James Moore

[Business of Supply, October 1st, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I find it interesting that the member says that this was not about politics, but he wants to trigger an election campaign. He says that this is about Canadians and policies. He stood there for 10 minutes and did not put one single idea forward. He says that employment insurance is very important and yet the Liberals walked away from the negotiations and conversations this summer. He says that the budget and the economy is so important but the Liberals offered no amendment to our budget. He says that our government is about division. This Conservative government is the longest serving minority government in Canadian history. We get that record by working with other political parties and getting things done.

We were elected because Liberals failed and we were re-elected because we are getting the job done. The fact is that the vote tonight, and the member knows it, the NDP is doing the Liberals the biggest favour they have ever had in the history of their party.

[Heritage, September 29th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, as I just said, those transactions took place without any consultation whatsoever with our government.

We are reforming the process by which these assets will be taken care of in the future. We are going to ensure that this does not happen again.

This government has an unprecedented and untarnished record of standing up and protecting Canada's character, culture, our heritage, and ensuring that all our assets are treated with the due care they deserve. We are changing the process. What happened in the past will not happen again, because we are taking action.

The NDP can make all the noise that it wants; this Conservative government will always take action to protect Canadian heritage.

[Heritage, September 29th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, what occurred of course was wrong. Those actions took place independent of this government, independent of my ministry. While we were not involved in those transactions at all, we are taking responsibility in ensuring it does not happen again.

What happened is not in the interests of taxpayers; it is not in the interests of our heritage. We are taking action to correct it in the future.

[Committees of the House, September 29th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, first of all, culture is not included in NAFTA, so the fearmongering of the member is exactly the opposite.

Again, I will underline it, and maybe it will penetrate this time. What the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley said is exactly wrong. Chapter 11 extends the protection and the rights of Canadian companies to sue American and Mexican companies who discriminate against Canadians. The rights of foreign companies to sue and to take legal action in Canada existed before chapter 11.

It is amazing that somebody can stand up in the House and for over 20 minutes speak so passionately and forcefully on a subject she clearly knows nothing about.

[Committees of the House, September 29th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I listened attentively to the speech being delivered by my good friend from Winnipeg. I have a great deal of respect for her.

However, on this subject we will disagree, and I will rebut her closing statements by saying that this House and Canadians should stand firmly in favour of chapter 11, should stand firmly in favour of NAFTA for simple reasons.

First, I was disappointed that she kept bridging back to using the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives as her source of data. That is a rather shaky foundation given that everything the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives does and everything they write has already been written before they have begun. All of their suppositions are cemented in. There is no imagination. There is absolutely nothing that the centre does.

That is the counterpoint. If I stood up and used them as the only source, I think some members would have the same point of view.

The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives is not a serious organization to be basing serious public policy on.

That said, chapter 11 of NAFTA extends an existing Canadian principle to our trading partners. The idea of national treatment existed before NAFTA. There would be no difference in the way that Canadian law would treat foreign companies doing business in Canada if chapter 11 were not in place. National treatment existed before NAFTA.

What NAFTA and chapter 11 do is extend to our trading partners the legal protection and the legal requirement that businesses cannot be discriminated against because of where they are from. It changes nothing in Canada. It changes everything for our trading partners.

Chapter 11 protects Canadian companies so that when they are doing business in the United States or Mexico, they cannot be discriminated against because they happen to be Canadian-owned or Canadian-based. Chapter 11 protects Canadians. It extends a Canadian principle. This is an important value.

The member is saying that we need to get rid of chapter 11. It is the very essence of NAFTA. It is the very essence of equal treatment. To say that somehow Canadian businesses are being discriminated against because of chapter 11 is mind-blowing to me, because to say that gets it exactly backwards.

National treatment for foreign companies operating in Canada existed before chapter 11. Chapter 11 protects Canadian companies so that the principle on which we treat foreign companies operating in Canada is extended to Canadian companies operating in the United States and Mexico. To get rid of chapter 11 would handicap Canadian companies and allow them to be discriminated against when operating in the United States and Mexico.

My question is, does the member not understand that?

[Youth, September 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, this government is making very important investments in young Canadians across the country. In my department alone, we are investing well over $100 million in youth programs across the country that will see young Canadians involved in this country.

I can tell the House, as a young member of Parliament and as a young minister, that all Canadians, young and old, benefit when this economy turns around and starts moving in the right direction with lower taxes and better opportunities. That will only happen with a Conservative government.

[Firefighters Monument, September 17th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, no job is more important than protecting the safety of Canadians. The monument, which will be the first of its kind in Canada, will remind us that firefighters put their lives on the line for our safety every day.

Calgary's Bruce Burrell of the Association of Fire Chiefs said this regarding the new memorial:

There could be nothing more welcome at this time for the families, friends and comrades of the fallen than the news that there will soon be a permanent fallen firefighters monument in Ottawa.

All parties in the House are proud to honour the sacrifice. We salute all those brave firefighters who over the years have lost their lives serving Canadians.

[Official Languages, September 15th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. The 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games will be completely bilingual.

Today, Graham Fraser himself said that the government as well as VANOC “...have taken a number of measures to ensure that both of Canada’s official languages are fully reflected during the Games”.

I appreciate the question because it gives me the opportunity to point out that our government today announced new funding of $7.7 million to ensure that the Olympic Games will be completely bilingual and will respect Canada's official languages.

Our Conservative government is keeping its promises.

[Questions on the Order Paper, September 14th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Canadian Heritage’s information systems do not capture financial information by federal riding.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 17th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, there are no programs offered by the Department of Canadian Heritage which fit the requirements listed above.

Programs offered by the Canada Council for the Arts award grants for international touring in dance, theatre, and performing arts through the following three programs: Dance Touring Grants--International (Pilot Program), Theatre International Program, International Touring Assistance in Music (Pilot Project). The maximum for each program is $50,000.