Ryan Leef

[Safer Witnesses Act, February 11th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague both for his work on committee and his comments today.

On committee, we were talking about the funding available. We have posed this question to people testifying and they have said it is not as much about the funding as it is the model and the structure provided. Can my hon. colleague comment on some of those aspects? We are getting the sense from the other side that if we pour money into it, that will solve the problem, but that is clearly not what we heard on committee. It was not the budget or the money issue; it was how the system was modelled.

On a budgetary note, some of the systems that my hon. colleague was talking about are developed by provincial and territorial governments. Our government has provided to the Yukon, for example, record levels of federal transfer payments. There was $809 million in last year's budget allocated for the kinds of things to support improved models with community groups and organizations working directly with the police. It is as much a provincial and a federal partnership that is required in policing, particularly when we move to organizations that run municipal and provincial police forces, to come up with a great model of Canadian policing.

Could my hon. colleague comment on some of those things that I know we both heard on committee?

[Interparliamentary Delegations, February 6th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian delegation of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association respecting its participation in the meeting of the Standing Committee of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region, held in Inari, Finland, November 13, 2012.

[The North, January 30th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to welcome to Ottawa the cabinet of the Northwest Territories, led by Premier Bob McLeod, as well as visiting members of the legislative assembly. Throughout the next three days, members of our government will be meeting and working in collaboration with the Government of the Northwest Territories to help advance northern priorities.

On this side of the House, our government and our Prime Minister have made the needs of the northern people a priority. We are making major investments in northern infrastructure projects that support northern prosperity, such as the Inuvik-Tuktoyaktuk Highway. We have increased the northern territories' borrowing limits to allow more flexibility when addressing territorial priorities. We have delivered on new investments in northern health care, and we have eliminated the wasteful and ineffective long gun registry. In contrast, the member for Western Arctic voted against all of these initiatives.

I wish our northern guests all the best for a productive time in Ottawa, as we work together to improve the lives of all northerners.

[Regional Development, December 10th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, as a proud northerner, I am happy to be part of a government that places a priority on the north.

Unfortunately, the member for Western Arctic keeps voting against everything that helps his riding, be it the Dempster Highway extension from Tuktoyaktuk to Inuvik or money for northern health care. He also opposed our government's decision to have a northern representative on the Arctic Council.

When asked to explain his actions to his constituents, he replied that he did not really have to answer any of those things.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, for the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency and for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario update this House on the great work that we are doing in the north?

[Aboriginal Affairs, December 7th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, everyone agrees that a sound education leads to a good job, but first nation students are not graduating at the same rate as other Canadian students. Clearly, the current approach to first nation education is not working.

Can the hard-working Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development please update the House on what the government is doing and how it is working with first nations to ensure that students on reserve have access to quality education?

[New Democratic Party of Canada, December 7th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, my constituents feel the effects of any increase in the price of goods. From gas and groceries to electricity, any change has a profound impact.

That is why my constituents and our Conservative government vehemently opposed the NDP leader's $21 billion carbon tax in the NDP's 2011 election plan. This job-killing carbon tax would literally raise the price on everything. This tax would do nothing more than raise money to be spent on the NDP leader's pet projects.

I assure the House that my constituents and our Conservative government will never back down on opposing the NDP leader's $21 billion carbon tax and will continue on the path of low-tax plans for jobs, growth and long-term prosperity.

[Leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada, December 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, no matter how mad the leader of the NDP gets, it does not change the fact that his $20 billion--

[New Democratic Party of Canada, November 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, New Democrats are on the defensive. They are upset that our government is telling Canadians about their plan for a $21 billion carbon tax. I wish it were not true, but regrettably it is. We only need to flip to page 4 of the 2011 NDP platform. It is right there, in black and white: a proposed tax on carbon that would generate $21 billion off the backs of Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

Literally everyone would be affected, because the tax would raise the price of everything. It will not matter if people are seniors, veterans or struggling families. Everyone will pay more if they are subjected to this NDP tax regime.

The truth is sometimes hard to swallow, but we on this side of the House will continue to tell Canadians the painful truth about this NDP carbon tax. We on this side of the House will continue with our low-tax plan for jobs, growth and long-term prosperity.

[Northern Jobs and Growth Act, November 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would agree with the member for Western Arctic that a carbon tax is not the direction to go. I clearly campaigned on the fact that we would not support or introduce that. I clearly campaigned on a low-tax plan for jobs, growth and long-term prosperity.

I am proud to stand behind a government that is going to move our country forward and move the economy forward without raising taxes on Canadian families, without the government telling Canadians how they are going to spend their hard-earned dollars, creating an environment for opportunity for Canadians to grow. That is the role of government.

The role of government is to produce and create opportunities and an environment in Canada for Canadians to succeed and have a choice to pick where they want to go and what they want to do. A carbon tax does not do that. A carbon tax would take money directly out of the pockets of Canadians and would start to direct them on where they have to go and what they have to do to find opportunities, controlled by a government.

We do not believe in that kind of plan. We will never support that kind of plan. I certainly will not stand behind that sort of plan. I do find it interesting that everything we are doing is paring off, trying to make sure Canadians have an environment where they can choose and where they can realize success. On most occasions, the opposition is voting against that.

I would encourage the member for Western Arctic to stand behind these things and realize that the opportunities and environment being created by the government is what government is supposed to do.

[Northern Jobs and Growth Act, November 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, certainly status quo is really not an option for us and it is not an option for the great people of the Northwest Territories.

Let me read a couple of the elements of that bill that would help make some changes. It would provide jurisdiction to the board to make orders setting out terms and conditions for access and the appropriate compensation to be paid in respect of that access. That is obviously great for the stakeholders and people impacted by surface and subsurface claims. It would provide the board the ability to make rules and bylaws, including rules about procedures to be followed. It would allow the board to set compensation for unseen damages resulting from access. It would require the board to provide periodic reviews and the ability to terminate orders when access is no longer being used.

All of these things do not exist in the status quo. They also fall under obligations that our government has to meet in specific land claims agreements. To ignore those land claim agreements and our obligations would not be a responsible step for the government. We certainly recognize that. We do not just want to do this in isolation. We want to do it in partnership with all three territories. That is exactly what we are doing, and I am not sure why the member for Western Arctic would want to only maintain the status quo, because that is not good enough for the people of the Northwest Territories.