House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2008, with 40% of the vote.
Foreign Affairs December 3rd, 2010
Mr. Speaker, rumours have been going around for weeks that a number of Canadian embassies in African countries, many of them members of la Francophonie, are set to close. Cameroon is one of those countries. Obviously, the Conservative government does not care about the diplomatic repercussions of that decision or about its reputation within the French-speaking world.
Can the minister clarify the status of Canadian embassies in francophone African countries?
Seniors November 25th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary's figures are not up of date.
This is a matter of priority between poverty amongst Canadian seniors or squandering $3 billion of public money. The Conservatives, who are not doing anything to improve pensions or reduce poverty, contend that our family care plan is irresponsible.
How can the Prime Minister find money for propaganda but not to help our seniors face their heating costs this winter?
Seniors November 25th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, despite what the parliamentary secretary said, this year, the poverty rate among Canadian seniors rose 25%. This means that 50,000 seniors are currently living in poverty. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister is conducting at taxpayers' expense a Canada-wide propaganda campaign to defend the untendered contract for F-35s.
Why is the Prime Minister letting these 50,000 people down while squandering $3 billion needlessly?
Madam Speaker, the Minister of Industry's riding, that of Parry Sound—Muskoka, was very happy about that budget.
I would like the hon. member to explain to us how the money spent on tablecloths, glasses, dishes and a theme pavilion relates to security. I do not really see the connection.
Canada currently has $56 billion in debt, which the Parliamentary Budget Officer determined could not be paid off until 2015-2016.
I am of the opinion that the parliamentary secretary should consider the much more conservative position that the Minister of Public Safety and his associates were taking before they came to power. They had announced a budget of $28 million, including all operational aspects and security.
Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety for taking the time to review the issue of the costs associated with the G8 and G20 summits.
The Conservative government likes to pat itself on the back for properly managing Canadians' money since the recession in 2008 and 2009. However, upon looking at the costs and expenditures associated with the two meetings in June 2010, we see that the government is very selective about which departments have to adjust their budgets.
First, however, let us consider a few examples of this government's extravagant and wasteful spending. For the G8 and G20 meetings, the government spent $1.1 million on backdrops and cardboard displays. It spent $12,000 on tablecloths, $19,000 on a table setting for 24, and $1,900 on etched glasses.
It spent $1.9 million on building a theme pavilion for the foreign media. It paid $400,000 to restore an old steamboat that will not be ready until months after the summits. Some $275,000 in public money was spent on washrooms and a stage located 20 km from the meeting site. It spent $2 million on a fake lake, even though Lake Ontario was right there. It paid $1.1 million on a sidewalk that is 84 kilometres from the summit site.
It burned through millions of dollars to help the foreign media imagine the Muskoka landscape.
In the second place, we need to seriously ask ourselves if the Conservative government can be trusted with taxpayers' money when there appears to be blatant disregard for either political neutrality or fiscal responsibility in the spending. For instance, a $20 million arena was built in the Minister of Industry's riding of Parry Sound—Muskoka for the journalists who were going to attend the summit. However, days before the event, the organizers stated that the arena would serve neither the G8 nor the G20.
A fund was also provided to the industry minister to provide gifts to the voters in his riding who would be “inconvenienced” by the summit. Meanwhile, Toronto business owners received nothing for enduring the inconvenience, the riots and the profit losses that surrounded the G20 in the city of Toronto itself. My colleague said this a few minutes ago.
While the RCMP and the city of Toronto police force have submitted their costs for review, the committee responsible for reviewing the costs of the summit has not received any similar costing from the government for the $100 million allocated to the OPP. It has been suggested that these costs need to be hidden in order to protect compromising information regarding fund allocation for political motives.
These blatant miscalculations cost Canadians millions of dollars. The Minister of Public Safety approved a $27.5 million RCMP command centre that could have been bought for $3 million. Instead, it was rented for $1.5 million, it incurred another $24 million in operational costs and then, after just 72 hours, cost another $2 million to tear down. There goes $27.5 million.
The Conservatives inherited a $13 billion surplus, which they turned into a deficit before the recession even started. In March, the Conservative government promised Canadians that the two summits would cost $179 million, yet it spent $676 million on security alone.
Salle André-Mathieu Theatre in Laval November 19th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the Corporation de la salle André-Mathieu de Laval was honoured on November 1 when ADISQ awarded it the Félix for entertainment presenter of the year. Awards of distinction are nothing new for the corporation. In 2004, the Conseil de la culture de Laval awarded it the Prix de la culture for its variety of performing arts programming.
The corporation was previously nominated for ADISQ awards in a number of categories and twice won the Félix for performance venue of the year. But the Félix for entertainment presenter of the year is a special honour for the corporation, because it had been a finalist for that particular award five times. This year, on its sixth nomination, it won the award. Congratulations.
As the elected representative for Laval—Les Îles, I am proud of the Salle André-Mathieu theatre. I want to congratulate all the people who had a hand in the corporation's success.
Government Advertising November 18th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are using taxpayers' money to advertise on pornographic websites. It is shameful, shows a complete lack of respect for women and is unworthy of our country.
I would like a female member of this government to explain to the House how the Prime Minister can find the money to pay pornographic sites that degrade women, but cannot find any money, not a dime, to create a commission to look into the deaths and disappearances of 600 aboriginal women. I want a woman to answer me.
Mr. Speaker, I hear what the parliamentary secretary is saying, and he seems to be quoting me, but I have never said that. I have never said that if we gave money to a certain country in the past that it should continue to receive funding. In fact, I agree entirely with some of the goals that the parliamentary secretary just mentioned. But how can we measure this effectiveness that they talk so much about? I do not understand how we can measure that. It is not absolute.
However, I can say that in Benin, a country that is part of the Francophonie, the annual growth rate over the past five years has been between 4% and 4.5%. The growth rate in Rwanda has increased each year over the past five years. We see that countries that have received aid from CIDA already have a growth rate that is exceptional for them.
I am simply asking for the criteria used in choosing these countries and asking that the Francophonie countries not be forgotten.
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation for taking the time to look at the issue of CIDA and its list of priority countries.
As official opposition critic for La Francophonie, I believe that we have an obligation to consider how we can help strengthen the ties between member countries of La Francophonie. That said, I know very well that CIDA has obligations that go beyond our country's membership in an international organization. It must first ensure that priority countries have a real need and must then predict the impact of Canadian aid on the quality of life of people in developing countries. We will have to review the decision to include or exclude certain countries from CIDA's priority list, according to the aforementioned criteria.
Countries in sub-Saharan Africa, members of la Francophonie, must be part of this discussion because, unfortunately, they are among the poorest countries in the world. For instance, in May 2009, eight African countries were taken off the list of priority countries for development assistance. It would appear that francophone countries were targeted in particular, since five of the eight countries are members of la Francophonie: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Niger and Rwanda. The question is: were those francophone countries targeted and, if so, why? Even African nations were wondering why this measure seemed to target francophone countries in particular.
A review of the countries' performance based on their development level does not justify this exclusion. According to the United Nations 2009 human development report, African countries that are members of la Francophonie are among the poorest of the 182 countries listed. I will name five: Benin, 161st out of 182; Cameroon, 153rd; Niger, the poorest country in the world, 182nd; Rwanda, 167th; and Burkina Faso, 177th out of 182.
When I compare this list to the Latin American countries that are not members of the Francophonie and that received aid from CIDA, I see a remarkable difference. The five countries that received aid from CIDA are: Peru, which is 78th on the list; Colombia, 77th; Bolivia, 113th; Honduras, which was 106th in 2010; and Dominican Republic, 73rd.
Why were the poorest countries in the world excluded when they need international aid the most? Even a list of our national and international agreements does not explain the exclusion of many sub-Saharan African countries.
Canada is a member country of la Francophonie. This obliges us to strengthen our ties with other member countries of this vast network, but CIDA's new strategy excludes, as I said, the five poorest member countries of la Francophonie in the world.
This decision has certainly had a serious impact on our diplomatic relations with member countries of la Francophonie. After the Minister of International Cooperation announced CIDA's new strategy in 2009, 17 ambassadors appeared before the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development on May 27 this year. According to some—
Government Priorities November 16th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, that is why food bank use has increased by 28%. Unless the extension cord I mentioned covered the 240 km between Toronto and Huntsville, that expenditure was wasteful and showed complete incompetence. The Conservatives wasted nearly $9,000 on a single extension cord, they bought plates and forks that cost nearly $1,000 per person, and they handed out gifts to the dignitaries and their spouses as though they were kings and queens.
How can the minister justify these royal expenditures when so many Canadians are suffering?