Scott Simms

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with quite a bit of attention about open federalism and I also want to make a comment about these solid relationships that are taking place now with the provinces. Recently, as the minister pointed out, the Conservatives signed a deal with Nova Scotia, or at least a clarification of a deal, but yet we do not see anything in writing at this point.

My question is quite specific because I know numerous other members want to question as well. As intergovernmental affairs minister, when she was going through the process of doing this with Nova Scotia, assuming she had something to do with it, what steps were taken to contact the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to allow it the opportunity to add its voice to the agreement that was supposedly to be signed with Nova Scotia? In other words, if this is going to affect only one province, therein lies breaking one of the basic tenets the Conservatives support, which is to say that it is a one-off deal.

Not only that, but the Conservatives also resurrected a former one-off deal in the royalty regimes with Nova Scotia. Why resurrect a one-off deal from the early 1980s and why would they not include Newfoundland and Labrador in this discussion about offshore resources?

[Equalization Payments, October 19th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, not only did the government sign a phantom side deal with Nova Scotia that did not even honour its promise, but after years of preaching about the evils of side deals, the government announced the deal one day after Danny Williams won a massive mandate to fight the Prime Minister.

Coincidence? I think not.

It is becoming quite clear that this side deal is not worth the paper that it is not even written on. Why did the government announce it so blatantly as to smack Newfoundland and Labrador right square in the chops? Why? And what happened to the evils of these side deals?

[Address in Reply, October 16th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I find this absolutely rich that here we have the member for Avalon who so dishonoured his own constituents in Newfoundland and Labrador that his reply to the Speech from the Throne is absolutely ludicrous.

We have a government that says it is strengthening the union, but at the same time it tries to set up an agreement with one province to the dismay of another. All that government is trying to do is to divide one province and setting one province against another.

I challenge the member for Avalon, who is now looking to be so bad in his own riding, to actually stand up and say yes to the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador and yes to the people of Canada, that the government will actually do something for the province and not sit back and make enemies of them all.

[Equalization Formula, June 19th, 2007]

Very good, Mr. Speaker, and if we do not believe that from the government, it will sue us. How about that?

By imposing a fiscal cap, the government is breaking its own election promise in addition to changing the spirit of the accords. The minister's own Conservative colleagues from Atlantic Canada and Saskatchewan have said publicly that yes, they did break the promise. Even the minister from Nova Scotia says that “we are still negotiating”, whatever that means.

Why does the Minister of Finance continue to think that he is so right when his Conservative colleagues think he is so wrong?

[Equalization Formula, June 19th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, once more, two respected Newfoundlanders have provided clarity in this Atlantic accord betrayal. John Crosbie and Roland Martin said this today about the 2005 Liberal agreements: “The government of Canada intends to provide additional payments to the province”, offsetting reductions, “to retain the benefits of 100 per cent of its offshore resource revenues”.

They are arriving today to voice their displeasure with this government. Why is the Conservative government betraying this obligation and breaking its word on the Atlantic accords?

[Ocean Ecology, June 19th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I am indeed proud of Jeremy Wedallas, a 12-year-old from Erin, Ontario, who recently wrote me a letter, visited my office, and was welcomed by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans as well.

He outlined his concerns about ocean ecology. Jeremy pointed out three areas of importance to him related to the preservation of our fishery: shark finning, bycatch and bottom trawling.

He stated that he was pleased that Canada had banned shark finning, where sharks were caught, the fins were cut off, and the shark was thrown back into the ocean to die. He also outlined his concern about the millions of tonnes of bycatch that are discarded each year.

I congratulate this young man for bringing these important issues to our attention. I was most impressed with his indepth knowledge of our ocean ecosystems. It is certainly commendable that this young man, at the very young age of 12 years, has such an interest in this important part of our environment.

I would like to congratulate Jeremy and urge him to keep up the good work.

[Petitions, June 13th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I have the distinct honour of presenting to this House of Commons a petition on behalf of a gentleman named Steve Saunders of St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador. It states that the undersigned residents of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador would like to draw to the attention of the House of Commons that during the last federal election a promise by the Prime Minister was not kept regarding the equalization formula.

It is an honour for me to present to this House no less than 20,000 signatures collected in what appears to be a short period of time. I may like to avail myself of some of our pages to help me with the reams of paper that I am in possession of, but it is indeed my honour to present these 20,000 signatures to the House.

[Atlantic Accord, June 12th, 2007]

There you have it, Mr. Speaker, a slight disagreement, certainly the understatement of the year by far.

The minister for Newfoundland and Labrador is now on record as saying his government did break its word on the Atlantic accord. Here is what he said:

People at home are saying that the Prime Minister broke a promise. It was not the Prime Minister; it was the party and then the government. I am not denying that.

That statement was made by the Minister of Fisheries.

If the Prime Minister takes the province to court, will the Minister of Fisheries come forward and be the chief defence witness for the province of Newfoundland and Labrador?

[Atlantic Accord, June 12th, 2007]

Empty threats, Mr. Speaker.

Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia signed a deal in 2005 and it must be followed to the letter. Now the Prime Minister wants to send a bill to the taxpayers for a court battle just to satisfy his own ego. Perhaps now is the time to bring back the court challenges program.

When will the Prime Minister do the right thing, stand up, and follow through on his promise and stop bullying these provinces?

[Business of Supply, June 7th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, we are not really arguing the budget today. This is about one aspect of the budget that concerns the Atlantic accords.

I would like the hon. member to answer two questions.

First, he talked about the offset payments involved here. However, an independent economist says that over the life of the accords $1 billion will be lost under this formula. How can he justify the offset payments that he talked about, but at the loss of $1 billion over the Atlantic accords, which is fundamentally breaking a promise?

The other issue is this. The member talked about how the finance minister and the Prime Minister did not break a promise, but yet almost every Atlantic Canada Conservative MP has said that they are continually working behind the scenes to ensure that we get what is right, obviously admitting that it is not right currently as it sits.

I encourage the member not to talk about other aspects of the budget. If he talks about other aspects of the budget, he will fully admit that he has no idea what he is talking about when it comes to the offset payments to the Atlantic accord.