Todd Russell

[Petitions, May 7th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today to present a petition on behalf of approximately 850 fishers who sold their licences under the Atlantic groundfish licence retirement program.

The petitioners come from the Straits area of Labrador and they have a long and historic attachment to the fishery. The petitioners assert that these fishers were treated unfairly under the income tax laws and ask the Minister of National Revenue to review these cases with a view to providing them the proper tax treatment as prescribed by the law. They seek fairness for the approximately 850 fishers and their surviving family members.

[Seal Hunt, May 5th, 2009]

Madam Chair, we talk about non-partisanship and within that vein I want to say to my hon. colleague that does allow for objective questions and critique in this instance of some of the actions or inactions of the government. I think that is a fair statement to make.

I would ask the member a couple of questions. First, when he starts his speech by saying that he is severing the seal hunt and the ban issue from the EU talks at the EU summit that is going to take place tomorrow, has he not already put us in a weakened position when it comes to what our stance is on the seal hunt and the ban that was just brought in by the European Union?

Second, regarding the public relations campaign that the government has supposedly undertaken, how much did it cost? What kind of changes does he foresee in terms of a public relations campaign as we go forward? Many people have talked about convincing European parliamentarians or the European public.

Third, our sealers need help today. The prospective ban probably had some impact on dampening the market and the price for seal pelts. The severe ice conditions this spring impacted the seal hunt itself. The sealers and the sealing communities need some help right now. Can we look forward to some help from the government for our sealers and our sealing communities? As we go forward, because of this ban that is going to come into place, there is going to be some hurt in our communities and within the sealing community. Can we expect the government to provide some help for our sealers as we go forward as well?

[Seal Hunt, May 5th, 2009]

Mr. Chair, my colleague from Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte raises a very good point.

One does not always have to turn a criticism or a critique into something that is partisan. However, if the government says that it has left no stone unturned and that it has had an aggressive campaign, I would ask it to answer a very specific question. There were 550 people who voted for the ban and 49 who voted against the ban. How effective has the government's campaign been if no rock was left unturned?

[Seal Hunt, May 5th, 2009]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the words of my hon. colleague, who tries to teach a lesson in being non-partisan. We all have been privy in the House to the government talking about the seal hunt in very partisan terms over the last month. This did a disservice to the energy that should have been focused on the European parliament and not within this Parliament. If there is partisan rhetoric going around, the government is going to have to share its own burden in that respect.

When it comes to the impact on the north, there is a tremendous impact upon Inuit peoples and northerners, but no less impact upon the people who ring the coastline around the island of Newfoundland, along the shores of Labrador, down into the Magdalen Islands and other parts of Atlantic Canada. It has a different type of impact in certain parts of Atlantic Canada with a bit of different emphasis.

I want to put this on the record. We have asked for some assistance for our sealers this spring because they have been going through a difficult time with ice conditions and the low price of pelts. They are going through an ever-increasing difficult time now. We called for assistance from the government to help our sealers. Are there any plans in place on the part of the government to assist our sealers, Inuit, non-Inuit, aboriginal, non-aboriginal, people in the north and parts of Atlantic Canada as we go forward?

The government has to take action on the international scene, which there seems to be some hesitation about, but it also has to look at what we can do domestically, within our country, to help our sealers as well. I would like to hear from the government on that.

[Seal Hunt, May 5th, 2009]

Yes, Loyola Sullivan.

Mr. Chair, why will they not make this a part of the EU expanded trade talks? It is fine to talk at home and try to win political points at home, but we have to put those words into action on the international stage because that is where the action is happening. I ask, what have they done in the last three years to protect our sealers? They talk a good talk, but they do not walk a good walk.

[Seal Hunt, May 5th, 2009]

Mr. Chair, my colleague from Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte is doing a tremendous job in terms of representing our party on fishing issues. Certainly he has been vocal and is very knowledgeable on the seal hunt and the devastating impact this European seal ban will have on our communities. I want to thank my caucus colleagues, many of whom are here tonight, for their support.

This issue affects me personally. I come from a small community on the coast of Labrador, a little place called Williams Harbour. Right now there are only 45 people living there and there were not a lot more than that at its height. It has depended on the seal hunt. It is a part of our livelihood. Just like so many communities along the coast of Labrador, or in northern Canada, or around the coast of Newfoundland, they live on the land and they live on the sea. The seal hunt has always been a part of our tradition. It has always been a part of who we are.

Williams Harbour is also an aboriginal community, an Inuit Métis community. We know the importance of the seal hunt not just over a few decades or even a few centuries. It is something that goes deep into our being; it is something that forms a part of our identity.

When I hear of a ban and some kind of exemption for Inuit or aboriginal people, I categorically reject that ban. That is just trying to save face. It is trying to emphasize to other stakeholders that they are being sensitive. They have no idea how we live in those communities. They have no idea what it means to a family in terms of food and clothing, and in terms of supplementary industries. Many people in our communities depend on seal byproducts for the craft industry which helps the tourism industry.

I know so many families from communities like Black Tickle or other places in Labrador where a family's annual income is $15,000 to $20,000. When $3,000 or $4,000 is earned in the springtime, that means something to that family. That means paying a few bills, buying a bit of food, maybe helping their kid go to university or college. It is so easy for politicians in other parts of the world not to understand this, or try to understand it, and that includes some politicians and activists here in our own country.

This is a humane hunt. It is a sustainable hunt. It is a legal hunt. It is a hunt that is built on the principles of conservation. My hon. colleague from Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte talked about the fact that there is an exemption in the legislation that allows certain countries within the European Union to cull animals for conservation purposes.

We harvest animals here on a conservation ethic. We try to find that balance too, because there are many within our communities who know the impact that an overpopulated seal herd can have on other fish species. As one of our former premiers of Newfoundland and Labrador said, the seals are in the water and they are not eating turnips. They are eating other fish and there is no doubt about that.

My hon. colleague also said in 2005 we had a vibrant seal harvest. Over 340,000 animals were taken and marketed. They were worth something like $70 million. People were asking for these products. That was three short years ago and now the government is saying it is going to take all kinds of action now that the ban is in place. People in our communities will ask what the government has been doing for the last three years to stand up for the sealers. What has the ambassador for fish conservation, the patronage appointment who was sent to Europe, been doing for the last three years to protect our sealers?

[Seal Hunt, May 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, we have been warning the Conservative government about it for months, and today it has finally happened. The European Union has voted to ban products of the legal, sustainable, humane, and economically important Canadian seal hunt.

The Conservatives and their patronage appointed fisheries ambassador have failed to stand up for the interests of Canadians. In what other industries will the Conservatives allow the European Union to dictate Canadian policy?

Even as Canadian and EU officials are set to start talks on expanded free trade, the Conservatives have failed the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nunavut, Quebec's Lower North Shore, the Magdalen Islands, and Atlantic Canada generally.

Who else will the Conservatives sell down the river to Brussels?

[April 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell my hon. colleague that we are indeed a have province. We have received the shaft from the provincial government, we have received no respect and we have received less than we were supposed to get under the Atlantic accord offset payments. Indeed, from the government's perspective, we are a have province.

I would ask the parliamentary secretary to answer the question clearly and distinctly. Why did we receive less under the Atlantic accord offset payments than what was projected?

[April 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I am following up tonight on my question for the government side concerning equalization. When I asked my question, I invited the government to lay all its cards on the table with regard to the impact of the Conservative budget on equalization and I asked for detailed projections and calculations.

I would add that it would also be useful to know more about the communications between the federal and provincial governments on this subject. There is still some confusion about how the provinces were notified about the Conservative government's intentions. There has been some back and forth on this issue, which has only served to confuse rather than clarify matters.

It would be good for the government to live up to its promises of openness and accountability by showing all Canadians, including those in Newfoundland and Labrador, the equalization forecasts and giving us details on how and when these changes were communicated to the provincial governments.

This issue is part of a larger picture. Despite the government's high-sounding words during the election campaign, it is not open or accountable. It has retreated into secrecy, gutted the rules concerning access to information and has even stopped the long-standing practice of issuing notices of cabinet meetings.

Just today, for example, the public learned how much the Conservatives paid a Republican advisor in the United States for communications advice. However, we only found out because it was part of the American law concerning disclosure. There is a lack of respect for provincial and territorial partners. Numerous provincial governments have had run-ins with federal departments and federal ministers.

Not that long ago, the Minister of Finance said:

The long, tiring, unproductive era of bickering between the provincial and federal governments is over.

That is a good thing, I would say. I would hate to see how bad the provincial-federal relations would be if the bickering had not stopped.

What does it say about federal-provincial relations or about the effectiveness of the ministers opposite that the Government of Nova Scotia today announced the appointment of the member for Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley as its so-called ambassador to Canada? The government must start treating all provinces and all regions of the country more fairly and even-handedly.

I would once again invite the government to be open and transparent with the people and the provincial governments on this equalization issue. Surely, in the spirit of openness and accountability, it can provide the House, and through us, the public, with detailed information on how its equalization changes will have an impact on each province. I would also hope that the Conservatives would make it clear when and how they communicated the changes to those governments. Were they open and transparent with the finance ministers and those involved?

When will the Conservative government start treating the provinces with more respect?

[Infrastructure, April 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, when there are challenges, we always want to find solutions, but the solutions must come from the people themselves. They know themselves, their land, their communities and what they have to go through better than we will ever know the issue or study it or understand it. The solutions must come from the people themselves. In terms of solutions, I leave it to them, but I also invite all colleagues to come forward with suggestions.

When we talk about relationships, the issue of devolution in Nunavut, as it is in the other territories, is an important process that must continue and be accelerated.