Megan Leslie

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 19th, 2012]

With regard to the cancellation of the Experimental Lakes Area (ELA) program and dismantling of the Experimental Lakes Area science team: (a) what assessment led to the termination of the ELA program; (b) what was the review process; (c) which departments led the review; (d) who made the decision to terminate the program and on what date; (e) does the ELA research program align with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ priorities, and if not, how does the ELA research program fail to align with the mandate; and (f) does the ELA research program align with the mandate of Environment Canada?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 19th, 2012]

With regard to the cancellation of the Experimental Lakes Area (ELA) program and discontinuance of funding: (a) what initiatives or programs are being cut; (b) for each initiative or program, what are the amounts of the planned decreases in human resources and funding; (c) will positions be eliminated and, if so, how many; and (d) which initiatives and/or programs will be eliminated by Budget 2012?

[Parks Canada, November 8th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, today we also learned that Conservatives will stop maintaining cross-country ski trails in many of our national parks. They include Prince Albert National Park in Saskatchewan, Riding Mountain National Park in Manitoba, and Elk Island National Park in Alberta. This is another example of cuts to direct services.

Can the Conservatives tell us if they plan to use a private company to deliver these services as well, perhaps Goldman Sachs?

[Social Services, November 8th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the proposed Conservative model for fiscal restraint is to focus their cuts on the services that Canadians rely on and then use Goldman Sachs as a model for prudent management. What is motivating the Conservatives here is not actually any concern about social services, it is a PR stunt to make up for the fact that they are making these reckless cuts.

Can the Conservatives tell us what in the world they hope to learn about social service delivery from investment banks?

[The Environment, November 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the minister's answer but we have actual facts here. The study was kept secret and the scientists who did the research were muzzled.

Instead of providing information about water contamination to the public, Conservatives concocted spin and downplayed the findings they found inconvenient. Spin will not protect our waterways nor will it protect the Canadians who drink from them.

How can the minister look at this study and still agree to further weaken environmental protection in the budget bill?

[The Environment, November 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, an Environment Canada study has found that contaminants are accumulating in the snow near oil sands operations. These results confirm those of previous research that the Conservatives prefer to ignore. Science should be based on facts, even if it goes against their ideology.

Why are Environment Canada's scientists not allowed to talk about this study?

[The Environment, November 1st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, they say that they made the decisions based on science, but Conservatives have never used science to base any of their decisions on before. What makes them think we would believe they are doing it now?

People can see through this science-based smoke screen. Ninety per cent of all lakes in Canada fall in Conservative ridings. It makes me wonder if next they are going to protect fake lakes in downtown Toronto.

Why are million dollar cottages in Muskoka being protected from pipelines, while lakes for the rest of us are not?

[The Environment, November 1st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, according to the Cohen report, the Conservatives are already mismanaging fish stocks. Things will be worse—except for the Conservative elite—if the Navigable Waters Protection Act is weakened.

It is scandalous that over 99% of lakes will no longer be protected, but it is even worse that 9 out of every 10 protected lakes will be in Conservative ridings.

Why protect the lakes of friends of the Conservative party and not of others?

[Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act, November 1st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I will paraphrase the Native Women's Association of Canada's testimony about this bill.

They talked about holes in the quilt that were going to happen because of the creation of this bill. There actually is not funding in place to enact this legislation. They talked about the fact that they needed more time. They talked about a long-term plan—two years, five years, ten years—and that this sort of twelve-month turnaround is not sufficient for their communities to react.

This legal regime would be created with absolutely no resources on the ground to implement it or to uphold it. The Native Women's Association actually said these are not the types of plans they need. They need plans that are developed in co-operation with first nations and not just have government design it and then have this patchwork input from first nations.

My hon. colleague is absolutely bang on in her analysis.

[Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act, November 1st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting how shocked she is. I am shocked at how little this member actually knows about this legislation.

First of all, it applies to on-reserve housing and matrimonial property rights on reserve, not women in downtown Vancouver.

If the member is so concerned about women having access to housing on reserve, then she should stop for a second and look at this law, look at the fact that it is saying we would create a legal regime here that actually would leave people homeless. There are no resources on many reserves to be able to actually have the housing there for men and women who do separate. This law has been written in a vacuum with absolutely no eye to how it would actually play out on reserve.

Back to Dr. Palmater, she herself said that if the minister actually listened to the voices of aboriginal women, he would have heard that aboriginal people do not want this bill as it is currently drafted. He would have also heard that what they do want is gender equality addressed in all of Canada's legislative initiatives.