Rona Ambrose

[Budget Implementation Act, 2005, June 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, our amendment to part 14, which is Motion No. 7 before us right now that relates specifically to the creation of the greenhouse gas technology investment fund, is to allow the minister and the government to have more flexibility to create more than just the one fund that is specified right now in Bill C-43.

We believe that this is important because it will allow the minister and the government of the day to look at regional issues and industry issues that we believe will not only help the environment, but also help industry work with the government to come up with the kinds of programs that will result in not only allowing industry to be a part of this program but ensuring that all of the investments do stay here in Canada.

We pointed out in committee that it was really important to the Conservative Party that Canadian companies and Canadian jobs come first and that the Canadian environment comes first. We were concerned that the legislation might create a fund where Canadian companies might contribute only to see that money end up in the hands of their competitors. We want to ensure that the government has the flexibility to address some of the concerns that industry has raised and frankly, environmental groups have raised as well.

This is the intent of the amendment to part 14. We want to create more flexibility that will result in not only better legislation on the environmental side but also better legislation on the industry side in allowing industry to work with the government on a better environmental plan.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2005, June 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Motion No. 7 which is an important part of Bill C-43. I am fortunate to sit on the finance committee which examined Bill C-43 in its entirety.

The Conservative Party of Canada has agreed to and supports Bill C-43, although I am here today to make an important amendment to the main spending bill of the government.

The main purpose of Motion No. 7 is to establish legislation for the formation of a greenhouse gas technology investment fund. We on this side of the House have long advocated for a made in Canada solution to the environmental problems of our times.

In the Standing Committee on Finance we introduced many helpful amendments to improve clause 14 which is the greenhouse gas technology fund. We wanted to bring more transparency and accountability to the fund and how the proposed advisory board would operate. We successfully passed an amendment in which the minister must publish advice within 30 days and make that advice public. We are glad to see that it was supported by the other opposition parties as well.

We are still concerned about the unaccountable 12 member advisory board which does not necessarily bring back much needed trust that Canadians should have in their government.

With these various amendments in committee we wanted to depoliticize this process, so that it would not be so open ended. We are glad that we were able to bring some accountability and transparency to the greenhouse gas technology fund process. We want to see more flexibility put into the process of the greenhouse technology fund and how it is administered.

Having said that, I wish to introduce an amendment that we believe will substantially improve the greenhouse gas technology investment fund. I move:

That motion 7 be amended in section 8 by replacing the words “Canada for any of the purposes referred to in” with “Canada or to any fund designated by the Minister, for the purposes of this subsection, for any of the purposes referred to in”

[Federal-Provincial Relations, June 9th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has sold off the social and economic fabric of Canada in exchange for votes and undermined federalism.

The leader of the Conservative Party is the only leader with a national vision and he will defend a strong and united Canada.

The Prime Minister is refusing to admit the facts: the fiscal imbalance is real, the imbalance is continuing, and the Liberal tax regime is sick.

Why is the Prime Minister continuing to hide billions of dollars in his mattress and not resolutely attacking the primary source of discord in Canada?

[Federal-Provincial Relations, June 9th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, by signing these ad hoc side deals with no consideration for a national framework, the Prime Minister has widened the fiscal imbalance between the provinces.

When will the Prime Minister stop practising patchwork federalism and stop pitting province against province and Canadian against Canadian?

[Federal-Provincial Relations, June 9th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we have a Prime Minister who has no national vision and we have a government that has abandoned fiscal imbalance.

In a rush to buy votes, the Prime Minister is willing to sign deals with anyone, anywhere, on anything. By signing ad hoc deals with--

[Child Care, June 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, each and every parent should be able to afford the choice to care for their children as they see fit. A one size fits all day care plan does not provide choice and discriminates against some parents.

When will the minister acknowledge that all parents deserve choices and financially empower all families equally?

[Child Care, June 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government is creating a two tier child care system, one tier for those who can find a space in a government run, nine to five day care centre, and another tier for those who are forced to fend for themselves, especially parents who work shifts. This two tier child care system does not create choice or opportunities for the majority of Canadians.

What is a single parent on a low income who works late night shift work supposed to do for child care under this Liberal plan?

[Child Care, June 6th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Social Development has embarked upon a path contrary to the request from the provinces, contrary to the desire of parents, and contrary to the established governing procedure. In fact, this past weekend the minister went so far as to say that institutionalized day care “is the way in which our kids live”.

I would urge the minister to expand this narrow vision and realize that not one of our nation's children should be left behind. Will the minister finally stand and admit that parents want choice in child care, and convert this two tier program into a universal program for every family, every parent and every child?

[Child Care, June 6th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and his friends have developed the annoying habit of meddling to the tune of billions of dollars in areas under provincial jurisdiction.

Now that the Prime Minister has taken over child care in Canada, could he tell us what he intends to do to resolve the labour disputes Quebec families are facing?

[Social Development, June 3rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the government has invested billions of dollars in a child care program. This program encroaches on provincial jurisdictions. Yet the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs remains silent on this issue. The provinces have spoken: they want to have a choice. However, the Minister of Social Development refuses to acknowledge that demand.

When will the minister finally listen, and respect the rights of the provinces?