no evil, hide the evil policy on Afghan detainees.
The only way to get to the truth is through a public inquiry. When will the government call one?
Afghanistan April 22nd, 2010
Mr. Speaker, while the government has been defying parliamentary orders for documents, interfering with parliamentary committees and dismissing opposition calls for a public inquiry on Afghan detainees, it has tried to maintain a shred of accountability by referring to the MPCC hearings.
Now we learn that these hearings are being derailed and may be suspended again because the government is starving it of critical documents on the detainee issue.
When will the government stop the cover-up, and stop hiding and delaying the truth?