Marc Garneau

[Housing, May 28th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my concerns about the housing first approach announced in budget 2013 its negative impact on community outreach programs for homeless Canadians and others living in precarious situations.

In Montreal alone, shelters serve over 2,000 individuals on a nightly basis and, as we know, citizens in shelters account for only the tip of the iceberg.

Budget 2013 leaves community outreach groups focused on the homeless in the dark about whether they will have the funding required to maintain their services.

Focusing on housing excludes other very important initiatives that help people leave homelessness behind once and for all.

The government has a responsibility to continue to fund proven and effective programs provided by community outreach groups and to protect and support vulnerable Canadians. I hope the government will reconsider.

[Questions on the Order Paper, May 28th, 2013]

With regard to the required public consultation process by Canada Post following the announcement of the possible closure of a post office location: (a) how many times has the public consultation process taken place with citizen input received and responded to by mail, email or attendance at a public meeting; and (b) on how many occasions, after public consultation, has action resulted in an outcome other than the closure of a location?

[Ethics, May 23rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I detect a measure of desperation coming from the other side.

I have a simple question. Now that the RCMP has approached the Senate to access documents and information, can the minister tell us whether the RCMP has approached the Prime Minister or anyone in his office for access to documents and information?

[Ethics, May 23rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, ordinary Canadians do not have influential Conservative friends who can make their problems go away, but Mike Duffy does. I am referring to the Prime Minister's former press secretary, Senator Stewart Olsen. We know that the report on Senator Duffy was whitewashed.

Who ordered Senators Tkachuk and Stewart Olsen to do this? Was it the Prime Minister, Nigel Wright or someone else in the Prime Minister's Office?

[Ethics, May 23rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, ordinary Canadians do not have influential Conservative friends who can make their problems go away, but Mike Duffy does. Two Conservative senators, David Tkachuk and Carolyn Stewart Olsen, helped Mike Duffy.

Why do they still have the confidence of the Prime Minister if he is so outraged by the situation?

[BUSINESS OF SUPPLY, May 21st, 2013]

Mr. Chair, during testimony at the Natural Resources committee, the deputy minister stated that the department had cut 160 positions in the department. Where did those cuts happen and how many of them were to scientists?

[BUSINESS OF SUPPLY, May 21st, 2013]

Mr. Chair, I hope there is a timetable associated with that.

The main estimates provide the decrease of $22 million in the geo-mapping for energy and mineral program, the GEM program. Will the government allow this program to sunset after this year, despite industry support and the recommendations of the natural resources committee in its 2012 report?

[BUSINESS OF SUPPLY, May 21st, 2013]

Mr. Chair, I was hoping the minister would have that information, especially since the Conservatives made changes under Bill C-38 to the eligibility of witnesses to appear in front of the National Energy Board. Certainly it is a question that is on the minds of many people because it has such important repercussions.

The latest environmental commissioner's report gave a scathing review on the federal government's and the two offshore petroleum boards' readiness for a major oil spill. Is there any funding in the estimates to fix this negligence by the minister and his government?

[BUSINESS OF SUPPLY, May 21st, 2013]

Mr. Chair, how many applications to appear as witnesses have been received by the National Energy Board with regard to the proposed line 9 reversal by Enbridge?

[BUSINESS OF SUPPLY, May 21st, 2013]

Mr. Chair, Atomic Energy of Canada quietly announced in March of this year that the expected long-term cost for cleaning up its nuclear program had surged to a total of $6 billion, up dramatically from the $3.6 billion currently on the books. How does the minister explain why there is such a major increase in the costs?