Ken Hardie

[Transportation Modernization Act, May 3rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, as a member of that committee, I can certainly vouch for the parliamentary secretary's comments. It was extremely collaborative. Many of the amendments brought forward were wordsmithed and shaped in order to bring this forward.

One of the primary things we tried to do was understand what the previous government had tried to accomplish with Bill C-30. We discovered that the interswitching provision of 150 kilometres, in spite of the difficulties being faced by grain shippers in the season it was brought forward, was never actually used. It did not work.

Although the intention was there to improve the system, our committee focused on ways to take that concept and make it a lot better. I am going to give my hon. friend another opportunity to really underscore the value of the reciprocal penalties as being a far more potent tool for shippers to have, and through the shippers, the producers, in order to get compliance and co-operation from the railways.

[Transportation Modernization Act, May 3rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to congratulate my colleague from the transport committee. We put in a very solid week of work listening to a lot of people, and despite the fact that we ended up on different pages on some issues, there was a great deal of effort to make sure this moved forward.

I want to test the member's memory on one issue, final offer arbitration. There are also provisions in the bill that require railroads to provide information about what they are actually charging to move similar products over similar distances. I am wondering if that is the kind of information that could help inform an arbitrator as they go through the FOA process.

[April 27th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, it is interesting to hear the hon. member mention the fact that he was a toothbrush lawyer. Therefore, I trust he will not bristle at this question.

There is always that fine balance between legislation and regulation. Could the hon. member give us a sense of where he would see things being legislated versus left to regulation, which might be more changeable over time?

[Oceans Act, April 25th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, the hon. gentleman did not sit on the fisheries committee. There may be a few points of enlightenment, not the least of which is that most of the activities going on in an area that is designated an interim marine protected area would be allowed to continue so that the people who fish and make a living in that area would not be deprived.

The opposition members talk about consultation. We saw a glaring example of a lack of consultation, not by the previous government but by a government many steps down the line, on July 2, 1992, when John Crosbie closed the cod fishery. Why did he do that without consultation? He did it because it had collapsed, because steps had not been taken in advance to prevent that kind of collapse. I would ask the hon. gentleman if it is not better to come in with an interim safety measure, using the precautionary principle, to avoid what John Crosbie did in 1992.

[Business of Supply, April 24th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, I have two problems with the motion. One is that it does not come across as being genuine. For a party that cut resources so badly during its time in office to ask that agencies get the resources they need does not connect very well. The other problem is that asking the Prime Minister to admit irresponsibility in this matter smacks to me more of partisan politics than it does of any genuine attempt to fix something.

I would ask the hon. gentleman, whom I enjoy working with on our committee, if he would go back to his party and say that if they really want to give the government the path of least resistance to doing something they think is a good idea, then they should cut the partisanship and get on with really good ideas for Parliament.

[Petitions, March 2nd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, every day, over 130 million girls around the world are not in school. In Canada, we know that education is key to individual and community prosperity and well-being. On behalf of the ONE campaign, which is here in Ottawa right now, I am very pleased to present a petition calling on the government to mobilize support to better fund girls' education internationally.

As our budget 2018 demonstrates, we believe that when women do better, we all do better. That principle applies not just here at home, but globally. The ONE campaign wants Canada to support that principle around the world.

[Business of Supply, March 1st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, it is really distressing to hear the hon. member across the way continue to confuse and inflame the situation by the constant reference to “values”. In the attestation, the word used is “mandate”. In conversations I have had with churches in my riding, I made it very clear that if there is nothing in their mission statements and vision statements that says they are deliberately in business to work against certain rights and freedoms that women and the LGBTQ2 community enjoy, they should have no problem ticking off the attestation, because that is not the business they are in. I also had a conversation with a Baptist minister and said that the chance of abortion or gay rights coming up at a soccer camp or a cooking class is zero.

Will the member start to take responsibility for using the word “values” incorrectly, when it is not mentioned in the attestation? Will he take responsibility for the fact that a lot of churches will not go ahead and run their summer camp programs because of the way he has deliberately misinterpreted what the attestation says?

[Business of Supply, February 15th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, there were a lot of unbelievable things in my hon. friend's comments. When I was thinking about running for office, in addition to the cuts the previous government made to veterans services, there was also over a billion dollars in lapsed funding, money the Conservatives promised and did not deliver, which was returned to the federal treasury to supposedly balance the budget.

What I also find unbelievable is this. Given all the wonderful things the member says the Conservatives did, why did the Equitas people take them to court? Why did the Conservatives not settle that before their time in office was done? Why were veterans turning their backs on the minister, who is a decent guy, and the former prime minister in the period leading up to the 2015 election? If all of the unbelievable things they did were so unbelievably good, why were we left with such a mess?

[Fisheries Act, February 13th, 2018]

This has been noted as being a very good point, Mr. Speaker.

The Kinder Morgan line passes right through the north end of my riding. Our citizens are concerned. However, we need rules of the game, standards and codes, that prescribe what can go and what should not go. These are all component parts of the legislation.

May there be another Kinder Morgan, we do not know? However, in the future when projects like this come forward, there will be a much clearer way of assessing their positive and negative benefits, if we want to call them that, and to respond accordingly through the regulations that will be in place.

[Fisheries Act, February 13th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member may have heard this before, but it is possible to have a healthy economy and a healthy environment, and we need both.