Jack Harris

[National Defence, November 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, lots of questions and no answers. We have heard the Conservatives say there is an option A, option B and option C, all of which are the F-35.

It seems that the new Chief of Defence Staff has a different take on this. He told the defence committee yesterday that the F-35 was not the only plane that met the stealth requirements of the SOR. According to him, other planes could meet the requirement for some measure of stealth.

Does the government now admit that the F-35 is not the only plane that can fill the requirements set out by the military and that a true consideration of alternatives must take place?

[National Defence, November 30th, 2012]

That is not much of an answer, Mr. Speaker. According to the National Post, KPMG's review of the price tag for the F-35 will be published some time before Christmas. It should have been done a long time ago, according to the government's own seven-point plan.

For years the Conservatives refused to update their lowball estimates for the F-35, even as every other partner country was revising theirs. It took the Auditor General's report to force the government to update its numbers.

Why did it take so long for the government to act? Will the Conservatives confirm that the new numbers will be released before this House rises in December?

[Nuclear Terrorism Act, November 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, of course, it is important for us to conform to the treaties to which we are a party. However, it seems that some modifications may be made, and we are supporting the bill to go to committee.

I note that the bill has been amended already in the Senate, to add a provision to make the manufacturing of a radioactive device a criminal offence. I wonder if that means a little more study is required. There are many types of radioactive devices, some of which are medical in nature and used for purposes of X-rays and different types of medical procedures. Is this one of the reasons we need to have further study on the bill, because it is highly technical in nature?

[National Defence, November 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the information released today on the case of Jeffrey Delisle shows that there was a serious failure to enforce mandatory security screening. It also shows that the government was only made aware of Delisle's adventures by the FBI.

The Minister of National Defence has said that our allies have full confidence in our security arrangements, but how can he say that when it was actually one of the allies that first alerted us to what this officer was up to and had been doing for years?

What steps has the minister taken since January to fix this security problem, other than providing these bland assurances?

[Financial Literacy Leader Act, November 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague asked an important question. As Barrie McKenna, a business columnist with The Globe and Mail, stated:

Looking to financial literacy to fill the void is like asking ordinary Canadians to be their own brain surgeons and airline pilots. The dizzying array of financial products, mixed with chaotic and increasingly irrational financial markets, makes the job of do-it-yourself financial planning almost impossible—no matter how literate you are.

What happens, of course, is that this is just driving people into the institutions that have financial products. In this country, we pay two and three times as much on management fees in the private sector than in the Canada pension plan, which is a better way of saving for Canadians.

We have a problem. It is considered to be a very small first step, but one that requires leadership from the government. We are not sure we are going to get it, but we think this is a start that ought to be made.

[Financial Literacy Leader Act, November 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague points to a real inconsistency by the Conservative government in suggesting that financial literacy is so important that we should undertake this task. It is preaching financial literacy now, but back in 2006 it cut nearly $18 million from adult literacy programs across the country. This is a bit of a fig leaf for the Conservatives' inaction, frankly, on the real problems of literacy in this country and its failure to protect consumers and build a better regulatory framework.

[Financial Literacy Leader Act, November 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would advise the Chair that I will be splitting my time on this bill, which is a bill to establish a financial literacy leader so-called, which is one of 30 recommendations of a task force on financial literacy. It is rather unfortunate that only 1 of the 30 recommendations were followed because this is really just a very minor or modest first step in what is required.

The problem of course is that many financial literacy programs often devolve into simply admonitions for individuals to save more money, which is an impossible situation for many people. In fact, most people going into retirement, for example, 30% have nothing more than CPP for their retirement plans. We have the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development suggesting that people should save more for an extra two years for retirement. It is totally inadequate.

I see I have only a short time to give this speech and I would encourage my colleagues to ask some questions and make some comments to allow me to speak a little more.

[Petitions, November 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition on behalf of mostly residents from Bell Island in my constituency who are calling on the Government of Canada to reverse its decision to close the Canadian Coast Guard maritime rescue station in St. John's, Newfoundland, reinstate the staff and restore its full services.

This is a very important search and rescue station. The petitioners recognize its value and want it reinstated.

[National Defence, November 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives started a new practice yesterday at the defence committee trying to block legitimate questions on supplementary estimates (B). With so much mismanagement and lack of transparency, it is no wonder the Conservatives would try any parliamentary tactic in the book to keep information from Canadians. If the minister does not want to be accountable at committee, then we will ensure he is accountable in the House.

When will the Minister of National Defence show transparency and accountability and release the information that the Parliamentary Budget Officer requested on cuts to the department?

[National Defence, November 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, acting on recommendations is the same as partially implementing. That is what the ombudsman said.

We have the minister's colourful responses to our questions and we then have the facts. The fact is the minister has not co-operated with the ombudsman. He tried to warn the ombudsman in September, saying he should not advocate for Canadian Forces members. That is also a fact. Just as with the veterans ombudsman, Conservatives are stonewalling, claiming a whole variety of documents are somehow magically cabinet records, even though they have nothing to do with ministers.

We are talking about ensuring benefits for injured soldiers. Will the minister now relent and let the ombudsman find the truth?