//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodInfrastructureInterventionHon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.): (1150)[English]Mr. Speaker, it is now the end of June and here is another year lost in infrastructure for Cape Breton. Whether it is road works on the north side of New Waterford, police and firemen structures, waste water treatment and development of Sydney Harbour, or fresh drinking water for northern Cape Breton, everything is on hold again.Are the Conservatives so arrogant that they actually think they can fool Canadians into voting for them by making a series of desperate, phony, last-minute announcements on infrastructure just before the election?Cape BretonGovernment assistanceInfrastructureOral questions41662144166215ColinCarrieOshawaPeterBraidKitchener—Waterloo//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1760GeoffReganHon.Geoff-ReganHalifax WestLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/ReganGeoff_Lib.jpgPrivate Members' BusinessHeritage Lighthouse Protection ActInterventionHon. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.): (1730)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased today to stand to speak in favour of Bill C-588 regarding the Sambro Island lighthouse. I had the pleasure of serving the community of Sambro between 2000 and 2004. In fact, the boundaries of the Halifax West riding were changed in 1997, and that was not a great year for me in other respects because I began what I call my involuntary sabbatical. I was defeated that year, but I was re-elected in 2000 under those same boundaries, so I had the pleasure and honour of serving the Sambro area from 2000 to 2004 when the boundaries were changed again and it was put back into the Halifax riding and taken out of Halifax West.The Sambro lighthouse is a very iconic structure. It has a great history. It was established as a result of the very first act of the Nova Scotia legislature. That is remarkable, when we think about it. In fact, it was built in 1758. It is hard to believe that we have any lighthouses in North America that were built that long ago, which is why it should not be surprising, perhaps, that it is in fact the oldest operating lighthouse in North America.I had the pleasure of going there, back in 2013, when I was no longer the MP for that area but still interested in attending public meetings in the Sambro area, along with the current Premier of Nova Scotia, Stephen McNeil, who was then the leader of the Liberal Party. He still is, of course, but he was not premier then. We were there to discuss community support for protecting lighthouses and in particular the Sambro light. I want to begin by thanking my hon. friend, the member for Halifax, for bringing the bill forward. I think it is a very positive idea, and I am very supportive of any measures that may result in this light being maintained and preserved for the long term because of that incredible history it has and the fact that it is North America's oldest light, a beautiful structure.I also want to congratulate Brendan Maguire, who is the provincial member, the MLA for Halifax Atlantic. He has done a lot of work on this and had many meetings and made lots of efforts with both levels of government to try to get support for the maintenance and the protection of this lighthouse. I also want to congratulate Rena Maguire and Susan Paul from the Sambro Island Lighthouse Heritage Society, who have done so much to gather support for the protection of the lighthouse. In 2013, I tabled a number of petitions signed by more than 5,000 people, calling on the Government of Canada to preserve the lighthouse at Sambro Island, and I was very pleased that the Government of Canada decided to provide $1.5 million for repairs and upgrades to the lighthouse.I hope we all recognize that this is an important part of Nova Scotia's heritage and really of Canada's heritage. I think that contribution of $1.5 million to upgrade it and maintain it is an indication of that importance. That is an important step, and we would like to ensure that it is preserved on a permanent, ongoing basis.I had the pleasure of visiting the lighthouse. I think it was in September 2013 that I was there. Paddy Gray is a fisherman who fishes out of Sambro, and he was kind enough to take me out on his boat. We actually caught a few fish along the way, but then we visited the island itself and went up to the light. I had my camera and took quite a few pictures. As a matter of fact, I have one of my photographs as the wallpaper on my computer, so I see the lighthouse and the island every day when I look at my computer.Not long ago I was asked to do a painting, just a little one, a five-by-seven canvas, for a fundraising auction. I do not claim to be a Renoir or Monet, but I enjoyed doing this from one of my photographs.Mr. David Sweet: I am certain he must be.Hon. Geoff Regan: Mr. Speaker, I am glad my hon. friend thinks I must be. That is very generous of him. I did enjoy doing that painting from the photograph I had taken, and that is why I chose to paint that picture of the Sambro Island light. I put it on my Facebook page. I do not know how hard it is to find it, but if any member wanted to find it they could probably look there and discover it.The lighthouse is very much symbolic, as all lighthouses are, of our seafaring heritage. For those of us from Nova Scotia, lighthouses mean a great deal.(1735)However, I learned, certainly when I was minister of fisheries and oceans, how much they meant to people all across the country, in places like Collingwood, Ontario, on Georgian Bay, and throughout the Great Lakes and many of the larger lakes in this country. In places where there is navigation, like the Great Lakes, lighthouses have been an important part of our transportation system. They certainly form an important part of our heritage. They are iconic structures, often beautiful structures, that mean a lot to people in the communities where they are.Not that long ago, 120 lighthouses in Nova Scotia had been declared surplus by the Conservative government. So far, community groups have only offered to take over 29. It is a big responsibility and a big cost for a community group to take on the ownership and, therefore, the ongoing maintenance of a lighthouse. These are often quite large and old structures. For example, the one in Collingwood had stone on the outside and was kind of rotting on the inside. The nature of the construction meant that it was very challenging to maintain. I suspect that the lighthouse in Sambro is of a similar kind of construction and might also be very challenging.However, I am proud of the cases where communities have decided to take the plunge and take over a lighthouse. For example, the Terence Bay lighthouse society in my riding of Halifax West was among those groups that submitted a business plan to protect the lighthouse in their community. In fact, $80,000 was spent to paint the lighthouse in 2008, and that was a very difficult—excuse me; this is actually in relation to Sambro Island, not Terence Bay. On the Sambro Island light, $80,000 was spent to paint the lighthouse in 2008. The process was extremely difficult because it is on an island and the substantial amount of materials that were needed had to be actually flown in by helicopter.The Nova Scotia Lighthouse Preservation Society has what it calls a “doomsday list” of lighthouses that are in danger of being lost through neglect. That is of great concern to many people in my province. Sambro has been on that list. The Sambro Island lighthouse has already been designated as a federal heritage building and national historic site. I think what the act is proposing to do would follow well along with that designation.Of all the provinces, Nova Scotia—not surprisingly, considering it is a peninsula and all the coastline it has—has the most lighthouses under petition to become heritage lighthouses. I think it shows the pride that Nova Scotia has for its lighthouses and their history.In fact, I gather we have 92 lighthouses under petition, of the 348 total lighthouses under petition in all of Canada. That is, nearly one-third of all the lighthouses in Canada that are under petition are in fact in Nova Scotia.It seems to me that the burden of maintaining these lighthouses should not be placed upon the community, especially when we are talking about heritage lighthouses of national importance, like the Sambro Island light, the oldest operating light in North America. This is an important asset for the broader community, in fact, certainly for my province and for our country. I am pleased that there has been money set aside to maintain it, but let us find ways to ensure that it is kept going, that it is protected for the long term, because it is a beautiful iconic structure. I urge any of my colleagues, if they have a chance to go to Nova Scotia, to go out to Sambro. If they could call me, I am sure I or my colleague and friend from Halifax could arrange for them to take a boat tour out to the island and have a look at that beautiful structure.C-588, An Act to amend the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act (Sambro Island Lighthouse)Government assistanceLighthousesMaritime heritageNova ScotiaPrivate Members' BillsSambro IslandSecond reading4150676BruceStantonSimcoe NorthBruceStantonSimcoe North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/71285RobertChisholmRobert-ChisholmDartmouth—Cole HarbourNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ChisholmRobert_NDP.jpgPrivate Members' BusinessHeritage Lighthouse Protection ActInterventionMr. Robert Chisholm (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NDP): (1740)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today and speak in support of Bill C-588, an act to amend the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act, with regard to the Sambro Island lighthouse.I want to commend my colleague the member for Halifax for her tenacity in supporting this community and this iconic structure that means so much to not only the people of Sambro and the people of Halifax but also the people across this country if not internationally. As has been said, the structure was built in 1758 by the first act of the oldest legislature, in the province of Nova Scotia. There have been a lot of people coming and going from Halifax Harbour, whether as part of the Royal Canadian Navy, war brides, or immigrants coming to this great country. It has been suggested by veterans that, when they left the harbour, the Sambro lighthouse was the last thing they saw, and when they returned to Halifax Harbour it was the first thing they saw. As one veteran expressed, it was like lifting a huge load off of their shoulders in making that crossing, seeing the lighthouse and recognizing that Nova Scotia and Canada were a few short hours away.It is a huge structure made of stone and concrete, standing 24 metres tall, and located on a granite island off the entrance to Halifax Harbour just slightly beyond the community of Sambro. It is a stately structure and has been referred to as Canada's Statue of Liberty.The other day I was thinking about how my wife's grandfather came to this country in 1928 through Pier 21 and would have seen this structure as the ship he was on approached this wonderful country, which he then made his home and where he raised his family, as did so many.Why is this important? This bill would place the Sambro Island lighthouse within the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act. Therefore, it would become a responsibility of Parks Canada to maintain it and save a piece of our natural heritage.The Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act came into force in 2008. However, for some reason many heritage buildings were missed, this one included. As a result, there was a requirement for the communities to put together a petition to nominate them as historic structures and put together a business plan. It was quite an onerous process. Needless to say it was a difficult one, given the lack of resources. However, there was a lot of work done. I think an indication of why it is so important for Parks Canada to take over this important structure for the Government of Canada is in recognition of the costs. No community is able to manage the costs of maintaining this important structure. It is on an island; it is 24 metres tall. We received an indication of what it would cost to maintain it when, in 2008, the Coast Guard repainted the lighthouse. It used a helicopter to ferry supplies, including a large web of scaffolding. The total cost was about $80,000, which is a huge expense for a small community and so a very difficult process.(1745)However, I give credit to the Sambro Island Lighthouse Preservation Society for being diligent and tenacious on this issue, along with Barry MacDonald of the Nova Scotia Lighthouse Preservation Society. I do not know how many hundreds of petitions I tabled in the House, along with my colleagues from Nova Scotia, but they ensured it was in the minds of Nova Scotians and Canadians that something needed to be done about this. I commend all of those volunteers for their efforts in this regard. That is why we are now at this point.I was happy to congratulate the government when I heard in early May that it had indicated that it would invest $1.5 million to restore the Sambro Island lighthouse. The minister at the time indicated that it was one of the most iconic structures in the country. It was great news, which would allow long overdue and needed concrete renovations, rehabilitation of the original lantern and gallery, and repainting to take place. However, this was recognized as a stop-gap measure. Therefore, it was important that the legislation be introduced in the House. My understanding is that government members have indicated their support, and for that I am happy to commend them.Part of the Parks Canada mandate is to protect the health and wholeness of the commemorative integrity of the national sites it operates. This means preserving the site's cultural resources, communicating its heritage values and national significance and kindling the respect of people whose decisions and actions affect the site. This is why it is so important for this important heritage structure in the history of Nova Scotia and Canada to be properly protected by the federal government. It is not as if the federal government has not already recognized the heritage value of this structure. In 1937, the Sambro lighthouse was designated a national historic site, and a plaque was placed in the village of Sambro. Then in 1996, the lighthouse received Federal Heritage Buildings Review Office classified status, which is the highest ranking status for Canadian government heritage buildings. In the case of classified federal heritage buildings for which the minister has assigned the highest level of protection, departments are required to consult with the heritage protection legislation before undertaking any action that would affect their heritage structureI did not indicate when I began that this is important to me for another reason. I was a member of the legislative assembly for the constituency of Halifax Atlantic between the years 1991 and 2003, and Sambro was part of my constituency. It was a constant reminder of the history that the community had shared with North America. The fact is that Sambro has been an active and productive fishing village for over 500 years, and it continues to thrive to this day based on the collaborative manner in which the people in that community, the fishermen and others, go about harvesting the resource of the ocean in a sustainable fashion. I am very proud to be here with my colleague, the member for Halifax, who sponsored this bill, to speak for a few moments in support of what she has been able to do for this iconic heritage structure, and also as somebody who has had some attachment and has attended many public meetings in the community about what we would do with the Sambro lighthouse. (1750)It is a good day, and I am pleased to support the bill. Again, I commend my colleague, the member for Halifax.C-588, An Act to amend the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act (Sambro Island Lighthouse)Government assistanceLighthousesMaritime heritageParks Canada AgencyPrivate Members' BillsSambro IslandSecond reading41507024150703PeterVan LoanHon.York—SimcoeColinCarrieOshawa//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/71285RobertChisholmRobert-ChisholmDartmouth—Cole HarbourNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ChisholmRobert_NDP.jpgGovernment OrdersBusiness of Supply [Opposition Motion—Federal Science Research ]InterventionMr. Robert Chisholm (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NDP): (1615)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in this debate and to indicate my support for the motion.It is important we recognize that the work of scientists, who work for the people of Canada, is extremely important. The information, the studies they conduct, the research they produce and the results they come up with are extremely important. Canadian taxpayers pay for this important research that is being done, all levels of inquiry, and it is something to which Canadians should have access.My critic area is the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Therefore, I talk to scientists who look at lobsters, for example, and the impact of warming temperatures on them, how they migrate, when they molt, what it means to their spawning areas with the closeness of salmon pen farms to them and where they are in relation to various outflows. This is all extremely important information. I will be splitting my time, Mr. Speaker, with my colleague, the wonderful MP for Louis-Hébert, and I look forward to hear what he has to say about this important issue.Again, on the issue of lobsters and salmon, so much work needs to be done. There is the impact of climate change, for example, on not only marine life but on the ice in the north and the impact that has on various cultures and communities. It is extremely important information, which I would suggest needs to be done in partnership with Canadians, universities and private sector scientists. However, there needs to be a strong public component, and Canadians have the right to have access to that information. I cannot say how many times I have been at meetings and conferences where I have listened to the people who do the research. I heard scientists say that their request to speak to a group on their particular research was declined. Some received media interview offers or whatever. People had found out about their work and were interested in it because it was an interest to the community, or in the case of lobster, there was an interest from all Atlantic provinces, but their political masters denied them that opportunity. In most cases, with all public servants who are under the control of the federal government, there is a very strenuous, rigorous protocol that they need to follow before the Conservative government will give them permission to speak.It is interesting that the Conservatives talk about getting rid of red tape, making things more efficient, streamlining the activity and work public servants do in providing services, whether that be information or handling employment insurance claims, yet they encumber the processes to such a degree because of their fear of information going astray or their desire to control the message at all times and at all levels, which is ironic beyond belief.During this discussion about the muzzling of scientists, I listened to a couple of government members recite all kinds of facts and figures about evidence of how the government was supporting scientists and allowing them to communicate. (1620)The reality is that since the Conservatives gained a majority in 2011, and certainly before that, they have cut funding to science programs. If truth be known, this all started back when the Liberals were in power. However, they have also been cutting programs themselves. For example, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans' budget has been cut upward of $1 billion over the last four years, and a great deal of that has had to do with scientists. My colleagues have talked about how 4,000 scientists have been let go by the government.We heard a story last week about a gentleman in Halifax, a scientist for DFO, Steve Campana. He does world-class research. He was afraid, like a lot of his colleagues, to speak out until he retired. Once he retired, he shared his feelings about how the government was controlling his work and the work of his colleague, and that not only were the some of the waters becoming toxic but, more important, the environment in which these people work was becoming toxic.Some senior research scientists in the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and other departments cannot wait to retire. If they could afford it, they would retire sooner. Some of them are leaving and going to the private sector, because they just cannot take it anymore.On the other end of the employment scale, I have visited a number universities across the country that are extremely concerned with the lack of support for post-doctoral work in sciences and, in my experience again, in the whole area of marine science where Masters and Ph.D. students do important scientific research on areas such as the impact of increasing temperature, the impact of the changing chemical composition of the ocean, the impact on the marine life, on the biodiversity of our coasts, of our oceans as a result of the increase in ocean acidification, for example. This is a serious problem as a result of the carbon dioxide emissions that are being held by the oceans. The volumes are getting so large that it is affecting the chemical composition of the ocean, and that is having an impact on marine life, whether it be crustaceans or other things. We need to know what that impact is. We need that research to be done, and we need it to be done by scientists. We see the research that is being done at our universities. Because Ph.D. students are unable to get funding for post-doctoral work here, those brilliant minds go to other countries. They are going to Nordic countries, or to Europe or to the United States to continue that work.We have funded that. We have supported that research. The students have made an incredible contribution, and we have just simply let them go. That is what has been happening under the government. That is the problem. It is a combination of muzzling and a lack of support. We have a list of programs that have been cut by the government since 2011, and it certainly goes beyond that. I said that DFO had been cut by $1 billion. Environment Canada, Libraries and Archives Canada, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Libraries, the National Research Council have all had cuts, and on it goes.We need to start respecting our scientists and researchers and the role of the public sector and ensure that work gets done.Budget cutsCommunication controlGovernment assistanceInformation disseminationOpposition motionsScientific research and scientistsSplitting speaking time412446841244694124470HedyFryHon.Vancouver CentreGaryGoodyearHon.Cambridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/71285RobertChisholmRobert-ChisholmDartmouth—Cole HarbourNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ChisholmRobert_NDP.jpgGovernment OrdersBusiness of Supply [Opposition Motion—Federal Science Research ]InterventionMr. Robert Chisholm: (1625)[English]Mr. Speaker, this is the case with any criticism that is brought forward against the government. It completely denies it and comes up with its own facts and figures in order to try to confuse the matter. However, when we talk to scientists, researchers and the universities it is not in front of the minister because they do not want to jeopardize the bit of money they do get, the little support. Remember we are talking about muzzling. When we get them away where they can talk openly, they are telling us the government is failing to provide the kind of support those young scientists need to go forward with research that needs to be done in our communities and our country and to be able to share that information with Canadians. Let me just add, the internationally known Bedford Institute of Oceanography is in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. Recently, the government granted $3.5 million. However, what was that for? It was for—Government assistanceOpposition motionsScientific research and scientists412447841244794124480GaryGoodyearHon.CambridgeBarryDevolinHaliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsInternational DevelopmentInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister of Labour, CPC): (1900)[English]Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member opposite for her question tonight during adjournment proceedings. From the beginning, Canada has been at the forefront of international response to help the people of Syria and to help the people of Iraq. Most recently, in May, the Prime Minister announced additional Canadian humanitarian assistance funding for both Syria and Iraq, whose people continue to suffer from the ongoing conflict.Millions inside Syria now require assistance. Millions more have fled to Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey, not knowing if they will ever be able to return to their homes. Compounding this problem even further, terrorist groups such as the so-called Islamic State have flourished in such an environment, expanding and threatening stability of the entire region.These situations represent some of the most difficult and complex humanitarian crises ever faced by the international humanitarian community. Canada has been among the top donors to respond to the United Nations' call to step up humanitarian efforts in both contexts. The top priorities are protection for civilians, including from sexual and gender-based violence, and shelter, food, and access to health care and basic humanitarian services.Already in 2015, Canada has allocated $80 million in humanitarian assistance funding in response to the crisis in Iraq. Since the beginning of 2014, we have committed $107.4 million to respond to the needs of Iraqis affected by the violence, and this makes Canada the fifth largest humanitarian donor to this crisis—the fifth largest, from a country with a small population like Canada's. Specific to Syria, as of May 2015, Canada is the sixth largest single country donor to the humanitarian response. Since the onset of the crisis, Canada has allocated over $503 million in support of the humanitarian response, with the most recent funding announced earlier this month by the Prime Minister himself.It is concerning that opposition MPs fail to acknowledge the real threat posed by ISIS and jihadi terrorism to our country and our country domestically. We take this very seriously. The military measures we are taking against ISIL do not in any way preclude humanitarian actions. There is no either/or. There is support for both. We will combat ISIS militarily, and we will support the victims of ISIS in a humanitarian way.Canada has been at the forefront of the international response to the crisis in Iraq, as well as Syria and the surrounding area, since the beginning of each crisis. We will remain at the forefront.In conclusion, we have helped nearly two million people, provided shelter and relief supplies to more than one million people, and helped to educate more than half a million children.In Syria, Canada's support has meant 16 million people have access to safe drinking water, 4.1 million Syrians have access to food assistance, and emergency assistance is provided to nearly three million refugees in neighbouring countries.We are getting the job done when it comes to humanitarian assistance during this crisis in the Middle East.Adjournment ProceedingsGovernment assistanceHumanitarian assistance and workersInternational development and aidIraqIslamic State of Iraq and the LevantRefugeesSyria412474541247464124747412474841247494124750412475141247524124753412475441247554124756ElizabethMaySaanich—Gulf IslandsElizabethMaySaanich—Gulf Islands//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsInternational DevelopmentInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong: (1905)[English]Mr. Speaker, the estimates contain all of government spending. All one has to do is check the estimates to see how much money the government is spending. Budget 2015 reaffirms our government's commitment to helping people who live in poverty and responding to humanitarian crises, and this response has been strong.Our main estimates clearly show the blueprint for the department's annual planned spending. It is right there. Humanitarian assistance has increased 62% this year over the year before, and since 2003 we have nearly doubled the amount of aid to low-income countries over the previous Liberal government.We are pleased that economic action plan 2015 announces the government's intent to leverage development-focused private investments through a development finance initiative. This will enhance Canada's ability to advance its international assistance objectives by partnering with the private sector to address critical financing gaps in developing countries.The estimates show all of this clearly. Our Conservative government is reducing taxes on the middle class while delivering aid in a way that is accountable to Canadians and effective for those in need.Adjournment ProceedingsGovernment assistanceHumanitarian assistance and workersInternational development and aidIraqRefugeesSyria4124760412476141247624124763ElizabethMaySaanich—Gulf IslandsManonPerreaultMontcalm//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsSocial DevelopmentInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister of Labour, CPC): (1910)[English]Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for her question, but I also want to thank the hon. member for her advocacy for disabled people across the country. I welcome the opportunity to address this important issue brought forward by the hon. member for Montcalm.First, I would like to remind the member that, as soon as the Minister of Employment and Social Development heard about a situation in his riding, he immediately pulled everybody together to find a solution to keep Canadians working. They found that situation swiftly and corrected the issue very swiftly. As the minister said of the 50 hard-working Canadians with intellectual disabilities who have been serving the government well for the past 35 years by sorting, recycling, and shredding sensitive government documents, their determination and dedication to work despite their limitations inspires us all, and we certainly need to continue supporting them and disabled Canadians across the country.That is why the minister quickly announced that their contract would be renewed for at least three more years. As for their salaries, my hon. colleague would know that they are set by the association and not by the Government of Canada. We partner with many organizations like this across Canada that help Canadians with disabilities get good jobs and fully participate within their communities. Our government is proud of our improved registered disability savings plan that is available to more than 100,000 Canadians with disabilities. We are also proud of the Canada disability savings grants and bonds, which help Canadians with disabilities save money for their future. We believe that all Canadians, including Canadians with disabilities, should have the opportunity to contribute to our country's economy and contribute positively to their community.Yes, disabled people are still very under-represented in the workforce, and this is concerning, but we are working at ensuring they have access to better jobs. That is why our government, through economic action plan 2015, would invest $40 million annually in the opportunities fund for persons with disabilities. Not only that; we would also invest $15 million over three years into the ready, willing, and able initiative of the Canadian Association for Community Living, which helps connect persons with disabilities with jobs. In my own experience as a parliamentary secretary, I have seen programs like this support literally hundreds of disabled Canadians, connecting them with available jobs. Currently, there are more than 800,000 disabled people in the country who are unemployed. Of those people, 400,000 have some form of post-secondary education. Conversely, we have employers across the country who are saying they cannot find qualified employees to take jobs. I encourage them all to look within the disabled community. We have able, ready, and willing employees there who want to work and who have a drive to work and be self-sustainable in their lives. It may take some accommodation in the workplace to employ a person with disabilities. It may take a little flexibility by the employer and maybe by the employee to ensure she or he can fill that job. However, I know from talking to employers who have employed disabled Canadians, as recently as a month ago, that they say that when they put the accommodations in place and support those workers they get very good workers. This money would be in addition to the $222 million per year to better meet the employment needs of Canadian businesses and improve the employment prospects for persons with disabilities through a new generation of labour market agreements for persons with disabilities. That is $222 million.In closing, we are getting the job done for the disabled community in this country. I thank the member for her interest and her support for that community. We will continue to support employers and employees as they move to jobs in Canada.Access for disabled peopleAdjournment ProceedingsGovernment assistancePersons with disabilities4124778412477941247804124781412478241247834124784ManonPerreaultMontcalmManonPerreaultMontcalm//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsSocial DevelopmentInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong: (1915)[English]Mr. Speaker, our government is working hard to improve the lives of Canadians with disabilities.On top of the measures I mentioned earlier, we are also extending the enabling accessibility fund to improve accessibility in workplaces and other facilities across Canada.These expanded criteria will support the disabled people the member across is asking about. We are also supporting many organizations dedicated to the well-being of persons with disabilities, helping them connect with available jobs and equipping them with the skills and training they need.The 50 workers I spoke about earlier have been providing excellent service to Canadians for over three decades now, and thanks to this government they will be able to continue their great work and keep on inspiring us all.We will continue to be there for the disabled community. We will continue to support the accessibility fund.Access for disabled peopleAdjournment ProceedingsGovernment assistancePersons with disabilities41247884124789412479041247914124792ManonPerreaultMontcalmAndrewScheerRegina—Qu'Appelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodInfrastructureInterventionHon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.): (1450)[English]Mr. Speaker, spring has arrived in Cape Breton and in many communities across Canada. This is when our construction season normally is getting into high gear, but the Conservative government stalled infrastructure spending last year and it looks like this year will be another repeat. This past weekend I was speaking with many councillors in my riding and they are concerned that there is going to be another year lost.Is the Conservative government willing to commit to the Cape Breton Regional Municipality and other municipalities to get the job done and get our people back to work?Building Canada FundGovernment assistanceInfrastructureOral questions41219324121933ShellyGloverHon.Saint BonifaceDenisLebelHon.Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/74ScottBrisonHon.Scott-BrisonKings—HantsLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/BrisonScott_Lib.jpgGovernment OrdersBusiness of Supply [Finance—Main Estimates 2015-16]InterventionHon. Scott Brison: (2155)[English]Mr. Chair, the RPP refers to government initiatives that will have their funding sunset in 2016-17. Can the minister list these initiatives?Consideration in a Committee of the WholeDepartment of FinanceGovernment assistanceMain estimates 2015-20164123070JoeOliverHon.Eglinton—LawrenceJoeOliverHon.Eglinton—Lawrence//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/74ScottBrisonHon.Scott-BrisonKings—HantsLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/BrisonScott_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodEmploymentInterventionHon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.): (1440)[English]Mr. Speaker, there are 169,000 fewer jobs for young Canadians today than before the downturn. While students are struggling to find work, the Conservatives are holding back money that was budgeted for programs to help fight youth unemployment. At the same time, the Conservatives are wasting tax dollars on self-promotional ads during the NHL playoffs. The money spent on each one of those ads could fund 30 summer jobs in the Canada summer jobs programWhen will the Conservatives stop wasting tax dollars on ads to promote themselves and start helping young Canadians find work?Employment opportunitiesGovernment advertisingGovernment assistanceOral questionsStudent summer employment40986784098679PierrePoilievreHon.Nepean—CarletonPierrePoilievreHon.Nepean—Carleton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodInfrastructureInterventionHon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.): (1155)[English]Mr. Speaker, municipalities across this country continue to find a financial black hole where federal infrastructure should be. The current government is all talk when it comes to infrastructure spending.In the Cape Breton regional municipality alone, $400-million worth of waste water system upgrades are required. Will the current government finally live up to its responsibility and bring the money to the table so we can get the job done, keep our water safe, and get our people back to work?Cape Breton Regional MunicipalityCities and townsGovernment assistanceInfrastructureOral questionsWater treatment39906093990610BernardTrottierEtobicoke—LakeshorePeterBraidKitchener—Waterloo//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsIntergovernmental AffairsInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister of Labour, CPC): (1920)[English]Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Trinity—Spadina is calling for the government to both renew long-term social housing agreements and provide new funding for housing, and I am pleased to explain our position on both of these matters.The social housing agreements to which the hon. member referred were signed many years ago, in some cases close to 50 years ago. The end date has been known since those agreements were signed and typically coincides with the final payout of the mortgages on these properties. As I noted in the House some time ago, Canadians understand that when their mortgage expires they stop paying the bank. That is essentially what is happening here. As the agreements end and as they mature, housing providers will find themselves with a valuable real estate asset and reduced operating expenses that can be used to continue to offer affordable housing to the clients. The fact is that most non-profit co-operative housing projects are expected to be financially viable when the agreements come to an end and the federal subsidies stop. For those who may experience difficulty, CMHC has been actively working with them to help them prepare for the end of these operating agreements. For example, CMHC's affordable housing centre offers a range of tools to assist housing providers, such as a project viability calculator, capital planning tools, and project profiles. Our government has also created more flexibility in some housing programs administered by CMHC to give eligible housing providers better access to funding for capital repairs and renovations. Hon. members will recall that in economic action plan 2009, we provided more than $1 billion to renovate and retrofit existing social housing so it could continue to be available for Canadian individuals and families in need. Close to 15,000 social housing projects were completed across Canada, everything from replacing roofs and windows to upgrading plumbing and electrical systems. As for new funding for housing, I would remind the hon. member that economic action plan 2013 renewed the investment in affordable housing for five years, with an additional federal funding of $1.25 billion. This brings the total federal commitment under this initiative to close to $2 billion over the previous eight years. This funding is delivered and cost-matched by the provinces and territories, which are best positioned to identify and address local housing needs. Depending on their priorities, provinces and territories can also opt to use the investment in affordable housing funds to support projects whose operating agreements have matured, or for other purposes such as new construction or renovation projects, shelter allowances, or assistance toward home ownership.I am pleased to advise the hon. member that the renewal agreements have now been signed with almost all provinces and territories. The governments of Canada and Ontario, for example, signed a renewal agreement last August that provides for a joint investment of more than $800 million over five years.The investment in affordable housing is doing exactly what the hon. member has asked for. It is reducing the number of Canadians in housing need. Looking specifically at Ontario, our government has invested some $5.7 billion in housing in that province since 2006. This includes more than $240 million under the investment in affordable housing—funding that means almost 18,000 households in that province are no longer in housing need.However, there is more to be done. That is why we have renewed the investment in affordable housing and why, again this year, our government will continue to invest about $2 billion in housing across Canada. Make no mistake: action is being taken. Working with the provinces and territories, we are ensuring that the housing needs of Canadians are being met.Adjournment ProceedingsAgreements and contractsFederal-provincial-territorial relationsGovernment assistanceInfrastructureSocial housing39758843975885397588639758873975888397588939758903975891397589239758933975894AdamVaughanTrinity—SpadinaAdamVaughanTrinity—Spadina//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsIntergovernmental AffairsInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong: (1925)[English]Mr. Speaker, as I said, Canadians understand that when the mortgage is paid off, they stop paying the bank. These agreements are coming to an end. We are continuing to invest large sums of money in housing across the country. We are working with our provincial and territorial partners to ensure they have the resources necessary to continue to deliver housing to the most needy across Canada. We have signed agreements with almost every provincial and territorial government in the country. We are getting the job done when it comes to housing, when it comes to infrastructure, when it comes to supporting Canadians to get the shelter they need, the most in need Canadians.What would not help them is the Liberal policy to increase taxes, implement a carbon tax, which would kill jobs and force more Canadians into poverty and which would increase the need for housing across Canada. That is a plan that will not work.Adjournment ProceedingsAgreements and contractsFederal-provincial-territorial relationsGovernment assistanceInfrastructureSocial housing397589839758993975900AdamVaughanTrinity—SpadinaBarryDevolinHaliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsHousingInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development, CPC): (1905)[English]Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for her question of November 24 on affordable housing. I welcome the opportunity to once again explain the government's position on this issue, which we have done many times. I want to remind the hon. member that the government has a strong record on housing. As I have said on previous occasions, our government has invested more than $16.5 billion in housing since 2006. This has directly benefited more than 900,000 individuals and families across Canada.Economic action plan 2014 confirmed yet again that our government is committed to ensuring that low-income families and vulnerable Canadians have access to quality and affordable housing. Our government realizes that some Canadians face financial constraints or have distinct housing needs that impede their participation in the housing market. This is precisely why we have invested heavily in housing and why we continue to work with our provincial partners, the territories, and other stakeholders across Canada to ensure that access to housing remains available to those most in need. One way we are doing this is by renewing the investment in affordable housing to March 2019, with a federal funding component of $1.25 billion over five years. This funding is being matched by the provinces and territories. It is being delivered through the renewal of existing bilateral agreements. This collaborative approach has worked well since the investment in affordable housing was first introduced in 2011. This happens in large part because it gives the provinces and territories the flexibility they need to invest in a range of affordable housing programs to meet their local needs and priorities.We are also providing support annually to households living in existing social housing, including low-income families, seniors, people with disabilities, and aboriginal people. Provinces and territories also contribute to this housing. It is provided under long-term agreements with housing groups. As we previously advised the House on November 25, these agreements span 25 and 50 years, and when they mature, federal government funding ends, as planned. Maybe the opposition just does not understand that when one's mortgage expires, one actually stops paying the bank, but the public understands this. The majority of non-profit and co-operative housing projects are expected to be financially viable and mortgage-free at the end of these operating agreements. With mortgages now paid off, operating expenses will decrease and housing providers will be in a position to continue to offer affordable housing. As I mentioned a moment ago, provinces and territories can use the federal funding from the investment in affordable housing to assist housing groups after their operating agreements mature, should the provinces and territories and other operators choose to do so. Our government has provided this flexibility to these partners. Our government has also taken steps to give some social housing projects greater flexibility when their operating agreements mature. Social housing providers whose operating agreements allow for the establishment of a subsidy surplus fund can now retain any money they may have in this fund after the operating agreements mature. These funds can be used to continue the lower cost of housing for low-income households living in existing social housing. That opportunity and flexibility lies within this partnershipAs members can see, our government has taken a common-sense, responsible approach to investing in affordable housing in Canada. We are allowing existing agreements to end, as they were planned to end, but are making needed investments elsewhere in co-operation with the provinces and territories to continue to reduce the number of Canadians in housing need.AhuntsicGovernment assistanceSocial housing39604423960443396044439604453960446396044739604483960449396045039604513960452MariaMouraniAhuntsicMariaMouraniAhuntsic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsHousingInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong: (1910)[English]Mr. Speaker, I can assure members that the Government of Canada continues to invest heavily in housing, including approximately $2 billion again this year. These investments are making life better for low-income Canadians, seniors, people with disabilities and others who have real housing needs and need housing assistance from various levels of government and partners. Regarding the social housing agreements referred to by the hon. member, I will say again that the end dates for these agreements have been known since they were originally signed. They expire between 25 and 50 years after they are signed. When these agreements mature, the last one in the year 2038, federal government funding for the project will end as planned. The majority of projects are expected to be financially viable, but for those that may face financial difficulties after the mortgage is paid off, CMHC has been actively working to help housing providers prepare for the end of their operating agreements. This work will continue, as will our government's commitment to ensure that Canadians have access to the housing they need. Once again, Canadians know that when their mortgages are over, they stop paying the bank. AhuntsicGovernment assistanceSocial housing39604563960457396045839604593960460MariaMouraniAhuntsicFrançoisChoquetteDrummond//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/71285RobertChisholmRobert-ChisholmDartmouth—Cole HarbourNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ChisholmRobert_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodDisaster AssistanceInterventionMr. Robert Chisholm (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NDP): (1450)[English]Mr. Speaker, we are talking about disaster relief for the provinces. The current government, without any notice, has tripled the threshold to qualify for disaster relief. In Nova Scotia, for example, that means that in the past 20 years, they would have had to forgo $20 million.The question is really simple. Why is the government downloading again to the provinces? Why does it figure the provinces have to carry this on their own?Download responsibilityEmergency response and emergency respondersGovernment assistanceNatural disastersOral questions39548253954826StevenBlaneyHon.Lévis—BellechasseStevenBlaneyHon.Lévis—Bellechasse//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/71285RobertChisholmRobert-ChisholmDartmouth—Cole HarbourNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ChisholmRobert_NDP.jpgGovernment OrdersVictims Bill of RightsInterventionMr. Robert Chisholm (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NDP): (1550)[English]Mr. Speaker, I appreciated my colleague's speech. As he correctly said, the New Democratic Party has very much been a supporter of the rights of victims, and of putting in place programs and supports and making sure their rights are recognized in a process that is often extraordinarily unfriendly and detrimental to them.My wife was responsible for establishing the first victims services division in Nova Scotia in 1989-90. It concerns me that, while the bill talks in great principles about the need to support victims, it does not do anything in terms of ensuring that there is enforceability, that those principles are able to be enforced, and that they have a role to play in the process; nor have the Conservatives ensured that the resources are there to actually provide the support that the victims require.C-32, An Act to enact the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights and to amend certain ActsCanadian Victims Bill of RightsGovernment assistanceGovernment billsReport stageVictims of crime3943986BarryDevolinHaliburton—Kawartha Lakes—BrockGlennThibeaultSudbury//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1760GeoffReganHon.Geoff-ReganHalifax WestLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/ReganGeoff_Lib.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsNational DefenceInterventionHon. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.): (1905)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have a chance to rise and speak about a question that I asked last week but certainly did not get a very satisfactory answer to. It was about the Conservative government's lack of commitment to the health and welfare of our Canadian veterans. There is really only one word to describe it, and that is “shameful”, I am sad to say.Too many veterans are too often denied benefits they are entitled to, while others are forced to fight their own government for years before they can get the help they need. In fact, this fall the Auditor General's report presented clear evidence that the government has failed to provide adequate access to mental health services, which are needed by many of our veterans. The report that noted that mental health support for veterans was very slow, complex, poorly communicated, not tracked, and not comprehensive enough. In fact, the Auditor General concluded that Veterans Affairs, believe it or not, was largely unconcerned with “...how well veterans are being served and whether programs are making a difference in their lives.”The Conservative government has closed down regional support offices to save a few dollars. At the same time, it has allowed over $1 billion to lapse and go unspent in this department so that it can make claims about balancing the budget. It is a government that shamelessly fudged the numbers with regard to the recently announced programs to enhance mental health services. While the Conservative cabinet minister originally led us to believe that this funding would flow over 6 years, we then learned that it would in fact be stretched over 50 years.Imagine being a government that presumes it can announce what is going to happen for the next 50 years. The gall and arrogance of that is appalling. Worse than that, to come across and pretend that the government is going to spend it over 6 years, when it is in fact over 50 years, is fundamentally dishonest. The government should be ashamed of that.Not only has the government failed to deliver mental health services for Canadian veterans, but a new report reveals that after committing to hire more mental health personnel for our Canadian Armed Forces, the Conservative government also failed to deliver. It is no wonder that Canadians do not believe a word the government says when it comes to the treatment of our men and women who serve our country and have served it in the past. The government simply cannot be trusted to tell the truth.Unfortunately, the lack of adequate and timely support for our veterans is clearly taking a toll. Over the last decade, 160 Canadian Forces members have died by suicide. Many more are struggling with mental health issues like PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder. However, as the Auditor General pointed out, under the current system, one in five veterans is forced to wait up to eight months to get help from the government. The Conservatives talk a good game about supporting our veterans and armed forces, but they clearly fail to recognize that we have an obligation to those who serve our country and to their families. This fall's report by the Auditor General is a reminder of the Conservatives' failed record on Canadian veterans. The Auditor General has found that Veterans Affairs needs to update its outreach strategy to include family physicians and that it needs to educate family members on how to spot possible signs of mental illness. Why on earth is it not doing this already? Why does the government not want this to happen? Is it because it does not want people who have PTSD to be found, recognized, and dealt with? Does it not want to know? What is wrong with the Conservative government?When we ask why the government has failed to correct this problem, what do we get? We get PMO talking points. I hope that we will not get the same thing tonight when the government has a chance to respond.Again, why does the government take this approach? Is it because it really does not want to know? That is the question on my mind. Is it because the minister is more concerned with photo ops than being available to respond to the report of the Auditor General? Is it because he would rather try to bully and intimidate veterans instead of listening to their legitimate concerns?Perhaps the parliamentary secretary, in the minister's place, could answer my colleague, the member for Guelph, who asked why the current funding for veterans' mental health is stretched over 50 years and wildly insufficient, especially when compared to the $1.13 billion that Veterans Affairs left unspent and the fact the Conservatives have squandered hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on partisan advertising campaigns.8560-412-64-03 Report of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Fall 2014)Adjournment ProceedingsGovernment assistanceHealth care systemMental healthVeterans3921577392157839215793921580392158139215823921583392158439215853921586GeraldKeddySouth Shore—St. Margaret'sPaulCalandraOak Ridges—Markham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1760GeoffReganHon.Geoff-ReganHalifax WestLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/ReganGeoff_Lib.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsNational DefenceInterventionHon. Geoff Regan: (1915)[English]Mr. Speaker, I guess what I did get, in fact, was PMO talking points, but I am accustomed to that. It is not a surprise. For example, I did not hear any explanation about how it was that the Conservatives failed to spend $1.13 billion allocated for the Department of Veterans Affairs, yet apparently had to close nine regional offices that were providing services to veterans across this country.The fact of the matter is that this report, other reports, and veterans themselves indicate the government is failing them and failing to deal with the mental health problems they are facing. If people were to talk to any member of Parliament who is hearing from veterans in their ridings who face problems and could see the hurdles they have to go through to get benefits, they would see how outrageous it is. People would understand that someone who is entering the forces has to go to boot camp and go through obstacle courses, but to make suffering veterans go through that kind of a course and go over obstacles constantly in order to get the benefits to which they are entitled is outrageous, and that is what we are seeing from the government. That is what we are hearing from Canadians all the time.It is time for the government to change its attitude, contrary to what my hon. colleague says, have a change of heart, have a heart, and pay attention to the real problems that our veterans are experiencing.8560-412-64-03 Report of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Fall 2014)Adjournment ProceedingsGovernment assistanceHealth care systemMental healthVeterans3921594392159539215963921597PaulCalandraOak Ridges—MarkhamPaulCalandraOak Ridges—Markham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsHousingInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development, CPC): (1825)[English]Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to stand here today to address the hon. member's question. The hon. member for York South—Weston has asked the government to explain its position on the issue of long-term funding for affordable housing in Canada, and I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond to this question today.Let me begin by stating very clearly that my colleagues and I share the hon. member's concern for the well-being of people who find themselves in need of housing. Our government has made unprecedented investments in affordable housing. We have made those investments over the past number of years, and we will continue to do so. Since 2006, our government, through CMHC, has invested more than $16.5 billion in housing. These investments have benefited more than 900,000 Canadian individuals and families. Again, this year, the government will provide $2 billion in housing investments right across this country. As for the longer term, I am sure that all hon. members of the House will recall that in economic action plan 2013, we renewed the investment in affordable housing until 2019, with $1.25 billion in funding over five years. Further to that, in recognition of the distinctive needs of northern Canada, our government also announced $100 million over two years to support the construction of new and affordable housing in Nunavut.The renewal of the investment in affordable housing ensures continuity of federal funding for housing programs across Canada, and I am pleased to say that renewal agreements have now been signed with most provinces and territories, and remaining agreements should be in place very shortly. An important component of these agreements is that provinces and territories match the federal investment in their jurisdictions. They are also responsible for designing and delivering affordable housing programs that meet their local housing needs and priorities. Hon. members should know that the investment in affordable housing, which of course, was introduced by our government in 2011, is making a huge difference in communities all across Canada. As of September 30, over 200,000 households have benefited from this initiative.As well, this does not include the hundreds of thousands of Canadian households that benefit from the annual federal subsidy for existing social housing units, both on and off reserve. Provinces and territories also contribute to this funding. This is provided to low-income Canadians through long-term agreements with housing groups. These agreements span 25 to 50 years, and when they mature, the federal government funding will end, as it was always planned to end, because Canadians know that when the mortgage is paid off, they stop paying the bank. The majority of non-profit and co-operative housing projects are expected to be financially viable and mortgage free at the end of the operating agreements. Housing providers will find themselves with valuable real estate assets and a decrease in operating expenses that can be used to continue to offer affordable housing to other Canadians who need it most.For housing projects that may face financial difficulties when subsidies end, CMHC has been actively working to help them prepare for the end of their operating agreements. It is important to remember that provinces and territories can opt to use funds from the investment in affordable housing to support projects after their operating agreements have matured.Adjournment ProceedingsGovernment assistanceHomelessness and homelessSocial housing390644839064493906450390645139064523906453390645439064553906456MikeSullivanYork South—WestonMikeSullivanYork South—Weston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsHousingInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong: (1830)[English]Mr. Speaker, we do agree on that. When the mortgages end and no longer need to be paid and they are operationally sufficient, we can take some of that money and use it for other projects, for some of the 90,000 people that the member opposite talked about who need housing.I would like to remind the member that our government has invested heavily in housing, providing over $16.5 billion since 2006. This helps low-income families, seniors, people with disabilities, people in aboriginal communities, and other vulnerable groups across the country. Economic action plan 2014 confirmed that we will continue to work with the provincial and territorial levels of government, municipalities, and other stakeholders, to ensure the accessibility and sustainability of housing, including social housing for those who are most in need.Our government is investing in those Canadians who need it most through our investment in affordable housing. This will provide federal funding of $2 billion from 2011 to 2019. This program alone represents an eight-year funding commitment, and is over and above the ongoing support for existing social housing on and off reserve.In closing, these investments are producing real results, and our government stands by its record on housing.Adjournment ProceedingsGovernment assistanceHomelessness and homelessSocial housing3906460390646139064623906463MikeSullivanYork South—WestonElizabethMaySaanich—Gulf Islands//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgGovernment OrdersAgricultural Growth ActInterventionHon. Mark Eyking: (1320)[English]Mr. Speaker, we have not had the final figures yet on how the government spent it. I just hope that the government is not doing the same with the farming industry as it has with many others. It is encouraging its administrators to not let the money flow and not let things happen, so it can pad the books and make its budget look good.We are finishing the harvesting season right now, and we should know in the next few months if the government has good intentions with advance payments for the agriculture industry. There were a lot of crops out west that had problems this year. We are going to see how the program is rolled out and how good the Conservative government is at helping farmers. In regard to the hon. member's question, we will know in the next few months if the government is doing a proper job, or whether it is doing like many other departments, which is holding back the money from hard-working men and women. Advance Payments ProgramC-18, An Act to amend certain Acts relating to agriculture and agri-foodDepartment of Agriculture and Agri-FoodFarming and farmersGovernment assistanceGovernment billsGovernment loansThird reading and adoption3902377LaurieHawnHon.Edmonton CentreBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgGovernment OrdersAgricultural Growth ActInterventionHon. Mark Eyking: (1325)[English]Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that the Conservative government has a track record of cutting research. The other problem we have to watch, if the research is commercial, is whether the big companies are doing it and the government is ponying up money.Recently I was at the agricultural college in Truro, and I saw the research being done there with public dollars. It was amazing. Just on the blueberry industry alone it was on spraying equipment, reduced pesticides, and varieties. At the end of the day, we have to have a good research program in this country, one that is publicly funded. Not always is the best research commercialized, big-company research. A lot of research can be done. In Newfoundland, they have the cold-crops research place. Without public money going in, it would never happen. No matter where one is in this country, we need public research and public funds going into it, or we are just going to have big companies like Monsanto taking over all the research.Agricultural researchC-18, An Act to amend certain Acts relating to agriculture and agri-foodFarming and farmersGovernment assistanceGovernment billsThird reading and adoption390238739023883902389MalcolmAllenWellandScottBrisonHon.Kings—Hants//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodEmploymentInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1455)[English]Mr. Speaker, Halifax's Leave Out Violence program, or LOVE program, does incredible work by helping extremely at-risk youth find and keep jobs in our community. There are glowing reports of its success. Everyone at the department recommended a renewal of LOVE's funding, but the minister denied its funding. How are people supposed to play by the rules when the minister changes the rules at whim, casts aside evidence, and ignores everyone's advice? Why is he denying funding to LOVE, a program with proven success in helping at-risk youth?Budget cutsGovernment assistanceJob creationLOVE: Leave Out ViolenceOral questionsYouth at risk39027283902729AndrewScheerRegina—Qu'AppelleJasonKenneyHon.Calgary Southeast//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88PeterStofferPeter-StofferSackville—Eastern ShoreNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/StofferPeterArend_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionMr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): (1450)[English]Mr. Speaker, from the time the government took power in 2006 to the end of 2013, $1.1 billion of appropriated money from the budgets of the government has not been spent on the Department of Veterans Affairs. It sent that money back to the finance department for its future tax schemes for the wealthy in this country.On my desk, I have the files of veterans who have been denied hearing aids and denied access to hospitals. We have an increased rate of suicide. Many veterans are now homeless. Over and over again, veterans across the country are suffering great difficulty.The money is there in the department to be allocated for these heroes of our country, yet the minister returns that money to the finance department. My question is, why?BacklogsGovernment assistanceOral questionsVeteransVeterans benefits389643338964343896435ShellyGloverHon.Saint BonifaceJulianFantinoHon.Vaughan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88PeterStofferPeter-StofferSackville—Eastern ShoreNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/StofferPeterArend_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionMr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): (1450)[English]Mr. Speaker, I want to tell the minister and the Conservative government that when the member for Outremont becomes the Prime Minister of Canada, we are going to fix these problems once and for all for the veterans of our country.We have reservists who are treated differently from people in the regular forces and we have many RCMP members who cannot get the help they need, yet the money is there in the budget to help these men and women. The government closed veterans' offices across the country as a cost-cutting measure and returned that money back to the finance department.The veterans of this country and their families are sick and tired of the delays in the benefits that they require. A benefit delayed is a benefit denied. When will the government allocate those funds to help the heroes of our country?BacklogsGovernment assistanceOral questionsVeteransVeterans benefits389643938964403896441JulianFantinoHon.VaughanJulianFantinoHon.Vaughan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgGovernment OrdersProhibiting Cluster Munitions ActInterventionHon. Peter MacKay: (2105)[English]Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to questions on the order paper. They are questions nos. 489 and 490.8530-412-7 Answer to question Q-489 on the Order Paper8530-412-8 Answer to question Q-490 on the Order Paper8555-412-489 International Upper Great Lakes Study8555-412-490 Government fundingAttorney General of CanadaConstituenciesEnvironmental impact reportsEnvironmental protectionGovernment assistanceGreat LakesInternational Joint Commission (Canadian Section)LaSalle—ÉmardOrders for return to written questionsPoints of orderQ-489Q-490Water levels3804606Jinny JoginderaSimsNewton—North DeltaRaymondCôtéBeauport—Limoilou//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC): (1140)[English]Mr. Speaker, it is exactly because of the tremendous sacrifices made by members of the Canadian Forces and their families that we have made record investments across the board, not only in giving equipment and support for serving members but also by investing an additional $4.7 billion over the course of eight budgets.It is interesting to hear the member opposite, who continually, as part of the NDP plan, tries to politicize this issue, particularly on a day like today. I would note that all of that investment was opposed by members of the NDP.Attorney General of CanadaCaregivers and health care professionalsGovernment assistanceOral questionsPost-traumatic stress syndromeSpousesVeterans37746553774656SylvainChicoineChâteauguay—Saint-ConstantPaulDewarOttawa Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC): (1140)[English]Mr. Speaker, indeed we do. These are not statistics. We offer the operational stress injury social support program for families. We, in fact, give assessment and treatment for mental health conditions if veterans need it, as well as counselling, within the operational stress clinics.We have case management, rehabilitation services, financial benefits, group health insurance, the veterans independence program, education assistance, pastoral outreach, an emergency fund, and a hotline. We have introduced a new program to give veterans access to operational support through dogs, as a comfort. We have ongoing program support.The members opposite, the NDP, opposed these programs.Attorney General of CanadaCaregivers and health care professionalsGovernment assistanceOral questionsPost-traumatic stress syndromeSpousesVeterans377465937746603774661PaulDewarOttawa CentrePaulDewarOttawa Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1415)[Translation]Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Justice told us that the government would follow up on the committee's modest recommendations to improve veterans' quality of life. This requires more funding.In concrete terms, how many more millions of dollars will be added to the department's budget to improve the quality of life of veterans and their family members and friends who support them?Closure of government operations and facilitiesGovernment assistanceGovernment servicesOral questionsService CanadaSingle-window government servicesToll free numberVeterans37699313769932AndrewScheerRegina—Qu'AppellePeterMacKayHon.Central Nova//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC): (1415)[English]Mr. Speaker, again, I reference the unanimous report that came from the veterans affairs committee, which speaks directly to the level of support and co-operation that exists to continue to support our veterans, their families, those who have served our country in uniform. We have established a record over the last eight years of having been very committed to the needs and the support of veterans: the $4.7 billion in additional funding that has been made available to them, the efforts that have been made to support those suffering from post-traumatic stress.Attorney General of CanadaClosure of government operations and facilitiesGovernment assistanceOral questionsPost-traumatic stress syndromeService CanadaSingle-window government servicesToll free numberVeterans37699333769934MeganLeslieHalifaxBrianMasseWindsor West//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionHon. Peter MacKay: (1420)[English]Mr. Speaker, I hear the member opposite chirping.This is an issue that we have taken very seriously from the moment we took office, and we continue to support veterans.Attorney General of CanadaClosure of government operations and facilitiesGovernment assistanceOral questionsService CanadaSingle-window government servicesToll free numberVeterans37699363769937BrianMasseWindsor WestMeganLeslieHalifax//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1420)[English]Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives love to boast, but they are the ones who have a record of closing offices and refusing to meet with veterans.Closing offices have left those in need seeing staff at Service Canada that have little experience on these issues. They are calling a 1-800 number or they are travelling long distances to one of the few remaining offices that is open. The Conservatives keep claiming that they are ready to act on committee recommendations, but how—Some hon. members: Oh, oh!Closure of government operations and facilitiesGovernment assistanceOral questionsService CanadaSingle-window government servicesToll free numberVeterans376993837699393769940PeterMacKayHon.Central NovaAndrewScheerRegina—Qu'Appelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionMs. Megan Leslie: (1420)[English]Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives keep claiming that they are ready to act on committee recommendations, but how can they expect Canadians and veterans to trust them to help our most vulnerable vets when the minister keeps cutting basic services?Closure of government operations and facilitiesGovernment assistanceOral questionsService CanadaSingle-window government servicesToll free numberVeterans3769943AndrewScheerRegina—Qu'AppellePeterMacKayHon.Central Nova//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC): (1420)[English]Mr. Speaker, sadly, that is factually incorrect. We have, in fact, expanded services as recently as this week, with more services available for those who are using service animals. In terms of direct services, we now have available across the country 600 points of contact for veterans and their families. We have invested, as I mentioned before, $4.7 billion in additional funding to ensure that veterans have the in-home care and the most direct services that go to their needs. We have extended numerous compassionate efforts to see that veterans' cares are being looked after in every way.Attorney General of CanadaClosure of government operations and facilitiesGovernment assistanceHome care servicesOral questionsService CanadaSingle-window government servicesToll free numberVeterans3769944MeganLeslieHalifaxMeganLeslieHalifax//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodJusticeInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC): (1520)[Translation]Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.Indeed, we have a substantive and comprehensive plan. It is absolutely necessary to work with the provinces and territories to give the necessary support to the most vulnerable—the women concerned by this issue—in each region of the country. I invite my colleague to work with my colleagues on this.Attorney General of CanadaGovernment assistanceOral questionsProstitution and prostitutesProvinces, territories, states37674483767449MariaMouraniAhuntsicAndrewScheerRegina—Qu'Appelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC): (1455)[English]Mr. Speaker, I share with the hon. member and all members here the enormous pride as we prepare to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the D-Day Normandy landings. We owe an eternal gratitude to all of the men and women in uniform who took part in that historic liberation.I note, as the member has said, that we have some 100 former members of the Canadian Armed Forces, veterans and their families, travelling to Normandy. The Prime Minister will be there along with the Minister of Veterans Affairs and other members of the House of Commons. This is an enormous source of pride for all Canadians, and we thank them for their service.AnniversaryAttorney General of CanadaBattle of NormandyGovernment assistanceOral questionsSecond World WarTravelVeterans376400937640103764011FrankValerioteGuelphNathanCullenSkeena—Bulkley Valley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgGovernment OrdersAgricultural Growth ActInterventionHon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.): (1810)[English]Mr. Speaker, I would also like to welcome the member here.There is no doubt that we need a new act, one modernized for agriculture and the department. However, as this member has already stated here, there is a lot of Big Brother stuff in here as far as plant breeders' rights where it is a privilege now to have these seeds. Then there are a lot of penalties that would be put in place on the people who are processing food. My question has to do with the advance payment of $400,000 to farms. As the member knows, the farms are big now and it sometimes takes $1 million to put a crop in again before harvest. A lot of farms are saying these advance payments of $400,000 are not enough and they recommend $800,000. We are hoping that when this goes to committee that amendments will be made.Is the member saying that his party will look at some of the amendments and make changes to the amendments according to what the farm community wants at the agriculture committee?Advance Payments ProgramC-18, An Act to amend certain Acts relating to agriculture and agri-foodFarming and farmersGovernment assistanceGovernment billsSecond reading3749404LarryMaguireBrandon—SourisLarryMaguireBrandon—Souris//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodHomelessnessInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development, CPC): (1150)[English]Mr. Speaker, we have championed a model to deal with homelessness called Housing First, and under Housing First, we have helped some 2,000 homeless Canadians with mental illnesses find stable housing. We are doing the job when it comes to housing.The NDP claims to support affordable housing, but it votes against the home renovation tax credit. It voted against the first-time home buyers' tax credit. It voted against disability-related home renovation construction and moving tax credits available for the medical expense tax credit.Why does it not put its money where its mouth is and stand up to support housing across Canada?Government assistanceHomelessness and homelessOral questionsSocial housing373041637304173730418CharmaineBorgTerrebonne—BlainvilleJohnCarmichaelDon Valley West//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodAgriculture and Agri-FoodInterventionHon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.): (1150)[English]Mr. Speaker, grain farmers and westerners are well aware of the income losses resulting from the Conservatives' mishandling of the grain industry. News from the prairies this week states that there is going to be a lack of cash and lack of fertilizer for this year's planting. Will Dodd, who farms in Saskatchewan, states he will need $750,000 to plant his 4,000 acres and he is sitting on 20,000 bushels of barley that are not sold.What are the Conservatives going to do to help farmers get their crops planted this year?Cereals productionFertilizersFreight transportationGovernment assistanceOral questionsRail transportation and railwaysSeed growingWestern Canada369136736913683691369AndrewScheerRegina—Qu'AppellePierreLemieuxGlengarry—Prescott—Russell//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgGovernment OrdersFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development, CPC): (1250)[English]Mr. Speaker, it is my great pleasure to rise and speak in support of Bill C-33, the first nations control of first nations education act.The introduction of Bill C-33 follows years of discussions, dialogue, and studies reflecting the efforts of many people, both first nations and government officials, to arrive at this point. All first nations across Canada were presented with numerous means of engaging in the consultation process and offered multiple opportunities to be a part of the dialogue and process leading to this legislation.In 2011 the Government of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations jointly launched a national panel on first nations elementary and secondary education, which recommended, in its final report, a first nations education act.In December 2012 the Government of Canada launched a consultation process and released a discussion guide to help support open and meaningful consultation activities on the government's proposed legislative approach.Between December 2012 and May 2013 the Government of Canada held face-to-face regional consultation sessions, video and teleconference sessions, and online consultation activities with first nations across Canada.The government received various input on a variety of topics, including first nations control over first nations education, inherent rights and treaties, the transition of legislation, funding, language and culture, and parental involvement in education.The legislation that we see before us today reflects the feedback that we received throughout the extensive consultation process. Engagements with first nations did not end there. On October 22, 2013, the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development released for public review the document “Working Together for First Nation Students: A Proposal for a Bill on First Nation Education”. This was the result of input and feedback received on the blueprint for legislation.The draft legislative proposal was shared with more than 600 chiefs and band councils and every first nation community across Canada, as well as provincial governments, for further input prior to the proposed legislation being finalized. Parents, educators, and students were also encouraged to submit comments on the proposal to further influence the development of this bill.In response, the Assembly of First Nations issued an open letter that listed five conditions that it felt were necessary in order to reach a successful agreement on this legislation. Members have heard many of their colleagues testify that our government has not only met but exceeded these five conditions.If the first nations control of first nations education act is passed, the Government of Canada will continue working with first nations on the development of necessary regulations to implement this proposed legislation.Of course we recognize that funding is necessary to support the implementation of Bill C-33 to support first nations and first nation education authorities as they take on roles and responsibilities established under the first nations control of first nations education act. The Government of Canada has invested through economic action plan 2014 an additional $1.252 billion over three years beginning in 2016-17 and statutory core funding on top of the existing $1.55 billion per year for elementary and secondary education on reserve. Even after the three-year period has ended, this funding would continue to increase at a rate of 4.5% each and every year. The funding would be stable and predictable, ensuring that schools have the resources necessary to help students meet their needs and prepare them to participate in Canada's labour market.In addition, the Government of Canada would help to support the transition to legislation by creating an enhanced education fund that would provide $160 million over four years, beginning in 2015-16. This funding would help develop the partnerships and institutional structures required to implement the proposed legislation, including support for first nations education authorities.Another important feature of Bill C-33 is the issue of ministerial oversight. Far from giving the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development more power or more control over first nations education, under this legislation the minister would have far less decision-making power than provincial ministers of education have in their jurisdictions and far less than he has today.In addition, under Bill C-33 a joint council of educational professionals would be put in place to support the implementation of this legislation. The joint council would have a membership of up to nine members, including a chair. Half of these members would be appointed by the Assembly of First Nations, four would be nominated by the minister, and the chair would be jointly selected by the Assembly of First Nations and the minister.(1255)The joint council would be made up of recognized educational experts and would have the role of supporting first nations and first nations education authorities in the improvement of their education system, as well as the oversight role of ensuring that the ministerial powers provided by the act are exercised with the benefit of the first nations' perspective and are used as a last resort. Indeed, the minister would not be able to create regulations or appoint temporary administrators without the advice of this joint council.Under the act, first nations or first nation education authorities would have the sole authority to hire and manage school inspectors, oversee school operations, and deal with situations where an individual school is not providing quality education to students. Under exceptional circumstances, the minister could appoint a temporary administrator under clause 40, but only after seeking the advice of the joint council of education professionals. This provision would only be exercised in exceptional circumstances, such as where inspection reports have not been submitted, significant issues have been revealed, standards are not being met, or there is significant risk to student well-being and success. It should be noted that these are the same conditions that would trigger a similar response in provincially run schools.Finally, I would like to touch briefly on the issue of language and culture. The Government of Canada and first nations believe that language and culture are essential to successful first nation education. Consistent with the Prime Minister's announcement on February 7, 2014, clause 21 of the first nations control of first nations education act would enable first nations to incorporate their languages and cultures into school curricula and offer language and culture programming. Clause 43 of the proposed legislation would also commit the Government of Canada to providing funding to support language and culture programming as part of its core funding.The intent of the proposed legislation is to create a legislative framework within which first nations would exercise control over first nations education. First nation schools and education authorities would also have full decision-making powers in terms of curriculum choice, providing it meets education standards under the act and the establishment of school policies and school procedures.In summary, Bill C-33 is an important piece of legislation. Developed in consultation with first nations, it is an essential and overdue step in ensuring that first nation students have the same quality of education and access to education as other students in Canada. I encourage my hon. colleagues to join me in supporting Bill C-33.Aboriginal languagesC-33, An Act to establish a framework to enable First Nations control of elementary and secondary education and to provide for related funding and to make related amendments to the Indian Act and consequential amendments to other ActsCultural heritageFirst NationsGovernment assistanceGovernment billsPublic consultationSchoolsSecond reading36915753691576MauriceVellacottSaskatoon—WanuskewinNathanCullenSkeena—Bulkley Valley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgGovernment OrdersFirst Nations Control of First Nations Education ActInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong: (1300)[English]Mr. Speaker, in my earlier teaching career, when I began my education, I was actually a teacher and a school administrator in the member's riding. The background and the time that I spent there helped me develop my love and experience. Quite frankly, it was the core of my educational experience, particularly in teaching first nations students in that riding. I know that the member cares deeply about the community as well.In terms of the appointment of this joint council, it would have nine members on it. Of these members, four would be appointed by the Assembly of First Nations and four would be appointed by the minister. The chair of the council would be jointly selected by the minister and the Assembly of First Nations. There would be great consultation with the aboriginal and first nations community on the membership of the council.Later in my career, I also helped build a school that was, at that time, responsible for the education of elementary students from primary to grade 5 in my hometown of Truro. That school was built with the intent of being inclusive for everyone. It is a public school, but the first nations students on the reserve close by in Millbrook attend the school. The involvement of the first nations community in Millbrook in this school is absolutely phenomenal. It invested capital money into the school for construction. It put staff from the reserve, appointed by the chief, into the school.This bill would also provide $500 million to increase capital construction for schools across Canada and renovations in schools across Canada, current schools that need these renovation monies desperately. This is a bill that would put its money where its mouth is. It would almost double the amount of money that is invested, with an additional $1.25 billion. It would also have money allocated for school construction and school renovations. I am very proud to support this bill. It also has the support of the chief of the reserve in my hometown. I am proud to stand here and support that on behalf of Millbrook, Chief Gloade, and the young people in my community.C-33, An Act to establish a framework to enable First Nations control of elementary and secondary education and to provide for related funding and to make related amendments to the Indian Act and consequential amendments to other ActsFirst NationsGovernment assistanceGovernment billsSchoolsSecond reading3691594NathanCullenSkeena—Bulkley ValleyJeanCrowderNanaimo—Cowichan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgGovernment OrdersVictims Bill of Rights ActInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, CPC): (1720)[English]Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, my friend from Mount Royal, for a very thoughtful, constructive speech. He has raised some very important points. Embedded in his remarks is the reality that this will be an incremental effort. He has also alluded to the fact that this, like many initiatives, will build on previous efforts and build on existing provincial-territorial infrastructure when it comes to victims. It is the living tree analogy.The member also embodies my own sentiment, and that is that we should not let the perfect get in the way of the good. What we are attempting to do here for victims is a very important non-partisan effort.In the brief time I have, I want to respond quickly to a couple of concerns about existing mechanisms. There are resources. There has been a commitment made in the federal budget with respect to the necessity to improve upon existing mechanisms at the provincial and territorial level. We do not want to duplicate the effort where we do, in fact, have some of those mechanisms in place already. We have also heard from a lot of victims about the necessity of trying to help them collect, as the member alluded to, with respect to restitution. That dovetails with other efforts we have put in place with respect to mandatory and doubled victim fine surcharges.As well, with respect to examining, I know that the member himself is very much an internationalist in his view. We have looked outside of the country as well when it came to the enforcement mechanisms. We have looked to the United Kingdom, the United States, of course, Japan, and the European Union as to ways in which we could include the right to information, financial redress, and attendance at court proceedings. We found that very instructive.We have also benefited from input from the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime, who will provide some of the recourse and the redress to which the member alluded. If there are failings within the provincial and territorial system, we will look to that federal ombudsman's office to assist victims in trying to alleviate their concerns.Attorney General of CanadaC-32, An Act to enact the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights and to amend certain ActsCanadian Victims Bill of RightsCompensationFederal Ombudsman for Victims of CrimeGovernment assistanceGovernment billsLaw enforcementRestorative justiceSecond readingVictim surchargeVictims of crime3653551IrwinCotlerHon.Mount RoyalIrwinCotlerHon.Mount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/91GeraldKeddyGerald-KeddySouth Shore—St. Margaret'sConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/KeddyGerald_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodRegional DevelopmentInterventionMr. Gerald Keddy (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue and for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, CPC): (1500)[English]Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has been going on and on about this. There are no facts to the information he has been supplying.The reality is that our government is committed to supporting economic development in Cape Breton and throughout Atlantic Canada. Subject to the passage of the legislation by Parliament, the economic and community development activities of the Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation, including the associated budget, will transition over to ACOA. The level of economic development funding that was delivered through ECBC will be maintained.Atlantic Canada Opportunities AgencyCape BretonEnterprise Cape Breton CorporationGovernment assistanceOral questionsRegional development programs36307793630780RyanClearySt. John's South—Mount PearlBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgPrivate Members' BusinessPromotion of Local Foods ActInterventionHon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.): (1800)[English]Mr. Speaker, I guess I am not shocked that the Conservatives are against this bill. Well, I am shocked, because what better bill could there be for farmers and consumers in this country? I am not saying that some of the initiatives the government has for local produce are not good, but we cannot be cherry-picking certain areas. What we are looking at in this bill, if I can repeat what the hon. member over here said, is more of a Canadian strategy in working with the provinces.What gets me is when the Conservatives say other countries might get angry with us or call it a bit of a barrier. I have some articles here out of the U.S., and here are some of the programs the United States has. One initiative is called “Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food”. This is right out of the United States, one of the trade partners that is going to have a big problem with our promoting local food. It states:In 2009, USDA launched the “Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food” initiative, an agency wide effort to create new economic opportunities by better connecting consumers with local producers. As part of the initiative, several funding efforts and programs were announced to assist farmers, help consumer's access nutritional foods, and support rural community development. The Americans are going to be really mad at us on this one.Here is another program that the USDA has in the United States. It is called the agricultural marketing service program. It states:USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service administers several grant programs supporting local food initiatives across the country. The Federal State Marketing Improvement Program (FSMIP) provides matching funds to State agencies to assist in exploring new market opportunities for food and agricultural products, and encourage research to improve the performance of the food marketing system. In 2009, 8 out of 23 grants awarded went to projects supporting local foods, such as funding to improve the effectiveness of Colorado MarketMaker.Some hon. members: Oh, oh!Hon. Mark Eyking: I know Conservative members are getting a little wound up, Mr. Speaker, but maybe you could get them to quiet down a bit. Maybe they are surprised that I am supporting an NDP private member's bill, but when a bill is good, we have to support it. I am surprised at the members over there. I know they know it is a good bill. This must have come out of the PMO. I do not know where it came from, but let us not get into that.What does the bill ask for? It asks for improving access to high-quality and fresh products and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. I do not know if the Conservatives are for that, but that is what is in it. The bill recommends a pan-Canadian local food strategy to constitute a local food program, and also wants local foods bought at institutions. That being said, let us talk about the institutions. As a farmer, I have sold to them before, and if this bill is going to be successful, the government has to help farmers develop products with the right sized packaging, labelling, and distribution system. It would take quite a bit to pull this off and it is very important that the government work with the provinces to make this happen, especially if local products would be going into federal institutions of any sort.Another great avenue that is taking off, not only in our country but in New Zealand and Australia, are farm markets. I have a brochure from Farmers' Markets Canada, which talks about $3 billion of revenue. It says:Farmers' Markets Canada is a...national organization dedicated to furthering the viability, growth and prosperity for Canadian farmers' markets....In 2008, FMC commissioned a national study with the help of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada to take the pulse of the farmers' market industry in all 10 provinces and measure its importance to Canadians and the Canadian economy.One of the most important findings was the value consumers place on being able to buy food directly from the farmer who produced it. While 92% of shoppers rated it as important, a full 62% rated it as “extremely important”. As many know, it is hard for farmers' markets to stay open year-round, and I would like to talk a bit about the one in Cape Breton. The one in Cape Breton is called the Cape Breton Farmers' Market. It is a non-profit co-operative that has been in operation for almost 30 years. It started as an outdoor seasonal market and now it is indoors, a market that attracts thousands of visitors weekly from all over the island.(1805)I am proud to say that my dad and I were some of the first vendors 30 years ago. We sold eggs and chicken and fresh produce there. Now look at it. While I am bringing attention to our own farmers' market, there are thousands across this country. This private member's bill would help those farmers' markets. We need to have more resources for those small farmers if they are making jams or jellies. If they are making value-added products, they are going to need some sort of help. That could stem from Bill C-539.We talk about oil security but food security is so important. Canada is a big country. We just need to look at this year alone and how the delivery of propane was disrupted by rail and how grain shipments were disrupted. It is important to have more local food. We do not expect to have the same food year-round locally. We like to have berries this time of year, which might come from Chile or wherever. It is important that when we have local foods, farmers have the opportunity to sell them locally and stores have the opportunity to buy them.Twenty-eight million shoppers visit farmers' markets. The average purchase price per shopper at a vendor's stall is $32. The average small farmer at these farm markets generates one to five jobs. The numbers are pretty big when we look at those farmers' markets.I mentioned before that we also have to look at the grocery store business. Recently I visited a store called Bread & Circus Whole Foods Market in Boston. I picked up a bag of carrots and swiped it and the screen not only told me the price but it also told me exactly who the farmer was that grew them, the people working on the farm, and how the carrots were distributed. It was the same with cauliflower. We should be encouraging our own stores to do this. Young people like to know exactly where products are from. This provides them with an advantage, as it does the farmer and the grocery stores themselves.Bill C-539 is only a start. We need a Canadian approach. The Conservatives get squirrelly when we talk about a national strategy about anything; they do not want national strategies. This is an issue that we should be looking at in the agriculture committee. Every member in the House must have a local farmers' market in their own community. Think of all the products that are available. Think of being in the Okanagan Valley. It is not just fresh produce I am talking about. I am also talking about wine. I am talking about the new types of wines at the farmers' market in Annapolis Valley, which are available in liquor stores now. It is more than just food that is being sold. Think of the wine industry. Think of the potential if grocery stores and liquor stores have these labelled right. This legislation is for more than about just farmers. It could also help people who sell fish. I am from the east coast and it has delicious fish. We have to look at how far away “local” means. We have people visiting us in Cape Breton from right across this country, many of them members, even some Conservatives, and they do not want to leave for various reasons. Whether it is at a restaurant or a farmers' market, people want to taste the local food, whether it is produce, fish, or so on. We have to do more than just have this legislation. We need to have resources for farmers to be able to produce the right type of products for the grocery stores. Safety is also important. A lot of small farms cannot afford all the tools needed for biosecurity and food safety. We have to help these farmers, because they will in turn expand and produce more food.I commend the member for her bill. I wish the Conservatives would come to their senses. When the time comes to vote, I urge them to vote for this legislation. It is important for farmers.Agricultural researchC-539, An Act to promote local foodsCape BretonEconomic prosperityFarmers marketsFederal-provincial-territorial relationsFood safetyFood supplyGovernment assistanceGovernment contractsGovernment policyInformation disseminationLocal productsPrivate Members' BillsRural communitiesRural developmentSecond readingTrade agreementsUnited States of America3629113362911436291153629116362911736291373629138PierreLemieuxGlengarry—Prescott—RussellRuth EllenBrosseauBerthier—Maskinongé//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1804RodgerCuznerRodger-CuznerCape Breton—CansoLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/CuznerRodger_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodRegional DevelopmentInterventionMr. Rodger Cuzner (Cape Breton—Canso, Lib.): (1500)[English]Mr. Speaker, when Conservatives announce significant departmental changes followed by the statement “it will be business as usual”, we know the business they are referring to is to mislead, misinform, and misrepresent the facts, as usual.Last week, the people in Cape Breton-Mulgrave were informed that the government had scrapped ECBC. Will the minister confirm to the House that the region will retain a designated budget, as well as matching current funding levels?Atlantic Canada Opportunities AgencyCape BretonEnterprise Cape Breton CorporationGovernment assistanceOral questionsRegional development programs36242793624280ChristianParadisHon.Mégantic—L'ÉrableGeraldKeddySouth Shore—St. Margaret's//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/91GeraldKeddyGerald-KeddySouth Shore—St. Margaret'sConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/KeddyGerald_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodRegional DevelopmentInterventionMr. Gerald Keddy (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue and for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, CPC): (1500)[English]Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to supporting economic development in Cape Breton and throughout Atlantic Canada.Legislation will be introduced this spring authorizing ACOA to assume responsibility for the direct delivery of economic development programs, services, and advocacy in Cape Breton. Subject to the passage of the legislation by Parliament, the economic and community development activities of Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation, including the associated budget, will transition to ACOA. The level of economic development funding that was delivered through ECBC will be maintained.Atlantic Canada Opportunities AgencyCape BretonEnterprise Cape Breton CorporationGovernment assistanceOral questionsRegional development programs36242813624282RodgerCuznerCape Breton—CansoJeanCrowderNanaimo—Cowichan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodEmploymentInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development, CPC): (1135)[English]Mr. Speaker, no government has done more for young people, people with disabilities, and aboriginals than this Conservative government under the leadership of the Prime Minister and under the leadership of this Minister of Finance. Our government will strongly continue to support youth employment. In fact, this summer, literally thousands and thousands of young people will get jobs and employment due to the financial support. In the budget there is $100,000 to support youth internships in this country.Aboriginal peoplesGovernment assistanceJob creationOral questionsPersons with disabilitiesYoung people36086123608613EmmanuelDubourgBourassaCarolynBennettHon.St. Paul's//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/91GeraldKeddyGerald-KeddySouth Shore—St. Margaret'sConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/KeddyGerald_CPC.jpgPrivate Members' BusinessNational Lyme Disease Strategy ActInterventionMr. Gerald Keddy (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue and for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, CPC): (1120)[English]Mr. Speaker, it is certainly an honour for me to rise today to participate in this debate on Bill C-442, an act respecting a National Lyme Disease Strategy. I would like to begin by commending the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands for her stewardship of this important bill, and I would like to acknowledge its support by many members in the House.The hon. member mentioned in her comments that many of us, myself included, live in areas where the blacklegged tick, or deer tick, is endemic. In addition, many of us, myself included, have constituents who have contracted Lyme disease at some point.This is an endemic disease. It is a Canada-wide disease, and it is a disease that is spreading. For those reasons, we need a national strategy. The support for this bill underscores the need to work together and to address this emerging infectious disease in order to minimize the risk for Canadians. Across the country, the number of reported cases of Lyme disease has increased significantly in the last decade. In fact, the actual number of cases in Canada is estimated to be up to three times higher than reported because many Canadians may not seek a full diagnosis and, quite frankly, many medical professionals do not know how to diagnose Lyme disease.To underscore that point, as the hon. member would know, Lyme disease was first reported in Lyme, Connecticut, in 1975 or 1974. Here we are, 39 years later, with Lyme disease endemic throughout New England and now it has spread into Canada, following the white-tailed deer, of course, and we still do not have a national strategy for Lyme disease. That underscores the need for the important discussion we are having in the House of Commons today.This has led to a growing recognition among governments, health practitioners, and stakeholders that work needs to be done to address this emerging infectious disease. Support for this bill also highlights the need to better leverage efforts at the federal level and across jurisdictions in Lyme disease surveillance and research.Our government has already established improved surveillance specifically aimed at Lyme disease, and welcomes the sponsor's efforts to bring additional attention to this important issue. The proposed bill highlights the need for continued action by governments, stakeholders, and the public health and medical communities to improve the understanding and awareness of risk factors, prevention, and treatment options. The objectives of this bill are laudable, and in fact align with the many activities already being undertaken by our government. Canadians should be reassured that the government has not been standing still.We are already making significant progress under the leadership of the Public Health Agency of Canada. We are working with provincial and territorial health authorities and other partners in informing Canadians of the health risks from contracting Lyme disease. We also continue to help protect Canadians against Lyme disease through improved surveillance, by conducting research, by providing factual and evidence-based information to Canadians, and by providing support for laboratory diagnosis. Since 2006, our government has invested $4.6 million through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research to specifically fund research on Lyme disease and to disseminate the latest findings and knowledge to the scientific community.These efforts are a central component of the Public Health Agency of Canada's approach to infectious diseases in Canada. More specifically, our approach to Lyme disease takes important action to reduce the disease's impact. We do this by enhancing surveillance, prevention, and control; research and diagnosis; and engagement, education, and awareness. These three areas are consistent with the key elements of the bill, and our approach is already delivering results. However, as mentioned before, we are also prepared to do more, and in a collaborative fashion, to further address this emerging infectious disease.(1125)That is why I want to signal to the House today that the government supports the intent of Bill C-442 and that we will be proposing practical amendments to ensure that the vision and values expressed in the bill can be realized and provide maximum benefit to the Canadian people.The bill addresses an important issue, but it needs to be refined to remain consistent with the jurisdictional roles and accountabilities of Canada's federal system of government. In keeping with the spirit of the bill, we must be mindful of our federal role and respect jurisdictional accountabilities.As we know, the provision of health care services in Canada falls under provincial and territorial jurisdiction. It is the provinces and territories that establish and monitor standards of care for health providers. It is also the purview of relevant medical colleges to define clinical care guidelines. It is not the federal role to tell medical professionals how to practise. The proper role for the federal government in this area is to ensure that best practices are being shared across all jurisdictions, so that Canadians can be reassured that treatments are guided by the best scientific evidence.In a similar vein, dictating to provinces and territories how and where to allocate their spending is contrary to our government's approach to fiscal federalism. However, it is within our federal role to facilitate collaboration across jurisdictions and with stakeholders to monitor and address the challenges posed by Lyme disease.We are doing precisely that through our involvement in the Pan-Canadian Public Health Network and our collaborative work with stakeholders such as the College of Family Physicians of Canada and patient advocacy groups. For example, the Public Health Agency of Canada is already working with the College of Family Physicians of Canada to engage health professionals on Lyme disease by increasing awareness among health care providers to enable them to recognize, diagnose, and treat the disease in its early stages. Suffice it to say, while we concur with the bill's goals and objectives, it would need to be amended to reflect these jurisdictional realities, which is something that the hon. member has already mentioned she is supportive of.This government is looking forward to working with the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands and will propose amendments in these areas to ensure that the bill is consistent with the provinces' and territories' primary role in delivering health care.Early on in my speech, I mentioned that 39 years ago, Lyme disease was first diagnosed in Lyme, Connecticut. It took 39 years to get to this stage. I have heard some members in this place—as the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands has already alluded—question whether they would support this piece of proposed legislation. Some members say that Lyme disease is not prevalent in their area or that it is not endemic in their area. I would suggest to these members that they had better take a look at whether they have white-tailed deer in their area. The blacklegged tick, better known in my part of the world as the deer tick, came to North America with the white-tailed deer. It has spread very successfully in most jurisdictions of North America. As deer become more urban, or perhaps as humans become more rural, more white-tailed deer are moving into what were once rural areas, which are now urban areas. Therefore, this disease is only going to get worse, and it has been wildly underreported. There are a number of cases we are still trying to diagnose that I suspect will end up being Lyme disease or some variant of Lyme disease.In closing, I commend the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands for her very important and extremely timely work on this file. I have a number of constituents in South Shore—St. Margaret's in Nova Scotia who are watching this file as it proceeds forward. These folks either have contracted Lyme disease themselves or have family members who have contracted Lyme disease. This is a terrible, insidious disease that is very difficult to diagnose. Therefore, this is very timely legislation.C-442, An Act respecting a Federal Framework on Lyme DiseaseFederal-provincial-territorial relationsGovernment assistanceGovernment policyIncident reportsInformation disseminationLyme diseaseMedical researchMedical techniques and proceduresNational Lyme Disease StrategyPreventive medicinePrivate Members' BillsSecond readingSetting of standards35950503595051ElizabethMaySaanich—Gulf IslandsMurrayRankinVictoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88PeterStofferPeter-StofferSackville—Eastern ShoreNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/StofferPeterArend_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionMr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): (1430)[English]Mr. Speaker, in 1995 the Liberal government changed the means test of the Last Post Fund from an entry level of $24,000 in income to $12,000 in income. Unfortunately, 19 years later, the means test is still at $12,000.Now I thank the government very much for the fact that there is more money in the Last Post Fund. Some modern day veterans may now be eligible. However, if the means test is not changed, many families and their veterans who pass away will not have access to the Last Post Fund.Will the government now change the means test so that more veterans who pass away and their families will have access to the program?Budget 2014 (February 11, 2014)Funeral and Burial ProgramFuneral homes and funeral servicesGovernment assistanceLast Post FundOral questionsVeterans357425035742513574252DanAlbasOkanagan—CoquihallaJulianFantinoHon.Vaughan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsAboriginal AffairsInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development, CPC): (1830)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to the question from the hon. member for Churchill.We are committed to ensuring that first nation youth have the skills they need to enter the workforce and benefit from participating in the economy.To help achieve this goal, the first nation and Inuit skills link program is one of two programs that our government administers under the first nations and Inuit youth employment strategy. The skills link program provides many different aspects, including wage subsidies for work placements and mentorship for youth who are not in school, to enable them to develop the valuable skills necessary to ensure full participation in the workforce. It includes work experience specifically in the field of information and communications technology. It includes activities designed to support aboriginal entrepreneurship. It also includes training experiences that support youth in acquiring skills needed for work placements. It includes career development information, including awareness and support activities like career fairs and leadership projects, career planning, and counselling activities. It also includes activities that promote interest in science and technology among aboriginal youth, including science camps, computer clubs, and activities that connect science and technology to traditional aboriginal knowledge. As members can see, there is a diverse amount of opportunities contained within the skills link program for aboriginal and Inuit youth.In Manitoba, we have arrangements in place to deliver approximately $4.5 million to support skills link and summer work experience projects for 64 first nations and organizations this fiscal year. The skills link program aims to promote the benefits of education as key to labour market participation and to help first nation and Inuit youth overcome barriers to employment.Another objective of the program is to introduce youth to a variety of career options and help youth acquire skills by providing stipends for mentored work experience, as well as support the provision of mentored school-based work experience and study opportunities such as co-operative education and internships. Ultimately, we expect participating first nation and Inuit youth to have enhanced employability skills, increased awareness of the benefits of education, enhanced ability to make employment-related decisions, increased appreciation for science and technology as a viable career or education choice, improved attitudes toward the transition from school to work, and an increased ability to participate in the labour market.These objectives and expected outcomes are consistent with, and support, our government's youth employment strategy skills link program. We will continue to invest in aboriginal youth through these innovative programs.Our government is focusing on funding projects that generate tangible results. We will continue to support the delivery of essential programs and services through organizations that get results, contributing to the improved living conditions and economic development of aboriginal peoples, while respecting Canadian taxpayers.Aboriginal peoplesAdjournment ProceedingsAdult education and trainingGovernment assistanceManitobaSkills Link programYoung people35546753554676355467735546783554679355468035546813554682NikiAshtonChurchillNikiAshtonChurchill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgAdjournment ProceedingsAboriginal AffairsInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong: (1835)[English]Mr. Speaker, I will commit to look into those two particular programs.The only political agenda going on here is the fact that our government puts millions of dollars into the youth employment strategy for all Canadian youth across the country, including significant dollars for Inuit and aboriginal youth, and that member and her party consistently vote against that money. Therefore, they are asking where the money is to support these programs after they have voted against the money when it was placed in the budget in the first place. That is the political agenda we are seeing here. Aboriginal peoplesAdjournment ProceedingsAdult education and trainingGovernment assistanceManitobaSkills Link programYoung people35546863554687NikiAshtonChurchillBruceHyerThunder Bay—Superior North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/91GeraldKeddyGerald-KeddySouth Shore—St. Margaret'sConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/KeddyGerald_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodTaxationInterventionMr. Gerald Keddy (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue and for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, CPC): (1205)[English]Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is alluding to the charities and we should be clear that the rules regarding charities and political activities are long-standing. Our Conservative government has always supported charities and their ability to exist within the tax rules in Canada.Economic action plan 2012 provided the CRA with additional tools and resources to increase transparency in the charitable sector.AccountabilityCharitable organizationsGovernment assistanceOral questions34957273495728Jean-FrançoisLaroseRepentignyDavidSweetAncaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodAgriculture and Agri-FoodInterventionHon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.): (1450)[English]Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Employment has alluded to what he might be doing for the plant workers in Leamington.Is the government going to do anything for the farmers who have invested over $1,500 for every acre of tomatoes and have no market for their tomatoes next year?Farming and farmersGovernment assistanceH.J. Heinz Company of CanadaLeamingtonOral questionsPlant closures34738263473827PeterMacKayHon.Central NovaGerryRitzHon.Battlefords—Lloydminster//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgGovernment OrdersEconomic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2InterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development, CPC): (1815)[English]Mr. Speaker, the hon. member across the way talked about how these things were evaporating. His party saw more taxpayer dollars evaporate into the coffers of Quebec Liberal ad agency firms with $40 million still owed to taxpayers. We have to ask: where is that $40 million that the Gomery inquiry says that the Liberal Party owes to the taxpayers of our country?As far as this budget implementation act goes, the Minister of Finance has done a tremendous job of putting together an economic program that is going to lead our country to jobs, growth and long-term prosperity.I am from Atlantic Canada. Our region has struggled over the years with its economy, but it is starting to turn the corner for many reasons, the most important one being the economic policies put forward by our Minister of Finance and this government. A young child growing up in Atlantic Canada today can look forward to a bright and robust future. A $25 billion shipbuilding program has been awarded to the Irving shipyards. That is equivalent to 11,000 jobs in Nova Scotia, 55,000 jobs across the country. Our government strongly supports the west-east pipeline to Saint John. That is going to bring a whole new industry of oil exports to Atlantic Canada. Oil will be refined, value-added, in Saint John and exported to countries all around the world.We have invested in a loan guarantee for the Lower Churchill Falls project. That is a $7.2 billion project. That means jobs and skilled tradespeople will be able to return from out west and take those jobs at the Irving shipyard in Saint John and in Labrador to fill those three large projects. We are taking steps in economic action plan 2013 to ensure we have the measures in place to provide the training so young people from Atlantic Canada fill those jobs and build a future for themselves and their families.Our Minister of Finance, our Prime Minister and this government have a visionary approach to the future, unlike what we have seen from the opposition. Our Conservative government continues to get the job done for Canadians through economic action plan 2013.On October 22, the Minister of Finance released the Annual Report of the Government of Canada for 2013. The report shows the continued downward track of Canada's annual deficit. In 2012-13 the deficit fell to $18.9 billion. This was down by more than one-quarter, or $7.4 billion, from the deficit of $26.3 billion in 2011-12. This was down nearly two-thirds from the $55.6 billion deficit recorded in 2009-10 at the pit of the largest economic recession since the Great Depression of the thirties.Our government's responsible spending of taxpayer dollars has played an important part in the results we have seen in 2012-13, with direct program expenses falling by 1.2% from the prior year and by 3.8% from 2010-11. We are looking at program spending, at government spending, before we look at cutting transfer payments like the Liberal Party did in the 1990s.I am proud that our government is focused on helping to create jobs and growth and opportunities for Canadians. I am proud our government supports hard-working families. Families and communities will be safer because of the measures we are taking in the area of justice and always putting Canadians first. According to the Minister of Finance, our government continues its efforts to ensure that every tax dollar is spent as efficiently as possible and wasteful spending is eliminated. We are keeping Canada on track to balance the budget in 2015 without raising taxes and without cutting those very valued transfer payments to the provinces.As reported by the OECD, Canada's total economic net debt to GDP ratio, which includes net debt of the federal, provincial and territorial governments and assets held in the Canada pension plan and the Quebec pension plan, stands at 34.5% in 2012. This is by far the lowest level among the group of seven countries which the OECD expects will average a net debt of 87% in the same year, more than twice as much. All Canadians should be proud of this success.It is our solid economic and fiscal fundamentals that have ensured Canada remains one of the few countries in the world to continuously receive the highest possible credit ratings from all major credit rating agencies.(1820)Having said that, we are not immune to the effects of slow global growth. We must build on our record by continuing to keep taxes low here in Canada, to work to expand trade, as we announced our trade deal with the European Union last week, to keep Canada on track for a balanced budget in 2015, and to grow our relationships not only here in North America but around the world so we continue to be a trading nation that people in other countries look to with great jealousy. We are one of the few countries in the world, and one of the only industrialized countries, that has trade deals now with both the European Union and the United States of America, over 800 million people. We have free trade deals with the two most valuable markets in the world. Canada is the country that has that deal now. This is something that all Canadians should be proud of.Much has been said in the past months about the temporary foreign worker program. We will ensure that the only purpose of the temporary foreign worker program is to provide temporary help where clear and acute labour shortages exist and where Canadians are truly not available for those jobs. We believe that is consistent with the wishes of Canadians.We have over a million net new jobs that have been created since July 2009; 90% are full time and over 80% are in the private sector. We are getting the job done when it comes to job creation.Our economic action plan 2013 is going to help many people in my riding and all Canadians through a number of key measures that will strengthen our local economies. In rural areas, in Atlantic Canada, we rely on seasonal employment. Sometimes that is not enough. Training will be required to help workers get into the workforce full time, year-round. As some of these large projects come online such as I mentioned at the beginning of the speech, we will need people who are trained to take those jobs up as we transition from an economy that relies purely on seasonal employment, particularly in the summers, to one where we have full-time good employment for skilled tradespeople, year-round, in Atlantic Canada.To that end, economic action plan 2013 will increase the skills and training to support these workers with a new $15,000 Canada job grant. This will help retrain workers so they can find high-quality, well-paying jobs, something that will be of direct benefit to my riding and all of Atlantic Canada, as well as all Canadians across the country.As parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development, I cannot stress enough the importance of training workers so that they can get into the workforce. Equally important is the strengthening of the apprenticeship program, which we put in place through economic action plan 2013. It will make it easier for apprentices to get the experience they need to get their journeyman status. With a skilled workers shortage in this country, reallocating $4 million over three years to work with the provinces and territories to increase opportunities for apprenticeships will go a long way toward filling this gap.We are listening to the skilled tradesmen and women and reducing barriers to apprenticeship accreditation. These include examining the use of practical tests as a method of assessment for apprentices. We are also putting these apprentices to work through measures that will support the use of apprentices through federal construction and maintenance contracts, investments in affordable housing, and infrastructure projects that are receiving federal funding.An often forgotten segment of the workforce is the disabled. We have not forgotten them in this budget. We will introduce a new generation of labour market agreements for persons with disabilities by 2014 to better meet the employment needs of businesses and employment prospects of persons with disabilities. We will do this through the expansion of the opportunities fund. There will be an ongoing funding of $40 million per year starting in 2015-16 to provide more demand-driven solutions for people with disabilities. Nova Scotians and all Canadians will also benefit from an allocation of $19 million over two years to promote education in high-demand fields, such as trades, science, technology, engineering and mathematics. These are the programs that will lead our young people to jobs in the future. We are supporting that now so those jobs will be filled by Canadians with proper training. Students are our future workers. Our Conservative government recognizes this need, and we are fulfilling that need with steps in this budget.We recently heard through media reports that first nations youth have only a 60% high school graduation rate in Canada. Our government recognizes that these young people need training and opportunities so they can join our larger economy. The aboriginal youth in this country are the fastest growing segment of our youth, and we need to take steps now to provide them the education and training they need to fully embrace the greatness that is this country, Canada.(1825)Higher education is the pathway to employment, and our government is improving services for students who apply for loans and grants. The minister's authority to electronically administer or enforce the Canada student loans program is consistent with economic action plan 2013's commitment to examine new ways to transform the way the Government of Canada does business to improve service and achieve efficiencies within our programs.This amendment would modernize the delivery of the Canada student loans program--Aboriginal peoplesApprenticeshipsAtlantic CanadaBalanced budgetBudget 2013 (March 21, 2013)Budget deficitC-4, A second act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 21, 2013 and other measuresCanada Job GrantCanada Student Loans ProgramCanada's Economic Action PlanDebt-to-GDP ratioEconomic prosperityEconomic recoveryEducation and trainingEmployment opportunitiesFree tradeGovernment assistanceGovernment billsGovernment contractsGovernment expenditure restraintGrants and loans for studentsHarmonization of standardsJob creationLabour shortageOpportunities Fund for persons with disabilitiesPart-time workersPersons with disabilitiesSecond readingSkilled workers and skilled tradesTemporary Foreign Worker ProgramYoung people344812334481243448126344812734481283448129KevinLamoureuxWinnipeg NorthBruceStantonSimcoe North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodCharitable OrganizationsInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, CPC): (1200)[English]Mr. Speaker, charities do a wonderful job for our families and communities across Canada. They often have to do this with little money and few volunteers.That is why it is unthinkable that any member of Parliament, let alone the Liberal leader, would collect his or her $160,000 MP paycheque and then turn around and charge charities for speaking fees, something which the Canadian taxpayers are already paying MPs to do. This shows a great lack of judgment and is also a disrespectful act toward the charities and the Canadian taxpayer.Would the Minister of State for Finance please inform the House of the good work our government is doing to actually support charities?Charitable organizationsGovernment assistanceOral questionsProfessional feesReferences to membersTrudeau, Justin3413033GregRickfordKenoraTedMenziesHon.Macleod//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88PeterStofferPeter-StofferSackville—Eastern ShoreNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/StofferPeterArend_NDP.jpgGovernment OrdersExpansion and Conservation of Canada’s National Parks ActInterventionMr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): (2245)[English]Mr. Speaker, I want to advise the previous speaker that the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, herself a proud Nova Scotian, did not malign any one individual. She mentioned the very serious concerns about the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board, which I myself have very serious concerns about as well.I want to start off today by thanking the government for entering into discussions to ensure that Sable Island possibly could be a preservation site and conservation site for as long as this planet exists.I just want to understand a couple of things. This is the same government that had massive cuts to Parks Canada. This is the same government that we hear speech after speech from the Conservatives talking about how great this legislation is, how great it would be for Sable Island, yet what do they do? They invoke time allocation on this debate. Sable Island was there long before any of us were here. Hopefully, Sable Island will be there for many years after we are gone. Therefore, moving time allocation on important legislation like this is unconscionable. I would truly love for someone over there to explain to the Canadian people why they felt it necessary to invoke time allocation, unless they plan to prorogue Parliament very soon and thus they know that this bill would end up dead.I am in favour of turning Sable Island into a national park reserve. However, like my hon. colleague for Halifax, I have some concerns that need to be addressed. That is why the NDP will be supporting that this legislation go to committee. We do not have much trust in that side, but we hope and trust that my colleague from Halifax will be able to invite any and all witnesses that her party wishes to bring forward, that the Liberal Party would be able to do the same, and that the Green Party could make submissions as well, to ensure that every single person who has reason to be concerned about Sable Island in the future would have the right to say so. We are talking about the Mi'kmaq, the first nations, the provinces, the oil and gas sector, the conservationists and the fishermen. All these people need to be heard.It is too bad the Conservatives could not make a national park out of the Senate. That would be great. Lots of people could go and visit that room and the $92 million that is spent on the Senate could go to preserve Sable Island and all of the other parks we have in Canada and maybe even create a few more. Then those senators could be added to the Species at Risk Act. That would be a wonderful thing.Here is the problem. I have heard these great Conservatives say time and time again that Sable Island would be preserved for future generations to come. That is wrong. I wish the Conservatives would get that out of their heads. Sable Island is not for human beings. It is not for people.Farley Mowat, who is a great World War II veteran, a conservationist and a fantastic author, said time and time again, and my colleague, the member from the Green Party knows this well because we were together when he said it, “We, as humans, have an obligation to ensure to protect our environment. We have an obligation to protect 'the others'.” What he meant by “the others” were things like bugs, snakes, horses, plants, birds and seals. The other species that inhabit this earth deserve to have their place as well. Sable Island is not like Banff National Park. It is not like Kluane in the Yukon. It is not like South Moresby. It is not like Nahanni. It is not like Kejimkujik. It is not like any other park out there where humans can go and interact and have fun and enjoy the beautiful parts of Canada that are absolutely gorgeous. Sable Island is so fragile and so special that we should limit, with the most extreme caution, the number of people who actually go to that island.My colleague from South Shore—St. Margaret's bragged about the fact he has been there dozens of times. He has been there two dozen times and I say he has been there 23 times too often. I have had the opportunity to go to Sable Island. I can assure members that it is a spiritual experience. It is beautiful. However, I felt guilty being there. I felt that I should not have been there. The reality is that with those horses, the plants and the birds, it is absolutely outstanding.(2250) There are reasons why some people are very concerned about the bill and are very concerned about the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board.I remember very clearly, as a private citizen, in 1995, attending a meeting at the Waverley fire hall in Waverley, Nova Scotia, which is now in my riding. The Sable gas people were there and the petroleum boards were all there. They had maps of the ocean, which had a dark black mark on Sable Island. It was blacked out. The first question I asked was why it was blacked out. They said, “That's Sable Island. We have no intention of touching it, ever. We are leaving it alone. It's too fragile”.I understand the need for oil and gas exploration. I drive a car, I have a house that burns oil and I fly back and forth all the time. I understand that. I was so proud of the fact that these experts were saying that Sable Island was going to be left alone, with a mile buffer around it. I felt really good about that.However, we were betrayed by the gas and oil sector. We were betrayed by other people. In fact, they did do seismic testing on that island. I remember it very well how—I cannot say what I want to say—upset I was that we were lied to at these meetings. These were professional people, and they lied to us. They said they would never do seismic testing on Sable Island, and they did.My very serious concern is that if we do not do this bill right, if we do not put in the concrete measures to ensure we never allow seismic testing on the island ever again, I will not have a good night's sleep, assured that those horses, those birds, those plants and other species that inhabit that island are able to do what they do in God's wonder, to do what they have done for hundreds of years and, hopefully, for hundreds years more. That island is not for people. The island is for the others. I wish everyone in this Parliament and across Canada would get that into their heads. This is too fragile an ecosystem and it needs to be, as best we can, left alone.I appreciate the Minister of the Environment and the parliamentary secretary indicating that, yes, in some certain cases, in emergencies, oil and gas workers or people who find themselves in serious trouble could go to the island for rescue, because it is the graveyard of the Atlantic. I understand that, and under strict controls and under strict protocols that is something I think we can all accept. I appreciate that fact.However, we need assurances from the Minister of the Environment and the government that when this bill gets second reading there will be no shenanigans at that committee, that there will be no time allocation, that there will be no rushing into in camera, as every committee here in this House does. We need to ensure that this is a public forum for all Canadians who are concerned about this precious jewel in the Atlantic and ensure that we do exactly what we are saying here today; that is that we protect the integrity of Sable Island for many years to come.At the same time, the government has made massive cuts to Parks Canada. We have never heard anything, yet, about funding this. We would like to see where the dollars are going to come from, where the money is coming from. One of the ideas the member for Halifax indicated, and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment also indicated, is a historical and interpretive centre in Halifax. Who is going to pay for that? Where is the money going to come from? What is it going to look like? We cannot have everybody going out to Sable Island to see it. It would be much better to have that interpretive centre in the community of Halifax or another community; I am not really particularly concerned about that. I just want to ensure that the dollars will be there to ensure that all Canadians, in fact, all world visitors who come to the area, will get to know that 290 kilometres from the east coast lies one of the most beautiful places on the planet. It is important that we get it right. That is why the NDP, led by our critic from Halifax, has indicated our support for this legislation to second reading.However, if we see a lot of games being played there, there is no guarantee that support will come afterwards. My colleague from Halifax has said very clearly that she so desperately wants to work with the parliamentary secretary, so desperately wants to work with the Minister of the Environment, and with the Conservative government, in order to ensure we get the legislation right.(2255)That is uncommon in this place. Normally, anything the Conservatives do would just shut it down. Anything we say, they shut us down. This is an opportunity, in a bi-partisan manner, to work co-operatively together and get it right. I am not sure why the Minister of the Environment or the Prime Minister would not want to pursue that and show Canadians that, yes, Parliament can work together as it has on many other issues. I was here when the protection of the Sable Island gully was there. In fact, I was quite proud of that because that was where the northern bottlenose whale lived. They offered limited protection to that area. It is a beautiful gully just off of Sable Island. It is absolutely gorgeous. I have never been to the bottom of it, but everything I have seen of it and the species that live under those waters is unbelievable. The Liberal government at the time worked co-operatively to get that done.We need to ensure that the resources for our Coast Guard, Parks Canada and Environment Canada are there to ensure the integrity of this legislation is matched not only in words but in dollars as well. That is what we need to discuss at the committee stage as well.We have been betrayed before. Not by the Conservative government, though, I will give it credit for that. It was not in power. We were betrayed by the provincial and federal governments at that time. I can assure the House that there are a lot of environmental groups out there. I know the Ecology Action Centre and Mr. Mark Butler, one of the great environmentalists we have on the east coast, are very concerned about this legislation. Our colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands indicated the concerns of allowing the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board any kind of management say on anything regarding this Island. Those are serious questions that need to be asked. I am not saying that someone is right or someone is wrong, but let us get the experts in. Let us get the people in at the committee stage in an unhurried manner, where we can take our time and do it right. If we do that, we can truly leave a legacy not just for people, but for the others with which we share this beautiful planet. That is the beauty of Parliament, when we can work together and achieve something that is greater than ourselves.I will give the government credit. I used to live in Yukon near Nahanni, which is absolutely gorgeous. When that size increased, I was shouting from the rooftops. I thought that was absolutely wonderful. I remember our colleague, Svend Robinson, was arrested defending South Moresby. Look at it now. It is one of the most beautiful and enchanting areas on the planet on the Queen Charlotte Islands. He risked everything to ensure that happened.We want to ensure that people do not have to protest in the streets of Halifax to ensure the protection of Sable Island. It simply does not have to happen. We can work in a co-operative manner and get it done.I will offer some advice for the minister, though. There are a lot more protected marine areas that we need to have in our country and I am proud to hear him say Lancaster Sound. I am proud to see the areas of the Bay St. Lawrence and also on the west coast. I have had the opportunity to live in British Columbia and Yukon and now in Nova Scotia. This is truly an absolutely gorgeous country. When we are connected in this regard, it is amazing what terrestrial and aquatic areas we have to enjoy in many cases. However, there are certain areas of the country which, in my personal view, should be left alone. Sable Island is one of them.I give top credit to Zoe Lucas. She is only about 5'2" or 5'3", but she is dynamite. She knows more about Sable than the House collectively will ever get to learn. She is amazing, but she is one person. We need to ensure that it is not just her, because one day she may not be with us. She has worked in the preservation, acknowledgement and awareness of Sable Island. She has brought that to many people in Canada and around the world to ensure the integrity of that beautiful island.The minister knows as he has been there. He understands the spiritual nature of that place. The last thing we need to see is hundreds of people showing up, taking pictures of horses and running around trying to pet them, stepping on their grounds and grass and everything else.I have another concern. When I was on the fisheries committee for many years, we had a very serious issue with grey seals. Sable Island is the home of many grey seals. Their population has exploded. (2300)One thing that we in the NDP will never accept is the cull of a wild species, where people shoot and kill the animals and they sink to the bottom and become crab or lobster bait. That is unacceptable. However, we will support a harvest of seals as long as the seals are utilized, whether turned into animal feed or other product. We would not allow an opportunity to go and kill 20,000 or 30,000 seals and then let them sink to the bottom. That does not make this country look very good internationally. However, if we utilize that seal product in a proper humane harvest, that would be good husbandry of the species, and would also protect the integrity of the island.The minister probably knows that when that many seals congregate on a shifting sandbar like that, it can cause havoc and a lot of damage. We want to ensure that the grey seals do not overrun the island and cause even greater damage. We want to control the species in a manner that is not only humane but offers economic opportunities for some fishermen, and utilizes the seal to its maximum potential. To just go out and kill a whole bunch of them and let them sink to the bottom is not the proper thing to do, and it is also very un-Canadian.Therefore, we need to know this from the minister, and hopefully we will learn this at committee: If indeed there is a time to harvest some of these seals to reduce the numbers, would the Sable Island park reserve allow limited hunting of those seals in that particular area? If it does, would it be done from the land or from boats? Having that many fishermen tramping all over the island could not be a good thing.These are the types of things, in terms of strict protocols, that we would need to address to ensure that this legislation is done correctly. We are very proud of the fact that the federal government and the great Province of Nova Scotia and its wonderful NDP government are working collaboratively on many of these issues. However, we still do not have all the answers we are looking for. My colleague from Halifax has done yeoman's work in this regard. I can assure members that when this gets to committee, she will be like a pit bull on a bone to ensure that this legislation is exactly what it should be. The reality is that she is the only member of Parliament of the 308 of us who has Sable Island in her riding, and that is a wonderful thing. Not many people get to say that. I know I do not. I am surprised she has not changed the name of her riding to Halifax—Sable Island. I do have McNabs Island, by the way. If members ever get a chance they should come down and see McNabs Island. It is absolutely beautiful. It is the same with Lawlor Island, but people are not allowed to go on that one.The reality is that these are jewels in the Halifax area and off the coast of Nova Scotia that are absolutely gorgeous. I invite my colleague over there from Kitchener to come on down and I will give him a personal tour of McNabs Island and the other island. However, I will not give him a tour of Sable Island. I would encourage him to leave it alone. We will have an interpretive centre, which hopefully the federal government will pay for, and we will walk him through that. In fact, my colleague from Halifax will walk him through it as well, and tell him all that he needs to know. However, we just encourage him with the greatest of respect not to go on the island, because that many people on the island, even if it is strictly controlled, could have unforeseen consequences.We want to ensure that the bill is done correctly. We want to work in a co-operative manner with the government. We do not like time allocation on this bill, and I would hope that maybe the Minister of the Environment could stand in his place and ask why the Conservatives moved time allocation on this very sensitive legislation. I hope that, with our colleague from Halifax and the great NDP working with the Conservatives and our Liberal colleagues and Green Party colleagues, we will ensure that we get the right legislation to ensure perpetuity for Sable Island park reserve now and in the future.BanCanada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum BoardEnvironmental assessmentGovernment assistanceGovernment billsGrey sealsNational, provincial and territorial parks and reservesNature conservationOil and gasPublic consultationS-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001Sable IslandSable Island National Park Reserve of CanadaSeal huntSecond readingSeismic explorationSenate billsTourism33939883393993BarryDevolinHaliburton—Kawartha Lakes—BrockBarryDevolinHaliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgGovernment OrdersBusiness of Supply [Opposition Motion—The Senate]InterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1740)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am proud to speak to this. I have been listening to the debate in the House and I heard the member for Markham—Unionville say in his speech that the motion was poorly worded. I want to challenge that because I think it is not a poorly worded motion; the motion is quite beautiful. It is beautifully worded and it is elegant in its simplicity. It says:That all funding should cease to be provided to the Senate beginning on July 1, 2013.(1745)I do think it is beautiful in its simplicity. We need to do something about the Senate. Look at the situation we are in right now when it comes to the Senate.What are the facts? What do we know? We are constantly being told that the Senate offers us this house of sober second thought. I think that is debatable. I will return to the sober second thought part.The member for Wellington—Halton Hills pointed out that we need to speak respectfully about Parliament. That includes the Senate, the other place. I would argue that it is the senators who are bringing disrespect to Parliament, not us who are here in this chamber. They are the ones who are bringing disrespect to Parliament.This so-called house of sober second thought, these sober second thinkers, are also filing false expense claims. We know that to be true. They are also misleading the public and Parliament about where they live. We know that they are abusing public funds. We know that they find the forms that ask them where they live to be confusing and difficult to understand. We also know that they are driving around with expired licence plates.I think that Canadians have paid enough money for this undemocratic institution and it is time that we stop spending millions of taxpayer dollars on this institution. The Senate is costing taxpayers $92.5 million a year. Frankly, that is $92.5 million too much.The member for Markham—Unionville said that this motion is idiotic. Tell that to the British House of Lords because they do not get paid as a right. They do not get paid for being lords. They do not have a salary in the House of Lords. Those folks get paid sort of a per diem for showing up. I would ask this question. Is that an idiotic way of doing things?The Liberals and Conservatives insist that we cannot do anything about the Senate. They say it is too big a constitutional issue, and once we open up the Pandora's box of constitutional issues no one will ever agree. We will go into this dark abyss of constitutional pandemonium, never to escape. Give me a break.The NDP does not believe this. That is why we are talking to Canadians first. That is the first step, talking to Canadians. I have been going door-to-door quite a bit at home, and at every single door people are asking if I can tell them what is going on with the Senate. This is what folks are talking about. We want to tap into that and see what people are saying. The NDP has launched our petition to roll up the red carpet, which people can sign, saying that this institution is outdated and it is time to get rid of it.After talking to Canadians, we need to start talking with the provinces. It is not that difficult. We can start with these baby steps. Let us talk to the provinces. Unfortunately, we have a Prime Minister who refuses to meet with the provinces. He has not been to the Council of the Federation. I cannot remember when he was there last, or if he was even there.The Liberals and Conservatives are insisting that they cannot do anything, that it is sad and unfortunate but their hands are bound. This is it. It is lovely. It is simple. It is elegant. Here is a solution. Let us pass this motion. There is nothing stopping us from doing this.I have heard some comments about the constitutionality of this motion. It is not unconstitutional to adopt a motion saying that the Senate should be defunded. The constitutionality of any subsequent legislation is a separate issue. This in itself is no problem. The sole purpose of this motion is the signal that it sends that the Senate is an illegitimate drain on the public purse. Let us do it. Let us move to the House of Lords model. Those guys are doing just fine. I do not think what they are doing is idiotic. There is not a lot of response to that. The cat has their tongues, the Liberals and Conservatives, because I do not think they treat the Senate as a house of sober second thought. They treat it as a fundraising arm for their parties. They want to keep appointing senators so they can go out and raise money for their parties on the taxpayer's dime. Let us look at who is in the Senate. There are David Smith and James Cowan, and they are the co-chairs of the Liberal campaign. They are campaign directors. I get along with James Cowan. I have worked with him. He is a nice guy. We are both from Nova Scotia and we have done some work together. We get along because we have a lot in common and we both like politics. I also get along with the Halifax Federal Liberal Riding Association president, Layton Dorey. He and I have a lot in common. We like to talk politics and we can shoot the breeze. I get along with these folks, but there is a big difference between Layton Dorey and James Cowan, because Layton Dorey is not being paid by taxpayers to do the work that he is doing for the Liberal Party.Let us look at the Conservatives. The chief fundraiser and chair of the Conservative Fund Canada is a senator. They should go for it, fill their boots, do all the fundraising they want to do, but they should not be able to do it on the taxpayer's dime. We should not be paying for a fundraising arm of these political parties. Let us remember that they are being paid, in total, $92.5 million. Senators are campaigning for the Conservatives and Liberals, while being paid by taxpayers and I do not think that is what Canadians are paying them for. If they are doing useful work for those parties, then those parties should be paying them out of their own coffers as fundraisers.The raison d'être of the Senate, when it was formed at Confederation, was one of sober second thought, with representatives from the provinces bringing regional interests to Parliament in doing that kind of political analysis on policy debates. Senators were supposed to be an integral part of our democracy, but we have seen anything but in the past 146 years. Fundraisers, failed candidates and senior party staffers have all been appointed time and time again to the upper chamber and the reality is that senators appointed by partisan prime ministers have a poor record of defending our regional interests.When I first arrived here, I spoke with our then democratic reform critic from Hamilton Centre and told him that I was from Nova Scotia, that there were Nova Scotian senators and I was conflicted about our position on abolishing the Senate. He asked when was the last time a senator ever stood up for Nova Scotia. I realized that they did not, they just did what their parties told them to do.Here is what they are told to do. The Climate Change Accountability Act passed in the House by a majority of democratically-elected members of Parliament. We acted on the will of the people and the will of the people was to pass climate change accountability legislation. When it got to the other place, it was voted down. This is what Marjory LeBreton, the Conservative Senate house leader, stated:We were as surprised as anyone else that the Liberals forced a vote on second reading of this bill. But once the Liberals presented us with an opportunity to defeat the bill, we of course were going to take it and defeat the bill because the government does not support this bill. The fact of the matter is this was not part of a strategy, this was something that landed in our laps. It was an opportunity to defeat the bill and we took the opportunity.That evening I was upstairs in this very place with Jack Layton, our then NDP leader. I had never seen him so angry. I had never heard him yell. He was beside himself with rage about how a bill in the House of Commons could be passed by democratically-elected MPs and when it got to the Senate, the senators said it was gone. It was unbelievable. It is $92.5 million too much.Abolition of SenateConstitutional amendmentGovernment assistanceOpposition motionsPatronagePolitical appointments33873243387325PierreDionne LabelleRivière-du-NordCathyMcLeodKamloops—Thompson—Cariboo//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgGovernment OrdersBusiness of Supply [Opposition Motion—The Senate]InterventionMs. Megan Leslie: (1755)[English]Mr. Speaker, I go back to the beginning of my speech, where I pointed out that this was the situation in the House of Lords. It is not unheard of. It is not silly. It is not some crazy concept. This is the way it is in England. They get their per diem if they show up and do the work, but it is not a salary as a right.If we de-fund the Senate, this is the first step. What the heck? There would be a lot of Canadians out there who would be pretty interested in volunteering in Parliament. They actually care about what is going on in Parliament. They want to see good legislation pass. If we had volunteers, they would not go across the country fundraising for the folks in here.Abolition of SenateGovernment assistanceOpposition motions3387348CathyMcLeodKamloops—Thompson—CaribooJimKarygiannisHon.Scarborough—Agincourt//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodInfrastructureInterventionHon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.): (1155)[English]Mr. Speaker, now that the build Canada fund's true infrastructure numbers have been crunched, municipalities are concerned, because $1.5 billion has been cut. The Cape Breton Regional Municipality is faced with a huge obligation for waste water and other infrastructure needs. Mayor Clarke and council have come up with their money on the table. The province is on side with its portion. When will the Conservatives come to the table with their share of infrastructure money for CBRM?Budget 2013 (March 21, 2013)Cape Breton Regional MunicipalityFederal-provincial-territorial cost sharingGovernment assistanceInfrastructureOral questionsWater treatment3334062PeterVan LoanHon.York—SimcoePierrePoilievreNepean—Carleton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1804RodgerCuznerRodger-CuznerCape Breton—CansoLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/CuznerRodger_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodGovernment AdvertisingInterventionMr. Rodger Cuzner (Cape Breton—Canso, Lib.): (1445)[English]Mr. Speaker, the cost of the Conservative action plan TV ad during the first round of the NHL playoffs, $95,000. A Conservative action plan ad during the NHL finals, $140,000. Conservative action plan ads during the Oscars, $200,000. A summer job for a Canadian student, priceless.While Canadian students are drowning in debt, the Conservatives are trying to advertise, telling them that it is a great day for a swim. Why have they cut 40,000 summer student positions each year since they have come to power?Canada Summer JobsCommunity Access ProgramGovernment advertisingGovernment assistanceInternetOral questions33210393321040ChristianParadisHon.Mégantic—L'ÉrableDianeFinleyHon.Haldimand—Norfolk//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodThe EnvironmentInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1455)[English]Mr. Speaker, the fact is Conservatives are refusing to work with others and it is harming our international reputation.However, I will move on to another Conservative failure. The government members have made it clear that they have no interest in the ground-breaking work of the Experimental Lakes Area, but even Conservatives have to see that it makes no sense to throw away four decades of research just because they are refusing to grant road access to scientists.Will the minister do the right thing and will he allow these scientists to keep their experiments going?Experimental Lakes AreaGovernment assistanceOral questionsScientific research and scientists332108033210813321082PeterKentHon.ThornhillGaryGoodyearHon.Cambridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/71285RobertChisholmRobert-ChisholmDartmouth—Cole HarbourNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ChisholmRobert_NDP.jpgGovernment OrdersSecond ReadingInterventionMr. Robert Chisholm (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NDP): (1725)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am always interested in hearing the member give us some indication of what he thinks and how he feels about an issue that is so important to all of us.I do not think there is anyone here who does not recognize the fact that there needs to be some action to deal with the desperate need for fresh, clean, safe drinking water in first nations communities. The problem is that bringing in legislation that would make first nations responsible for it, without properly ensuring that there would be funding in place, just compounds an already difficult situation. Could the member please comment?Drinking waterFirst NationsGovernment assistanceGovernment billsS-8, An Act respecting the safety of drinking water on First Nation landsSecond readingSenate billsWater treatment33213373321338RobClarkeDesnethé—Missinippi—Churchill RiverRobClarkeDesnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodNational DefenceInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence, CPC): (1455)[English]Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will. In fact, there are no cuts to the glider program. In fact, what we have, apparently, is a review being done within the department, which I have not seen, to improve the experience of flying for cadets. I repeat: no reductions are planned. There are no reductions in place. I maintain, and I think all members would maintain, that this is the best youth development program we have in Canada today. It produces some of our best leaders. It promotes good citizenship, community service and physical fitness among all young Canadians. The cadet program is here to stay under this government.Gliders and glidingGovernment assistanceOral questionsRoyal Canadian Air Cadets33005593300560ScottAndrewsAvalonRaymondCôtéBeauport—Limoilou//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1804RodgerCuznerRodger-CuznerCape Breton—CansoLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/CuznerRodger_Lib.jpgGovernment OrdersThe Budget [Financial Statement of Minister of Finance]InterventionMr. Rodger Cuzner (Cape Breton—Canso, Lib.): (1330)[English]Mr. Speaker, there are a number of things that the member and I will have to agree to disagree on. However, he represents a part of the country that is important to me. I had the opportunity to live in Fort McMurray for nine years. Many people from Cape Breton live there. As he referenced, a lot of Newfoundlanders and Easterners have made their way there. I know Atlantic Canadians take a great deal of pride in their contribution to developing the oil sands. I think he understands that full well. My question is on the Canada job grant specifically. What we know is that there has been absolutely zero discussions with the provinces on this piece. We know that negotiations have to come forward. His comments seem to be the polar opposite to what we are hearing from the premier of Alberta, Alison Redford. Why is the province where he resides not a big fan of the job grant program? Also, could he enlighten us as to whether he is aware of any consultations that went on between the Province of Alberta and the federal government?Adult education and trainingBudget 2013 (March 21, 2013)Budget debatesCanada Job GrantFederal-provincial-territorial relationsGovernment assistanceWays and Means No. 1532514643251465BrianJeanFort McMurray—AthabascaBrianJeanFort McMurray—Athabasca//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgGovernment OrdersThe Budget [Financial Statement of Minister of Finance ]InterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, CPC): (1520)[English]Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of economic action plan 2013, a budget focused on jobs, growth and long-term prosperity for all Canadians.When we ran in the election of 2011, we asked the Canadian people for a mandate, which included balancing the budget within the term of that mandate, by 2015. This budget presented by the Minister of Finance with the support of the Prime Minister of Canada would keep us on track to having that budget balanced by 2015.As we move toward a balanced budget, there are three paths we could take.The first path is to raise taxes, and many governments across Canada have taken the challenge to balance their budgets by raising taxes. However, that is not the path this Minister of Finance took. That is not the path of this government. We will not balance the budget by raising taxes on the people of Canada. In fact, since we were elected in 2006, we have cut taxes for the average Canadian family by $3,200, and we are still going to balance the budget by 2015. By lowering the tax burden on the people of Canada, we are increasing the jobs, growth and productivity of our country. Low taxes mean more jobs. More jobs means more productivity. That is the path we are taking.The second path we could have chosen was to cut the transfers to the provinces, as we saw the Liberal Party do the 1990s. Those transfers are valuable to provinces as they try to deliver on the priorities of Canadians in terms of education and health care. We saw billions of dollars taken back from the provinces in terms of those transfer payments in the 1990s, which saw hospitals close, nurses laid off, teachers laid off and Rae days in Ontario. We do not want to go back to that path. We will not support that.This budget does not cut any transfers to the provinces. In fact, since we took office in 2006, the federal government has increased transfers each and every year. The transfer for health care, the social transfer and transfers for equalization have all been increased each and every year, which is more support for the provinces. Even though we are increasing that support for the provinces, we are still on the path to balance the budget. In fact, since 2006 when we took office, we have increased those transfers from the federal government to the provinces by more than $20 billion to a record high in 2013-14 of $62 billion. This is an incredible amount of money that our provinces can use to support health care; to support education; to pay doctors, nurses and teachers; and to support other social programs in their provinces. That is an incredible commitment the federal government has made to the provinces, and we are keeping that promise.My own province of Nova Scotia has seen the transfers from the federal government increase in 2006 from $2.2 billion to almost $3 billion, which is an increase of almost $700 million. That $700 million is a lot of nurses, teachers and support for the priorities of Nova Scotians, and that is contained in this budget.The third path is the one we chose to balance the budget. It is the path that looks first into government spending to make sure we focus government spending in a pragmatic and prudent way, focusing on the priorities of Canadians. That is what we see in this budget. The budget supports my constituents in a large rural riding on the east coast because it focuses on the same priorities: jobs, growth and prosperity. It supports industries that are needed in my riding that hire the vast majority of the constituents I represent here in Ottawa.For example, this budget supports infrastructure. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities asked this government to support infrastructure: waste water treatment plants, roads, bridges and all the infrastructure needed to attract business to rural parts of Canada. This is infrastructure that is needed both in urban and rural Canada. This budget focuses on that.The build Canada plan, which sunsets next year, put in billions of dollars and worked with municipal leaders across Canada to support infrastructure development. However, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities asked the government to do a longer-term deal in this budget, which we have done. (1525)It is a 10-year deal for the new building Canada plan, adding $53 billion for infrastructure from coast to coast to coast, for roads, bridges, recreational centres and waste water treatment plants. These are the projects that this fund will help, which will help build the economy in rural and urban parts of the country.The Federation of Canadian Municipalities also asked the government to support it again with the gas tax. We all know that in previous budgets we made the gas tax allowance permanent. That was asked for and delivered. In this budget, we are indexing the gas tax allowance to protect the municipalities from inflation so they can count on that money. It will be continued at an indexed rate so they know they will not be hurt by inflation. That was asked for by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities made and something we delivered on.Does it support the budget? Absolutely. It stated:Today's budget delivers significant gains for Canada's cities and communities. We applaud the government for choosing to continue moving our communities forward even as it meets its immediate fiscal challenges....This is also a budget that delivers real gains for Canadians...it will spur growth and job creation while laying the foundation for a more competitive economy.This budget, the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister have delivered for municipal leaders across Canada and in my riding.In Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, there is a large forestry industry. Does this budget support the forestry industry? These are the guys who go out in the woods and cut the trees down. Not only does it support them, but the truckers who transport the logs to the sawmills. It supports the sawmill workers who turn the logs into lumber. It supports the manufacturers who turn the lumber into products which we export not only domestically but worldwide. This is a strong budget in support of the forestry industry.The Forest Products Association of Canada supports this budget. It stated:—(FPAC) welcomes the additional support for innovation and market development unveiled in today’s budget and also applauds the government’s focus on skills training....We applaud the government for its continuing support for the forest products sector even at a time when tough measures are needed to reduce the deficit. This is a strategic future-oriented decision that demonstrates ongoing commitment to the transformation of the industry.We have support from the forestry industry for this budget.In my riding, agriculture is a heartbeat. It employs literally thousands of my constituents. There are blueberry producers, dairy farmers, beef farmers and poultry farmers. There are agriculture producers who have created innovative products. There are fruit producers in the riding. This government and this budget supports the agriculture sector. It is expanding our markets internationally. It is investing in research and innovation so agriculture producers can develop new products and sell them in new markets. This is a strong budget in support of research, innovation and agriculture and supports, in particular, the extension of international trade so we can produce and export our agriculture products to new markets.What does the agriculture community say about this budget? The Canadian Cattlemen's Association stated:The CCA welcomes Budget 2013 and appreciates the Federal Government’s continued commitment to innovation, competitiveness, market development, regulatory cooperation, and addressing labour shortages. These are the top priorities for our industry and for the CCA.That is strong support for this budget by the agriculture community and the industries that are important in my riding.Also in my riding there is manufacturing, which is centred around the aerospace industry. There is an IMP plant in Amherst, which employs 400 people. There is an IMP plant in the Halifax airport region, which employs over 1,200 people. There are 1,600 of my constituents who are directly employed in the aerospace industry. I know there are many thousands in the Quebec aerospace industry who put dinner on the table for their families due to direct employment by the aerospace industry.What does the aerospace industry say about this budget? It stated:—(AIAC) is very pleased with measures announced in the Economic Action Plan 2013...The measures announced in [this budget] constitute an excellent short-term response to the Aerospace Review report...Therefore, there is support for this budget by that industry.This budget supports my riding, the agriculture community, the forestry industry, the municipalities, infrastructure and the aerospace industry. Many of my constituents will benefit very much from the implementation of this budget. I ask all my colleagues in the House to stand and support economic action plan 2013.(1530)Aerospace industryBalanced budgetBudget 2013 (March 21, 2013)Budget debatesBuilding Canada PlanCities and townsFarming and farmersForest products industryGas Tax FundGovernment assistanceGovernment expendituresInfrastructureNova ScotiaTax reliefTaxationTransfers to provinces and territoriesWays and Means No. 15325185632518573251858325185932518603251861325186232518633251864325186532518663251867PhilMcColemanBrantRandallGarrisonEsquimalt—Juan de Fuca//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/74ScottBrisonHon.Scott-BrisonKings—HantsLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/BrisonScott_Lib.jpgGovernment OrdersThe Budget [Financial Statement of Minister of Finance]InterventionHon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.): (1045)[English]Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to speak to budget 2013.[Translation]I have to say that, based on the Conservatives' fanfare as they released part of the budget in the days leading up to yesterday, I was expecting great things from budget 2013.[English]After all, we were led to believe that this budget would help address Canada's skills gap: 260,000 jobs without people; 1.3 million people without jobs. We were told that the skills gap was the most pressing issue of our time and that new investments would form the cornerstone of this budget. Reports said that the Prime Minister was mad as hell about Canada's training programs and that he would not take it anymore. However, when we finally had a chance to see the budget, it did not even come close to this hype. Not only is there no new money for training, the government is actually freezing its training budget at 2007 levels. What has happened since 2007? The economy went into a recession, from which the Canadian labour market has yet to recover, and inflation over the last six years has driven prices up by 10%, so a dollar today simply does not go as far as it did in 2007.What we have now is an even greater need for training programs to get Canadians back to work, but the government is actually providing fewer resources than before. In the lead up to the budget, the Conservatives identified the correct problem, but in the budget they failed to provide an adequate solution.If the Prime Minister was mad as hell before the budget, he must be absolutely furious today, because the measures in budget 2013 will not improve training in Canada. With less money for training than before, a 10% cut, when we factor in inflation, simply will not get the job done. It simply will not be enough to satisfy someone who is actually concerned about Canada's skills gap.[Translation]I imagine that if the Prime Minister had been serious about this, he would have accepted the premiers' invitation to sit down with them in Halifax. (1050)[English]Perhaps what is really irking the Prime Minister is the fact that he has not been able to take credit for Canada's training programs. Maybe that is why he did not sit down with the premiers in Halifax to talk about the economy. Imagine, the premiers asked the Prime Minister to sit down with them last autumn to discuss the economy at their premiers' meeting in Halifax, and the Prime Minister said no, that he did not have to do that.Budget 2013 actually helps the Prime Minister's real objective, and that is to stamp the economic action plan logo on every training program in Canada. However, the Conservatives should not be preoccupied simply with ensuring that the federal government gets all of the credit. They should be focusing on helping Canadians get jobs. On that point, budget 2013 fails.The budget attaches new strings to the training funds that require matching provincial money. Cash-strapped provinces simply may not be able to afford it. British Columbia has said that it was alarmed at the change. Alberta is not sure even if it can afford to participate in the program.[Translation]The Quebec Minister of Finance, Nicolas Marceau, said, “—this is a direct attack on Quebec. It is economic sabotage.”[English]Clearly, these proposed changes in budget 2013 require a greater level of co-operation between the federal government and the provinces, but the Conservatives have got off to a very bad start.When it comes to training, what the Conservatives have delivered is not an economic action plan. It is an economic inaction plan. In terms of Infrastructure, this is another area where budget 2013 does not live up to the hype.There is a national consensus that we must do more to invest in our communities. Some say that there is $160 billion infrastructure deficit. We have known for years that the government's infrastructure plan from budget 2007 would expire in 2014, and we were led to believe that budget 2013 would deliver significant new money to help Canadian cities and communities invest in infrastructure.Not only does budget 2013 fail to deliver the goods, the Conservatives are actually cutting new infrastructure funding in order to balance the budget by 2015. Starting in 2014, the Conservatives will cut new funding for provincial and municipal infrastructure by almost $2 billion a year, compared to what was actually already in budget 2007.New money under the building Canada fund drops from $1.7 billion in 2013 to a paltry $210 million for each year until the budget is supposedly balanced. On top of that, the Conservatives are playing a shell game with infrastructure. They are taking infrastructure money from budget 2007 that they have failed to yet get out the door and are spreading it over the next five years and trying to call it new money. It is another example of the Conservatives economic inaction plan.We were told that the budget would focus on manufacturing. This is an area where the Conservatives have a dismal record. In fact, Canada's manufacturing sector has hemorrhaged jobs, an astounding 350,000 net jobs lost since the Conservatives took office in 2006. Clearly, the status quo is not working.What does budget 2013 do? The cornerstone of the budget's plan for this sector is another two-year extension of the temporary accelerated capital cost allowance. This is the third time the government has extended this program for exactly two years.The private sector has been asking for a five-year extension so it can plan ahead for long-term capital investments and make strategic investments based on the long term, not on the availability of government funds. Instead the Conservatives are only prepared to offer more of the same. Whether it is training, infrastructure or manufacturing, budget 2013 just does not live up to the Conservative hype.In terms of the deficit, this is a budget that back loads its investments at the end of this decade and then projects a surplus in 2015 that is no bigger than a rounding error. The Conservatives are basing their budget surplus on rosy revenue projections and cuts to new funding for infrastructure. This is more false advertising. Again, the Conservatives economic inaction plan is full of it. The Conservatives' plan promises jobs, growth and long-term prosperity. What does it actually deliver? On the jobs front, the percentage of Canadians with paid work is still lower than it was in 2008. Canada's labour market still has not recovered from the recession.It is even harder for young Canadians to find work. The employment rate today for young people is more than five points worse than prior to the recession. More Canadians in their late twenties are stuck living at home than before. In the late 1990s, one in five Canadians in their late twenties was still living at home with parents. Today, it is one in three. Young Canadians simply cannot afford to move out. Their incomes have dropped since 2008. They are being squeezed between being underemployed or unemployed and having to pay crippling levels of student debt.Lost in yesterday's budget coverage was the release of a TD Bank report on student loans. According to this report, student debt in Canada now stands at almost a trillion dollars. It is the second-highest source of debt in Canada next to home mortgages. The 90-plus day delinquency rate on student loans is at an all time high. The Government of Canada has been writing off hundreds of millions in Canada student loans over the last few years.(1055)[Translation]Too many young Canadians are losing hope. We run the risk of creating a lost generation of youth who are burdened with high debt and have no useful work experience.[English]Young Canadians, their parents and their grandparents are looking to the government for a concrete strategy to create new opportunities for young Canadians. Instead of delivering a real plan to help our youth, budget 2013 focuses its so-called job opportunities for youth plan on more government advertising. Under this so-called youth jobs plan, the Conservatives are taking $19 million from existing programs and reallocating that money to advertising, as though the solution to the country's job crisis for young Canadians is more economic action plan ads on TV.Budget 2013 also places Canadian jobs at risk by continuing to hike job-killing EI premiums. In fact, the average Canadian worker will pay an extra $50 in EI premiums next year and his or her employer will face even higher increases.With measures like these, no wonder budget 2013 assumes that Canada's unemployment rate in 2014 and 2015 will in fact go even higher than previously predicted. The Conservatives also talk about growth and long-term prosperity. Well, the budget assumes that Canada's economy will actually slow down. In fact, the government had to reduce its growth projections for this year by more than a full percentage point. It seems the only growth taking place in the Canadian economy right now is the growth in household debt. This does not bode well for the long-term prosperity of middle-class Canadians. Canadian families now owe a record $1.67 for every $1.00 of annual income. This level of personal debt is higher than American families were carrying prior to the crash.Meanwhile, median household incomes have flatlined over the last four years. Canadian families may have bigger mortgages today, but they are in no better position to pay them. In fact, a growing number of Canadians are now struggling to pay their mortgages, even at low rates. They are petrified as to what will happen when rates go up. Making matters worse, housing prices are starting to soften. For many Canadians, their home is not simply a place where they live, it is also part of their retirement plan. The experts say that Canadian home prices are now over-valued, and the Minister of Finance is partly to blame. It was the finance minister, with his risky mortgage scheme in budget 2006, that brought U.S.-style 40-year mortgages with no down payments to Canada. That scheme made 40-year mortgages the norm in Canada, it drove up housing prices and it helped to create a housing bubble. Accelerated capital cost allowance programAdult education and trainingBudget 2013 (March 21, 2013)Budget debatesBudget surplusBuilding Canada FundEconomic prosperityEducation and trainingEmployment insurance premiumsFederal-provincial-territorial relationsGovernment assistanceGrants and loans for studentsHousingInfrastructureJob creationManufacturing industryMortgagesPersonal debtRetirement from workWays and Means No. 15Young people32487653248766324876732487683248769324877032487713248772324877332487743248775PeggyNashParkdale—High ParkAndrewScheerRegina—Qu'Appelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgStatements by MembersLast Post FundInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, CPC): (1110)[English]Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the veterans and legions across my riding to thank the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance for increasing the funding envelope of the Last Post Fund. The Last Post Fund is the fund we use to show respect to our veteran soldiers, the ones who fought at Juno in Normandy, the ones who fought in the jungles of Burma, the ones who liberated millions of Europeans in World War II, a generation of soldiers who are coming to the ends of their lives. Our government has answered their request to respect them by increasing the Last Post Fund from $3,600 to $7,300 to help and support their families with the funeral.We need to show these veterans respect, both in life and in death. Our government has answered that call.I call upon the opposition to stand and vote in favour of this budget. If it votes against budget 2013, it will be voting against every veteran across our country.Budget 2013 (March 21, 2013)Deaths and funeralsGovernment assistanceLast Post FundStatements by MembersVeteransVeterans benefits32488373248838324883932488403248841Jinny JoginderaSimsNewton—North DeltaRéjeanGenestShefford//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1804RodgerCuznerRodger-CuznerCape Breton—CansoLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/CuznerRodger_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodFisheries and OceansInterventionMr. Rodger Cuzner (Cape Breton—Canso, Lib.): (1140)[English]Mr. Speaker, we know that DFO is responsible for the funding, care and maintenance of core harbours, but anybody who lives in a coastal community also recognizes that non-core harbours still contribute to the economies of those communities.Until recently, officials confirmed that there was $5 million to fund health and safety issues for these non-core commercial harbours. Can the parliamentary secretary confirm how much is in the fund currently and whether or not an initiative like the Gabarus seawall would qualify for funding in this particular program?BreakwatersDikesGabarusGovernment assistanceOral questionsPorts and harboursSmall Craft Harbours Program32109233210924StevenFletcherHon.Charleswood—St. James—AssiniboiaRandyKampPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgPrivate Members' BusinessHomes Not Connected to a Sanitation SystemInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1835)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am really pleased to rise today in support of today's motion to protect water and public health in rural communities. This is an excellent motion, and I applaud the member for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel for bringing it forward. She is bringing forward a sound policy idea. As we heard in her speech tonight, she listened to her constituents and identified a gap in policy. Working with her community along with outside experts she came up with a creative policy solution to solve the problem. This is a perfect example of responsible representation by an MP and I am proud to say that the MP for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel is one of my NDP colleagues. It is great work.Motion No. 400 seeks to study the establishment of financial support programs to bring homes connected to a septic system up to a standard, with the aim of improving public and environmental health. This kind of program would make Canadians in rural communities, who are often left out of city initiatives, a priority. It would carry benefits both for the environment and the economy.The federal government invests millions of dollars to bring municipal wastewater treatment systems up to standard, but more than a quarter of all Canadians, mainly in rural areas, are not connected to these city treatment systems. They depend instead on home septic systems. As it stands, 25% of Canadians are forced to pay out-of-pocket to maintain their septic systems on top of the taxes they pay for the municipal services they do not use.Some may wonder why the member for Halifax would be standing to speak to the motion. My riding does include rural communities that are not part of the municipal wastewater system. I am pleased to tell the House that the motion has been endorsed by some communities in Nova Scotia.I also support the motion from my perspective as the NDP environment critic. From an environmental and health perspective, a consensus exists that outdated septic systems in low income rural areas pose a threat to water quality and public health. Updating these systems is quite expensive and often too costly a project for Canadians.The government understands the importance of maintaining high standards for wastewater treatment in cities. We need to establish the same high standards for our rural constituents. We have to develop a funding program for homeowners who do not have the means to ensure that their septic systems meet those environmental standards.The member for Westlock—St. Paul said earlier in the House that he did think the motion was in federal jurisdiction. He said that government members would not be supporting the motion, keeping in mind of course that it will not be a whipped vote and that members will be free to vote as they want. With respect, saying that the motion is not within federal jurisdiction is just a way to duck the issue. This is a perfect opportunity for federal leadership. I checked the website of the member for Westlock—St. Paul. He celebrates things on his website like $9,000 that went to the Cold Lake Public Library flooring renovation and $23,000 to the Gibbons curling rink for upgrades. Members might be wondering what in the world flooring upgrades and curling rink upgrades have to do with federal jurisdiction. That is a good question. These kinds of projects are federal issues and do fall within federal jurisdiction because the money comes from a community infrastructure fund. Why would the federal government not show leadership on something like Motion No. 400? Why would it duck this issue? Why would it not take real leadership and stand up for the health and environmental protection of our rural communities?Motion No. 400 would be an important step toward increasing the equality of services for both rural and urban taxpayers. Rural living is becoming more expensive and services are becoming more difficult to access. Citizens in these areas are often unable to reap the benefits of many of the federal programs that we do see coming forward. We need to give rural Canadians the support they need to maintain the same standard of living as city dwellers, rather than force them to relocate to cities.(1840)Further, the motion would help to protect both water quality and public health. Outdated sceptic systems are a major source of pollution in rural communities. They have been shown to contribute to the growth of bacteria in our water. By leaving these sceptic systems in their current state, we risk contaminating our drinking water, which of course poses a serious danger to the health of Canadians. Water contamination can affect not only drinking water, but also aquatic ecosystems and beaches. A number of rural communities depend on this kind of tourism, and the economic losses that come with water contamination are serious.In addition to supporting local economies, this measure would be of personal financial benefit. It could relieve rural Canadians of a disproportionate financial burden and allow them to participate more fully in their local economies. The motion would go a long way to solving those kinds of problems.All of this means that rural communities would be strengthened if these measures were to be taken. The motion is a real and tangible way to improve the quality of life of rural Canadians, and it is actually part of a larger package of policies that the NDP is proposing to help rural communities.The motion was inspired by a resolution of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities that flagged as a problem the lack of federal support for septic system upgrades. On behalf of their constituents, who are really our constituents, they are pressuring the federal government to act on this issue. The federation, along with over 70 individual municipalities on just the first day of debate, have all expressly supported Motion M-400.The Conservatives say that existing federal funding meets this need, but the municipalities are vigorously disputing this claim. We have evidence from different municipalities saying that existing programs do not solve this socio-economic problem, and that the funding does not come close to the demand that exists. Federal investments in infrastructure simply do not target the distinct and widespread need for financial support for rural sceptic system upgrades. Current investment in this area is in no way comparable to what is spent in urban areas. Federal and provincial governments have contributed up to 85% of the cost to upgrade municipal water systems, but rural Canadians are forced to bear the full cost of upgrading their sceptic systems themselves, simply because of where they live.I really hope, despite the fact that we have had some indications the government will vote against the motion, that all members will give serious consideration to this arbitrary inequality that leaves rural Canadians with a disproportionate economic burden.The federal government must carefully consider the implications of the current financing system for rural Canadians. As parliamentarians, we must take a good, hard look at the problem that families cannot afford to replace their sceptic tanks and maintain water quality in their communities. We have to explore the opportunities that could provide these Canadians with the financial support they need for important investments.Canadians across the country have signed a petition calling on the government to consider establishing a financial support program to upgrade outdated sceptic systems for families in need. I echo their support of this motion, because I believe that rural Canadians deserve the same quality of service, the same health protections and the same ability to participate in their economies and society as every other Canadian. I believe that Motion M-400 does just that, so I am proud to support it.Government assistanceM-400Rural communitiesSewage treatment and disposalWater quality3171241317124231712433171244317124531712463171247317124831712493171250317125131712523171253317125431712553171256317125731712583171259DenisCoderreHon.BourassaKellieLeitchSimcoe—Grey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodAboriginal AffairsInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1415)[English]Mr. Speaker, last year the Prime Minister committed to renewing the Crown-first nation relationship, but after failing to act for a full year, he made the same commitment to the National Chief of the AFN on January 11. Yet there was no mention of it in his speech to caucus yesterday.Many first nations, Inuit and Métis people are living in poverty in homes without electricity and they have no choice but to send their kids to schools that receive one-third less funding than other schools in Canada, while Conservative backbenchers and senator are hurling insults. Action is needed now. When will the Prime Minister act to start addressing these serious problems?Aboriginal peoplesEconomic developmentGovernment assistanceOral questionsPoverty316721431672153167216KellieLeitchSimcoe—GreyStephenHarperRight Hon.Calgary Southwest//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodAboriginal AffairsInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1415)[Translation]Mr. Speaker, today we are debating a motion calling on the government to make the improvement of economic outcomes of aboriginals a central focus in the next budget. The government should therefore conduct nation-to-nation consultations in keeping with treaties.However, in his speech to caucus, the Prime Minister did not make this issue a priority. What is worse, the Conservative members and senators hurled insults.How will aboriginals fit into the next budget?Aboriginal peoplesEconomic developmentGovernment assistanceOral questionsPoverty316721831672193167220StephenHarperRight Hon.Calgary SouthwestStephenHarperRight Hon.Calgary Southwest//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodForeign AffairsInterventionHon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.): (1450)[English]Mr. Speaker, 15 years ago today, world leaders, MPs and NGOs gathered here in Ottawa to sign the Ottawa treaty to ban anti-personnel landmines, which unanimously passed. Since then, Canada has been one of the leading funders for the removal effort. However, under the Conservative government, the funding for the landmine clearance has been cut. Canada has gone from being in the top five to, now, number ten. Will the government commit to renew funding for the landmines clearance and return Canada to a leadership role?Canadian Landmine FundConvention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their DestructionGovernment assistanceLand minesOral questions31042403104241MichelleRempelHon.Calgary Centre-NorthJohnBairdHon.Ottawa West—Nepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88PeterStofferPeter-StofferSackville—Eastern ShoreNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/StofferPeterArend_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionMr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): (1440)[English]Mr. Speaker, my 90-year-old mother who was born in Holland, now living in Richmond, B.C., is very upset that many of her heroes who liberated her, my father and her fellow Dutchmen in the Netherlands may not get a proper funeral and burial service when they pass on. Trust me, Mr. Speaker, you do not want to upset my mom.Why is the Minister of Veterans Affairs upsetting my mother and why is it that so many veterans in the country cannot get a proper funeral and burial service after the services they gave to us? They liberated Europe. They gave their very best to our country. Will the government now ensure that all veterans in our country get a proper funeral and burial?Deaths and funeralsDepartment of Veterans AffairsFuneral and Burial ProgramGovernment assistanceOral questionsVeterans30577913057792StevenBlaneyHon.Lévis—BellechasseStevenBlaneyHon.Lévis—Bellechasse//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence, CPC): (1445)[English]Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Edmonton Centre for the question and also for his 31 years of service with the Canadian Forces. Today I was honoured to be with the Minister of Veterans Affairs to announce the creation of the Memorial Ribbon as part of our government's ongoing support to Canada's military and their families. The Memorial Ribbon will recognize loved ones of our fallen heroes who have not been recognized by a Memorial Cross. This demonstration of our continued care and concern for Canada's military families extends to our brave men and women who have served our country but also their families and loved ones who have sacrificed so much for us.We honour those families. We will never forget their sacrifices. Lest we forget.Deaths and funeralsFuneral and Burial ProgramGovernment assistanceOral questionsVeterans3054187305418830541903054191LaurieHawnHon.Edmonton CentreRobertAubinTrois-Rivières//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88PeterStofferPeter-StofferSackville—Eastern ShoreNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/StofferPeterArend_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionMr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): (1430)[English]Mr. Speaker, that is patently false. The Last Post Fund does not supply the needs of all veterans. The fact is that we asked last week in the House of Commons when the government would ensure it for every single hero of our country who wore the uniform. When veterans pass on, it is the final chance that a grateful nation has to thank them and their families for their service. I would like to ask the minister again, does he believe that every veteran who serves this country deserves a proper and dignified burial service?Funeral and Burial ProgramFuneral homes and funeral servicesGovernment assistanceLast Post FundOral questionsVeterans30523723052373StevenBlaneyHon.Lévis—BellechasseStevenBlaneyHon.Lévis—Bellechasse//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88PeterStofferPeter-StofferSackville—Eastern ShoreNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/StofferPeterArend_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodVeteransInterventionMr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): (1435)[English]Mr. Speaker, what utter nonsense. The fact is, he knows and the government knows that it is funeral homes and provinces that are picking up the financial slack to ensure that our veterans get the dignity they deserve when they pass on.We are going to ask the government one last time. Will it now put the funding into the last post fund to ensure that every single veteran in this country, who served the country with the unlimited liability, gets the dignity that they and their families deserve?It is the least we can do. It is our last chance for a grateful nation to thank the veterans for their service. Will the government restore that funding to ensure veterans get the dignity they so richly deserve?Deaths and funeralsFuneral homes and funeral servicesGovernment assistanceLast Post FundOral questionsVeterans302115330211543021155StevenBlaneyHon.Lévis—BellechasseStevenBlaneyHon.Lévis—Bellechasse//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/71285RobertChisholmRobert-ChisholmDartmouth—Cole HarbourNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ChisholmRobert_NDP.jpgGovernment OrdersIncreasing Offenders’ Accountability for Victims ActInterventionMr. Robert Chisholm (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NDP): (1030)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in the debate on Bill C-37.I will remind members of what our critic, the member for Gatineau, has stated. We support the bill at second reading. We are anxious to see it move forward to committee where we will give the matter more examination.There is no question that members of the official opposition support victims of crime and their families. We recognize the value of provincial and federal services that have been provided to victims of crime and their families. However, there is a concern whether these services are adequate and sufficiently funded. I certainly have not heard an adequate explanation from the government whether this additional surcharge would ensure that those services are properly funded. If we are going to provide services to victims and their families to try to address some of the impact of the crimes to which they have been affected, then the support needs to be there and it needs to be properly funded.We have raised our concern with the idea that the discretion of the courts has been removed in terms of deciding whether the surcharge creates an undue burden and hardship on the offender. This goes to the point that the Conservative government seems to continually move in on the jurisdiction of the judiciary to remove the learned discretion the courts have earned over many decades. This is a concern. In other words, the government is moving into an area in which, frankly, it has no business being. The Conservatives seem to be cherry-picking to restrain the judiciary in areas they think are politically advantageous to them. There is certainly no evidence as to whether this achieves any positive outcome in terms of addressing crime and making our communities and Canadians any safer. They appear to continually penalize the people who are trying to ensure there is a balance of fairness in restitution and rehabilitation within the system, which has been shown to be much more responsive to the demands that we ensure that our communities are safer for Canadians.I have some experience with the Nova Scotia victim fine surcharge and its implementation. It is an important measure, but I have not heard the government talk about the consultations it has had with provincial jurisdictions. Is there a standard application for the victim fine surcharge across the country? I have not heard if the government has worked in any way to make sure that there is some standardization across the country or that the application of this victim fine surcharge is being applied in a uniform fashion across the country and that it complements what already exists in provincial jurisdictions. That is an important question. Certainly it is one members on this side will be pursuing at committee and in further debate in this chamber.(1035)We recognize that more has to be done. We are concerned that members opposite are looking for an easy fix, for measures that would appear to be having some impact. They could be doing more in a substantive way to get at the issues of crime and punishment, to ensure that victims are properly compensated, that services are in place to deal with the impacts of the crimes on victims and their families in the most effective way possible. As we have said, the intent of the bill, which is to ensure that services for victims of crime are properly funded, is laudable and is something we support. Whether this increase would properly fund those programs, we have not heard as yet. These questions will be forthcoming. I have not heard anything from government members during the second reading debate to answer some of our questions. I am not the first member to raise these questions, but we have not heard anything in response. They are important questions. We are not here simply to pass laws that fulfill a political objective. We are here to ensure the laws of this land do what they are supposed to do, that they are properly thought out and have the intended impact. It is unfortunate that we are dealing with a piece of legislation in this House when there does not seem to have been an attempt to coordinate it with what exists at the provincial level. There is Bill C-350 and there are some conflicts between it and Bill C-37. Those things have to be clarified. We have to ensure that the work we are doing here is adding in a positive and constructive way to the laws of this land and not creating more conflict. We have already seen that legislation passed by the government, as it deals with crime and justice, has been challenged in various jurisdictions. Various provisions have been struck down by the courts. I suggest that these things happen because the legislation is not well thought out and members of this House who have much experience and knowledge to bring to bear are not given the opportunity to fully engage in debate and examination of legislation.In conclusion, we on this side will be supporting this bill in principle to send it to committee. However, we have a number of outstanding questions that we will be pursuing. I hope members opposite will recognize the need to co-operate to ensure that this legislation, if it passes this House at the end of the process, is the best piece of legislation it can possibly be.C-350, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (accountability of offenders)C-37, An Act to amend the Criminal CodeCriminal liabilityFederal-provincial-territorial relationsGovernment assistanceGovernment billsJudicial discretionSecond readingVictim surchargeVictims of crime2994725IrwinCotlerHon.Mount RoyalKevinLamoureuxWinnipeg North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/74ScottBrisonHon.Scott-BrisonKings—HantsLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/BrisonScott_Lib.jpgGovernment OrdersBusiness of Supply [Opposition Motion—Income Inequality]InterventionHon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.): (1305)[English]Mr. Speaker, this is an important issue. In fact, in a recent survey around three-quarters of Canadians indicated that income inequality is one of the top economic issues that we have to deal with as governments and politicians. This is not a partisan issue. Income inequality has grown in Canada on a secular basis over the last 30 years. It has grown under Progressive Conservative governments, Liberal governments and Conservative governments. It has grown under New Democrat provincial governments. It has grown under Liberal and Parti Québécois provincial governments in Canada. While this is not a partisan issue, it is an important one. It is one that we should have a debate about and talk about what we as federal leaders can do, working in conjunction with provincial and municipal governments and leaders in Canada.The reality is that there has been an acceleration in the gap between the rich and the poor in recent years in Canada and throughout the industrialized world. This is not an ordinary economic downturn and recovery cycle; it is a global economic restructuring. It is one where resource rich countries like Canada benefit disproportionately from the global demand for their natural resources. However, within Canada, there will be growth in the gap between have and have-not provinces exacerbated by the provinces that have those natural resources versus those that do not. The reality is that this is not something that the federal government or provincial governments can do alone. We need to work together.The reality is that there are some types of government programs that can help with issues of income inequality. The working income tax benefit, which was introduced in the last fall economic statement of the Liberal government and embraced and continued under the current Conservative government, is a measure that both governments can claim responsibility for. It is a good policy. It is the kind of policy that can help break down the welfare wall, that barrier to those people who want to work but lack the economic incentives to do so.If we believe in that kind of public policy, we ought also recognize that tax credits for disability, or for children in sports or music or cultural activities or for caregivers, ought to be refundable. Because of the perverse nature of non-refundable tax credits, it the poorest of the poor, the people who need these benefits the most, who do not qualify for them.The changes to OAS, again, are an example. If we evaluate who receives OAS, 40% of the people receiving OAS make less than $20,000 per year and 53% make less than $25,000 per year. There is a disproportionate hit to those with the lowest incomes. We all have to consider that when we are making decisions in Parliament.I believe that the Governor of the Bank of Canada, Mark Carney, said it best when he remarked in regard to inequality that, “The people who say it's not an issue are wrong, and the people who say it's an issue and who want to create class warfare are wrong. The focus needs to be on ensuring equality of opportunity.... It's a massive issue; fundamental to society. It's not right that big swaths of society become discouraged and marginalized.”I think Governor Carney has nailed it, frankly. We have to focus on equality of opportunity. We cannot guarantee equality of outcome. However, we can work together to ensure equality of opportunity. If we look at this, I believe one of the successes of the U.S. economy multi-generationally was the sense of hope, that one could be born into any station in the United States and have a shot at success.I think one of the reasons why the U.S. economy is, and probably will continue to be, stagnant for some time is that people have lost that sense of hope, that capacity to grow and develop and for their children and someone else's children to succeed.If we think of the drivers of equality of opportunity, where are the best opportunities to break multi-generational poverty?I was just at the Canadian Council of Chief Executives' conference at the convention centre here in Ottawa. There was session focused on education and learning. They were talking about lifelong learning. They were talking about restoring the honour of trades. They were talking about early learning and child care.(1310)These are CEOs of the biggest companies in Canada who were talking about how to address some of the issues, the drivers of equality of opportunity, and they were talking about early learning and child care and how important they are. A federal government cannot act on early learning and child care alone, but there is no constitutional barrier to a federal government working in partnership with the provinces on that issue. I served in a cabinet where we signed agreements with every province and territory on early learning and child care. We committed federal funds and we worked co-operatively, because it is a national imperative. Quebec has a good system and I congratulate it and several Quebec governments for having implemented a program that has helped to strengthen equality of opportunity and upward mobility.It is not just good social policy; it is good economic policy. The reality is that there is no area of educational investment that will yield more bang for the buck in its impact on people's success in the future and their growth economically and socially than in the years before they even get to grade 1 or the primary grade in the public education system.These are the issues we should be talking about in this House, not pithy partisanship. We should be talking about ideas on how we can work together across party lines and with provincial governments to address these issues. Let us look at the issues of aboriginal and first nations. It is not economically or socially sustainable to have the fastest growing and youngest population in the country as the most economically and socially disenfranchised at the same time. In the House, as politicians we have to develop the kinds of ideas and solutions, the head start programs, the early intervention programs, that can help save a generation of young aboriginal and first nations youth.We also have to engage non-aboriginal Canadians in this discussion. Part of responsible politics is pedagogy. We have to engage non-aboriginals and we have to tell them that they in fact have as much interest in seeing young aboriginals and first nations members succeed as the members of those first nations communities themselves. If we do not address the issues of what is going on in aboriginal and first nations reserves, it is not only a social time bomb but also an economic time bomb for our country.These are the kinds of issues we should be talking about when we talk about equality of opportunity. What we now see in Canada is a resource-driven recovery and a gap between resource provinces and non-resource provinces. Alberta is investing massively in education, and I congratulate it, as that is exactly the right thing to do. Alberta has a progressive premier in Premier Redford out there.At the same time, my province of Nova Scotia is cutting investment in public education by about 30%, because of budget issues.One of the things that came out of the meeting of Canadian Council of CEOs today was that one of the CEOs was saying that an Alberta CEO has as much interest in the education system in Nova Scotia or Newfoundland as he does in the Alberta education system. The future workforce in places like Alberta and Saskatchewan could very well come from places like Nova Scotia and Newfoundland.In fact, there is a vested economic interest, not just in those provinces but across the country, in strong education and in working with the provinces to ensure that they can afford to invest in that fundamental underpinning of equality of opportunity: strong public education.One area we should be looking at, whether we are talking about learning and lifelong learning or restoring the honour of the trades, is the German model of apprenticeship and skilled trades. Germany has a robust economy, and they have not had the same growth in income inequality that we have had in Canada. One of the reasons is that in Germany they have never lost the honour of skilled trades.Over the last 30 years in Canada, we have lost the honour of skilled trades. We need to restore that. We have to work with apprenticeship programs. The federal government and provincial governments need to work hand in hand to deal with this issue.(1315)The economic and social returns of dealing with income inequality and equality of opportunity issues today is one that can yield huge benefits for future generations of Canadians, and that is why this is an important issue that we should be engaged with in Parliament.Aboriginal peoplesCare for childrenEducation and trainingEqual opportunitiesGovernment assistanceIncome distributionLow incomeOpposition motionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTax creditsWorking income tax benefitYoung people2979963297996429799652979970297997129799722979973CarolynBennettHon.St. Paul'sDeanDel MastroPeterborough//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodThe EnvironmentInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1440)[English]Mr. Speaker, Canadians would have more faith in what the minister was saying if the National Energy Board did not fail to follow up on violations 93% of the time. The Conservatives are gambling with Canada's west coast, and now we hear that down in Rio, they are reneging on their promise to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies. Basically they are doing whatever their big oil friends want them to do. Is there anything that this minister would not do for his big oil lobby friends?Government assistanceOil and gasOral questions2951486JoeOliverHon.Eglinton—LawrencePeterKentHon.Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/63577ScottArmstrongScott-ArmstrongCumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit ValleyConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ArmstrongScott_CPC.jpgPrivate Members' BusinessCanada Pension PlanInterventionMr. Scott Armstrong (Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, CPC): (1355)[English]Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member who put this bill forward, the member for Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor. I know he did this in good faith.On behalf of the Government of Canada, I want to start by expressing our appreciation for seniors who have worked hard to build a better country for future generations of Canadians. We commend each and every one of our seniors for all they have given and continue to give, and we recognize that they deserve a secure and dignified retirement that reflects on the contributions they have made.I want to assure everyone that the Conservative Government of Canada recognizes financial security as a factor that has an obvious impact on the quality of life for seniors. In this regard, the government is taking a number of decisive actions to improve the lives of seniors on many fronts, including providing Canadians with almost $76 billion this year through Canada's public pension system.We also introduced a new guaranteed income supplement top-up benefit to help Canada's most vulnerable seniors. This is the largest increase to the GIS for the lowest income seniors in a quarter century. This will improve the financial security and well-being of more than 680,000 seniors across Canada. These measures demonstrate that the Government of Canada is taking concrete action to help our seniors. Of course part of helping seniors is the assurance that benefits will be paid in an efficient and timely manner. These are traits that would be hindered, not helped by this bill.There are a number of critical problems with the bill. The first is the matter of cost. This is a significant issue in light of the current fiscal reality facing this global economy. The current system of monthly payments has been and will continue to be the most efficient way to administer the old age security and the Canada pension plan programs.While we can never be sure exactly how many seniors would take advantage of a bi-weekly payment schedule were it universally adopted, a bi-weekly payment schedule would more than double the number of transactions for CPP and OAS benefits. This would significantly increase the administrative costs of processing and issuing benefits in a seamless and timely manner.Public Works and Government Services Canada estimates that this proposed bill would increase the total cost of payment of administration and processing by about $18 million a year. That is $18 million that could actually go to seniors. This figure includes direct costs such as postage, banking fees, printing services and cheque reconciliation for both direct deposit payments and paper cheques.When examining the proposed legislation, we must also consider the fact that the seniors population is also growing in Canada, and growing significantly. We need a more efficient and simple delivery method of benefits, not a more complicated one.Canadians gave our government a strong mandate to complete Canada's economic recovery and return to balanced budgets. That is exactly what we are doing. We recently began to implement a significant deficit reduction strategy to ensure government programs are as efficient as possible.Service delivery includes processing new applications, responding to inquiries, changing addresses, updating banking information, issuing millions of cheques and deposits, and cancelling benefits upon the death of a recipient. Payment processing already involves several different departments, all acting in conjunction to process these payments.The processing cost of a single cheque or direct deposit may not seem like much when it is looked at in isolation, but when the government is issuing millions of cheques and deposits each month, this becomes a whole different matter. As members of the House are likely aware, the first of Canada's baby boomer generation turned 65 in 2011. Within less than two decades, close to 1 in 4 Canadians will be over 64. Changing the payment schedule during this demographic shift would only increase expenses and create complications for the delivery of OAS and CPP benefits.Canadians expect the programs to be delivered as effectively and efficiently as possible. The current system of monthly benefit payments for the CPP and OAS programs is the best use of taxpayers' dollars. The real advantage of the monthly payment schedule is that it ensures the accuracy of payments by allowing the department time to respond to any changes in the individual's eligibility status, such as marital status or an increase or decrease in income. This important step is to make sure all seniors get exactly what they are entitled to when they are entitled to get it.(1400)We must remember that the monthly payment schedule also serves the needs of seniors across this country. The practice of paying all benefits at the end of the month was adopted to provide the best service possible for our seniors. It is a commonly accepted standard for government benefits. This includes other federal benefits, such as those provided by Veterans Affairs Canada, as well as the universal child care benefit and the Canadian child tax benefit.I would also add that most provincial and territorial benefits are also paid on a monthly basis. It is important to provide consistency across government so Canadians know exactly when they will be receiving their cheques and exactly what they will be owed.If the government supported this bill, it would cause a ripple effect of increased program costs for both the provincial and federal governments. Internationally, most of the OECD countries also provide monthly benefits for their seniors programs. Ultimately, the change would be expensive and would further add to the complexity of a system that currently works well. It would also duplicate arrangements that could be made on an individual basis with financial institutions without the need for legislation.In this kind of situation, our government strives to find a balance. We think we should maintain the monthly payment schedule as the most efficient system we can provide our seniors. In this time of fiscal restraint, our Conservative government is committed to delivering the highest quality service in a way that is efficient, effective and focused on the needs of Canadians.In conclusion, our government cannot support Bill C-326. It would be an irresponsible use of taxpayers' dollars. I encourage all members of this House to vote against it.Administrative feesBalanced budgetBest practicesC-326, An Act to amend the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act (biweekly payment of benefits)Canada Pension PlanCostsElectronic funds transfersForeign countriesGovernanceGovernment assistanceGovernment chequesGuaranteed Income SupplementIncome securityOld Age SecurityPrivate Members' BillsProvinces, territories, statesQuality of lifeSecond readingSenior citizensService deliveryTransfers to personsValue for money2876794ManonPerreaultMontcalmDeniseSavoieVictoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence, CPC): (1505)[English]Mr. Speaker, all of the inaccuracies in the member's statement come as no surprise to me. This is a member whom we have seen consistently, throughout his entire career, vote against every single measure that has been taken by this government and previous governments to make the lives of veterans, members of the forces and their families better. I merely point to the fact that he has voted against providing funding to assist five new operational stress clinics, the creation of the Veterans Ombudsman and the $282 million to expand the veterans independence program.We have made great strides in helping veterans and we will continue to do so.Court ordersDisabled veteransFederal Court of CanadaGovernment assistanceIncome taxOral questionsService Income Security Insurance PlanVeteransVeterans Independence Program2821275PeterStofferSackville—Eastern ShorePhilMcColemanBrant//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1804RodgerCuznerRodger-CuznerCape Breton—CansoLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/CuznerRodger_Lib.jpgOral Question Period2015 Pan Am GamesInterventionMr. Rodger Cuzner (Cape Breton—Canso, Lib.): (1155)[English]Mr. Speaker, Canadians are demanding transparency about the government's $500 million contribution to the 2015 Toronto Pan Am Games. There are reports that they have already gone over budget. Municipalities across the GTA are on the hook for 44% of capital costs, but they have no clue what is going on. Everything has been done in secrecy.When will the government give municipalities, and all taxpayers, an open and transparent accounting of what is going on?Government accountabilityGovernment assistanceOral questionsPan-American GamesToronto27542092754210TedMenziesHon.MacleodJamesMooreHon.Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodNational DefenceInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence, CPC): (1140)[English]Mr. Speaker, our sympathies go out to Corporal Langridge's family.With this particular investigation which the MPCC has been carrying out, we have been co-operating. We are considering the request for further funding. I should point out that the Government of Canada has already provided an additional $2.3 million to the MPCC to fund this public interest hearing. The public interest hearing is, of course, under way. The member opposite should know we cannot comment on this while the hearing is taking place.Canadian ForcesDeaths and funeralsGovernment assistanceInquiries and public inquiriesLangridge, StuartMilitary Police Complaints CommissionOral questionsPost-traumatic stress syndrome273286927328702732871JasbirSandhuSurrey NorthJasbirSandhuSurrey North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodNational DefenceInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence, CPC): (1140)[English]Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. It is a shame the member opposite and his party would want to politicize such a very compassionate and difficult issue for the family.We have been working with the MPCC, co-operating fully, including providing additional funding of over $2 million. This particular issue will be resolved in that forum, that non-partisan, arm's-length hearing. We will not interfere with a process that is under way.Canadian ForcesDeaths and funeralsGovernment assistanceInquiries and public inquiriesLangridge, StuartMilitary Police Complaints CommissionOral questionsPost-traumatic stress syndrome27328742732875JasbirSandhuSurrey NorthTedOpitzEtobicoke Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/71285RobertChisholmRobert-ChisholmDartmouth—Cole HarbourNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ChisholmRobert_NDP.jpgGovernment OrdersBusiness of Supply [Opposition Motion—Veterans Affairs]InterventionMr. Robert Chisholm (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NDP): (1615)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am please to speak to an issue as important as this. I am somewhat intimidated to have to follow the member for Hamilton Centre, who speaks on issues as important as this with a level of passion to which we all should pay some attention.I am pleased to speak in support of the motion that was introduced by the member for Sackville—Eastern Shore, which reads:That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) honour the service of Canadian military and RCMP veterans and their families by committing to not cut Veterans Affairs Canada in the upcoming budget; and (b) provide programs and services to all military and RCMP veterans and their families in a timely and comprehensive manner.I have been paying attention to the debate today and listening to members on the government side talk about how everything is fine. They are saying that there is going to be cuts, not to programs and services, but to red tape or to the bureaucracy and that this will not affect the services and programs. I find that hard to believe on a couple of levels.First, 90% of the funding in Veterans Affairs Canada goes to programs and services. Therefore, if the government is going to cut that department by 5% to 10%, then I would like to see how it would do that without affecting programs and services.Second, government members are arguing this point in a way to suggest that everything in the department right now is fine. We have heard my fellow colleague from Nova Scotia talk in the House repeatedly about the problems that our veterans are facing in trying to deal with this department. Again and again, cases come forward that are denied for no reason or there are non-sufficient reasons given. Senior veterans who are now in a frail condition need support and services, whether that be health care or otherwise, but they are either unable to get them or they are put through such a wringer of a process that it just adds to their burden. It has been said by others much more eloquently than I that these are the women and men who have fought and served on behalf of our country and in defence of our country, democracy and the UN. They have made unbelievable contributions to Canada and to generations for many years. However, the government seems to be turning its back on them.It is not just this government. This has been going on since 1998. The auditor general said first in 1998 that claims were being denied repeatedly without sufficient justification and that veterans were not getting the services and supports they deserved. Here we are in 2012, and it is continuing apace.In February, Guy Parent, the Veterans Ombudsman, said in a new report that veterans were not being given adequate reason for why their requests for disability benefits were being turned down and that they were not getting timely and comprehensive services and programs. We heard from the former ombudsman and auditors general. However, the problem continues to exist in our country. (1620)I appreciate the members opposite getting up and talking with their hand over their heart about how much they support and believe in veterans and people who serve in the military and the RCMP, but that is not good enough. We need to do more than that. We need to work harder. We need to be committed to putting the money and resources in place for these men and women who the government has been quite prepared to send and put in harm's way in different parts of the world. These people have gone willingly and, in many cases, made the great sacrifice, and we are not prepared to support them and their families when they return. For that kind of commitment. I do not understand it. I cannot fathom it. it is wrong and we are trying to do everything we can to turn it around.We have heard the government say that there are fewer veterans, that they are dying off. In fact, there are more veterans. The veterans are continuing. The government may remember that it dedicated women and men to fight in Afghanistan . Recently, the chief of army staff, Lieutenant-General Peter Devlin, stated before a Senate committee on national defence that over 40,000 Canadian Forces members have deployed to Afghanistan since 2011. They have examined the situation and they have suggested that 30% of those people studied receive some form of mental health care, 8% of those were diagnosed with PTSD and a further 5% with some type of Afghan-related operational stress injury. What about those people? Do they not deserve support and services from the government? We need to do something. We need to take a stand in this House to ensure the government does the right thing. Its allies in the United States and in the U.K. have said that their veterans will not be subject to austerity.I would suggest that if the government is so convinced that its red tape review will have the kind of effect that will recognize a savings, then it would be prepared to exempt this department and find the money elsewhere through those kinds of red tape. I will talk about the kinds of services and the fact that services are not available. I have an 86-year-old constituent, David Kurts, who has been trying for two years to get services from the government and this department. This is somebody who has served in the navy, the merchant marines and the merchant navy, who has contributed to the public service, has been a contributor and has been denied services for two years. He, undoubtedly, will need to go before an appeal board to get any action. The member for Sackville—Eastern Shore is keeping an eye on this file as I will and we will try to ensure we get a positive resolve.In light of the government's willingness to consider protecting some of this budget, I want to move the following motion, seconded by the member for Saint-Jean. I move: MotionThat the motion be amended by deleting all the words after “should” and replacing them with the following: honour the service of Canadian military and RCMP veterans and their families by: (a) committing to not cut Veterans Affairs Canada benefits in the upcoming budget; (b) committing every dollar identified through the Strategic and Operating Review of the department to programs and services for military and RCMP veterans and their families; and (c) providing programs and services to all military and RCMP veterans and their families in a timely and comprehensive manner.Amendments and subamendmentsAuditor General of CanadaBudget cutsBureaucracyCanadian Forces mission in AfghanistanDepartment of Veterans AffairsGovernment assistanceHealth services accessibilityKurts, DavidLeave to propose a motionMental healthOpposition motionsPost-traumatic stress syndromeRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceService deliveryStrategic review processVeteransVeterans Ombudsman27198792719880BarryDevolinHaliburton—Kawartha Lakes—BrockBarryDevolinHaliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/71285RobertChisholmRobert-ChisholmDartmouth—Cole HarbourNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/ChisholmRobert_NDP.jpgGovernment OrdersBusiness of Supply [Opposition Motion—Education for First Nation Children]InterventionMr. Robert Chisholm (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NDP): (1705)[English]Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent for sharing her time with me. I also thank the member for Manicouagan for sponsoring this motion and the member for Edmonton—Strathcona for seconding it.I am excited today with the commitment that our caucus has shown to this issue and that we brought it forward as an opposition day motion. Today the finance critic and I met with the Minister of Finance to talk about the official opposition's priorities with respect to this budget. In our priorities we talked about this issue. We talked about education in first nation communities and how important it was that the government and all members of the House focus their attention on doing a better job of ensuring that young aboriginals would have equal access to not only education, but through education to employment opportunities throughout the country. I am encouraged by the fact that the Minister of Finance indicated that this was a problem, that he understood it and that he wanted to find a way to resolve it. As I understand it, the government has indicated it will support this motion. Therefore, that is some reason for optimism.I am from Nova Scotia and I have seen some incredible progress being made by the first nations communities in Nova Scotia. There are 13 Mi'kmaw communities in Nova Scotia. Eleven of them are part of what is called Mi'kmaw Kina'matnewey, which is Mi'kmaw education. It is a partnership among the Mi'kmaw, the province and the federal government and has been in place since 1994. Some communities, like Eskasoni for example, have been working on the education issue going back to 1980. They and this partnership recognize how there are parties to this problem and they need to work together to come up with the solution. They have been making incredible progress. Whether it is on reserve or off reserve, the partners in Nova Scotia have been addressing aboriginal education in a way that is providing for hope and better futures for those aboriginal families and those children. This is the kind of solution that we need to look to in our country. I know there are other jurisdictions in British Columbia, with the Nisga'a, where real progress has made in matters with respect to aboriginal education.If we are committed to doing it, we need to recognize the spirit of this resolution and the fact that this problem has been ignored for too long. We need to not find fault but find solutions and deal with the problem, and it may take resources. Members in this caucus have identified the fact that the level of education per student for aboriginal children is much lower than it is for other students, and that is not good enough. Therefore, we need to reinvest to ensure solutions are found, but we need to sit down together.I am encouraged also by the fact that one of the movers and shakers in terms of Mi'kmaw education in the province of Nova Scotia, Chief Morley Googoo, is now a regional chief of the Assembly of First Nations and will be responsible for the education file for the assembly. We have reason for hope. Not only do we have the information now that has been provided by the panel and not only do we understand the problem, but we in the House need to bring our collective commitment to this problem.(1710)We will push the government at every opportunity. It needs to recognize that it is its turn to step up to the plate, get out of the box and not look simply at the dollars but recognize that there is a problem. We talk about skills shortages, the economy and the aging population, but we recognize the fact that fastest-growing young population in the country is coming from aboriginal communities. We need to ensure those people have an opportunity to participate, as they will, in culturally-sensitive education programs so they can participate in our communities and we can build a stronger country.Academic achievement and school performanceEducation and trainingFirst NationsGovernment assistanceMi'kmaqMi'kmaw Kina'matnewey/EducationOpposition motions2695096AlexandrineLatendresseLouis-Saint-LaurentBarryDevolinHaliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodForeign AffairsInterventionHon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.): (1200)[English]Madam Speaker, the Conservatives are way behind in spending for peace building and democracy projects. Last year the Minister of Foreign Affairs approved 85 projects. This year the minister has approved only 23 projects and the rest are sitting on his or the Prime Minister's desk. When the Conservatives use their partisan and ideological tactics it puts the NGOs and their staff in jeopardy. Most of all, it fails Canada's commitment to help the poor and devastated regions of the world. The minister should stop playing with people's lives and approve these projects.DemocracyGovernment assistanceInternational development and aidOral questionsPeacekeeping and peacemaking267402326740242674025RonaAmbroseHon.Edmonton—Spruce GroveDeepakObhraiCalgary East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1760GeoffReganHon.Geoff-ReganHalifax WestLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/ReganGeoff_Lib.jpgRoutine ProceedingsVeterans AffairsInterventionHon. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.): (1015)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to present two petitions.The first petition is signed by veterans and their supporters, who feel they have been abandoned by their own government and believe planned cuts of $226 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs are wrong. This petition notes the impact of the government's severe cuts will impair the department's ability to provide support to the very veterans who have been injured in the service of their country.The proud Nova Scotians who have signed this petition call on the government to restore full funding to Veterans Affairs and exempt the department from the current program review.Budget cutsDepartment of Veterans AffairsGovernment assistancePetition 411-0256263667726366782636679DavidMcGuintyOttawa SouthGeoffReganHon.Halifax West//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1806MarkEykingHon.Mark-EykingSydney—VictoriaLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/EykingMark_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodHealthInterventionHon. Mark Eyking (Sydney—Victoria, Lib.): (1440)[English]Mr. Speaker, today being World Aids Day we have good news and bad news. The goods news is researchers state that beating AIDS globally can be done with today's science, that it is just a matter of funding. The bad news is the international global fund for fighting AIDS, TB and malaria is hitting a funding wall. It has effectively frozen all new spending for the next three years. The global fund states that Canada owes it $180 million for this year and it has yet to receive a penny.With only one month left, will the Prime Minister send a cheque to the global fund to fight AIDS?Global Fund To Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and MalariaGovernment assistanceOral questions261908426190852619086VicToewsHon.ProvencherColinCarrieOshawa//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodThe EnvironmentInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1430)[English]Mr. Speaker, I do not have a lot of faith in that good faith because it is Conservative inaction that has made us a climate change laggard and denied Canadians jobs in the new energy economy.I do not blame the Conservatives for wanting to pull out. Kyoto's independent emissions audits have exposed six years of failure by the government, six years of failed environmental policies and six years of failed federal leadership.The government's climate inaction kills Canadian jobs. When will it stop blaming the Liberals for the failure of Kyoto? When will it actually introduce a plan for a transition to a new energy economy?Government assistanceGreenhouse gasesKyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeOral questionsRenewable energy and fuel2610615PeterKentHon.ThornhillPeterKentHon.Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgStatements by MembersInfrastructureInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1410)[English]Mr. Speaker, I am so proud to represent the wonderful riding of Halifax, a hub of creativity and innovation. Investing in cities like Halifax makes good economic sense. It is an essential part of our long-term plan for community development.Beyond wanting to ensure that our cities are vibrant, green and healthy places to live for future generations, infrastructure investments in our cities create jobs and increase our quality of life through increased public transport, better housing and the green projects needed to transition Canada to the economy of the future. The numbers prove it. While corporate tax cuts result in only a 30¢ return on the dollar, infrastructure investments contribute more than $1.50 in additional GDP for every dollar invested.Public consultation is an indispensable part of determining what investments should be made. I am proud to point to the consultations carried out in the design of Halifax's new public library, which have resulted in a multi-purpose, forward-thinking community-designed hub that meets our community's needs.It is time to invest in Halifax and time to invest in our cities.Cities and townsCity of HalifaxEconomic impactGovernment assistanceInfrastructureStatements by Members26088282608829260883026088312608832MichelleRempelHon.Calgary Centre-NorthKyleSeebackBrampton West//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1760GeoffReganHon.Geoff-ReganHalifax WestLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/ReganGeoff_Lib.jpgGovernment OrdersBusiness of Supply [Opposition Motion—Asbestos ]InterventionHon. Geoff Regan: (1320)[English]Mr. Speaker, I appreciate her comments about her friends who are suffering from asbestosis. I also appreciate her question about the science. In fact, she may have heard when I asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources if the government had research on the health impacts of asbestos. Her question is similar to that.I do not have the information on whether or not the government has done studies on this question of how to help people who are suffering from asbestosis and what the best means are, but I would encourage her to ask a Conservative member that question.I would hope the Conservatives will bring forward and table in the House any independent scientific studies on both of these subjects.Asbestos safetyAsbestosisGovernment assistanceMedical researchMedical techniques and proceduresOpposition motions253658425365852536586CarolHughesAlgoma—Manitoulin—KapuskasingRodgerCuznerCape Breton—Canso//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/82PeterMacKayHon.Peter-MacKayCentral NovaConservative CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/MacKayPeterGordon_CPC.jpgOral Question PeriodNational DefenceInterventionHon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence, CPC): (1430)[English]Mr. Speaker, certainly, our sympathies go out to the Fynes family, and the death of Corporal Langridge was indeed a tragedy.With respect to the Military Police Complaints Commission that is looking into this matter, it has announced that it will hold a public interest hearing into the investigation related to the death of Corporal Langridge.I think the hon. member would agree it would be inappropriate to comment on a process that is now in place with regard to the recommendation that the Fynes family be funded for their representation on the public interest hearing. Again, it would be inappropriate to comment at this time.Canadian ForcesDeaths and funeralsGovernment assistanceLangridge, StuartLegal servicesOral questionsPost-traumatic stress syndrome252656225265632526564RandallGarrisonEsquimalt—Juan de FucaHélèneLaverdièreLaurier—Sainte-Marie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/74ScottBrisonHon.Scott-BrisonKings—HantsLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/BrisonScott_Lib.jpgOral Question PeriodHuman RightsInterventionHon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.): (1150)[English]Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have fought and voted against every advancement of gay rights in Canada, from pension benefits to marriage to transgender rights, and yet, yesterday, the Conservatives came out in support of the “It Gets Better” gay youth campaign.If the Conservatives are now serious about helping gay youth, will they recognize the support that pride festivals provide to struggling young gays? Will the Conservatives restore the funding that they themselves cut for these important pride festivals across Canada?Festivals and Major Events CanadaGay and lesbian personsGovernment assistanceOral questionsYoung people25133652513366AndrewScheerRegina—Qu'AppellePaulCalandraOak Ridges—Markham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/1760GeoffReganHon.Geoff-ReganHalifax WestLiberal CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/ReganGeoff_Lib.jpgGovernment OrdersCopyright Modernization ActInterventionHon. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.): (1130)[English]Madam Speaker, I am very pleased and honoured to stand today in this debate on Bill C-11 on behalf of the Liberal Party and on behalf of my constituents in the great riding of Halifax West.It is disappointing that the Minister of Industry and the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages do not appear to be interested in listening to this debate.What we see in Bill C-11 is, as Yogi Berra said, “This is like déjà vu all over again”. In fact, this reminds of another Yogi Berraism. When he was asked about going to Coney Island, he said, “Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded”.This is the same kind of logic that we find in the government's approach to this bill. The new copyright bill, Bill C-11, is a carbon copy of the old copyright bill, Bill C-32. It has the same ideologically driven principles and it has the same flaws and omissions. It has the same, as my hon. colleague from Timmins—James Bay was just saying, American-influenced digital lock provisions.However, the Liberals recognize that there is a need to modernize the Copyright Act. We also recognize the need to protect artists, creators, educators and consumers. We recognize the need for balanced legislation. We think it is important to have copyright rules that are fair and balanced.Instead of that, today we have before us a recycled bill that includes some of the most restrictive digital lock provisions in the world. This is, in fact, an approach that Michael Geist, who is the Canada Research Chair of Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, correctly points out is all about satisfying U.S. interests.I was pleased to see this morning that he actually wrote on his blog today. He states:The Liberal position is consistent with Bill C-60, their 2005 copyright bill that linked the digital lock rules to actual copyright infringement and did not establish a ban on the tools that can be used to circumvent digital locks.Clearly, this renowned expert on copyright, the Internet and e-commerce is saying that our approach is one that makes sense and is consistent.In view of those concerns, the Liberal Party will not support Bill C-11. The digital lock provisions in this bill are far too strict and they override virtually every other right that is in the legislation.These provisions, for example, make it illegal for a mom to move a movie from her DVD to her iPad or Playbook so that her kids can watch it during a long car trip.(1135)[Translation]These provisions will make it illegal for Canadians to transfer a movie from a DVD to their iPad or PlayBook so that their kids can watch it during a long car trip, because bypassing the DVD protection measures would lead to a $5,000 lawsuit. That is appalling.[English]I will take the case of a visually impaired student. If that student needs to shift the format of a digital text so he can read it but finds protection measures on the source material, he would not be able to read it unless he breaks the law. How can that possibly be considered a fair and balanced approach? In fact, it is the opposite of fair and balanced.I know many of my colleagues across the way do not believe their tough on crime agenda means going after busy moms or students with disabilities, but they should actually consider the implications of this bill because that is exactly what they are doing with this bill.This morning, the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages actually claimed that he and the government have the support of the Council of Ministers of Education Canada for the this bill. However, this is what the council actually said, “Much like many other education groups, provincial ministers agree that the digital lock provisions are too restrictive”.The minister seems to interpret that as support, which is a strange interpretation in my view.The Liberals are strongly opposed to a government that seeks to make it illegal for ordinary Canadians to exercise their rights to view material they have legally purchased in the format they choose. This is about whether people can change something. If people have a CD they have paid for and they want to transfer the music from their CD to their iPod or, perhaps, to their Blackberry, they want the ability to do that. What the government is saying is that they can do that. It wants Canadians to believe they can do that. However, the government is also saying that it is giving us that right but that it is taking it away because it has put a digital lock on it and we cannot. It is a contradictory position.(1140)[Translation]Other countries have managed to fulfill their international WIPO treaty obligations without having to implement such strict digital lock provisions. So why would Canada go well beyond what is expected of it? The answer is clear. This bill was drafted for the purpose of meeting the demands of the United States instead of meeting the needs of Canadians and standing up for their interests.[English]Diplomatic cables, recently released through WikiLeaks, have revealed that much of the bill was drafted specifically to meet American expectations in terms of the digital lock provisions. I find that quite shocking and disturbing. It is not about what is in the interests of Canadians but what is in the interest of some U.S. interests. The Conservatives even offered to provide the United States government with an advance copy of the bill before the Parliament of Canada was allowed to read it.Hon. Judy Sgro: Shame. Hon. Geoff Regan: That is shameful. It is hard to imagine that could happen. Surely, the Conservatives would have more respect for Parliament and for the House of Commons than to offer it to a foreign government before tabling it here and making it available for members and for Canadians to examine.Worse than that, the cables revealed that the Conservatives actually asked the United States to place Canada on the United States trade representatives' piracy watch list. They wanted to scare Canadians into supporting this copyright bill. Talk about a regressive, recidivist, bizarre way to approach this. Ten days after the Conservatives made the request, the U.S. was only too happy to oblige them. Naturally. It is no surprise that they went along fully.The irony of all this, of course, is that the U.S. is now loosening up its own provisions on digital locks. During the last review of the American circumvention rules, it significantly loosened them up. While it is now legal in the U.S. to circumvent a protection measure to create a mash-up for YouTube, in Canada it is going to be illegal, thanks to the government. Can anyone Imagine that? The Conservatives talk about this being balanced, fair and a modern copyright law. This is regressive.While the Bush White House had a direct line into the Prime Minister's Office, the opinions and advice of Canadian stakeholders, Canadian citizens and Canadian experts fell on deaf ears.During the 40th Parliament, a special legislative committee on the copyright bill heard from 142 witnesses and it received 167 submissions. That is a lot of input. As members of Parliament, we also received comments from thousands of Canadians. In fact, yesterday alone, my office received nearly 3,000 emails on this one subject. Canadians are concerned about this and have made lots of comments but the government is not listening.Much of what the committee heard last winter and spring made a lot of sense. Instead of listening, instead of saying that they heard what the witnesses were saying and that they would make some changes, the Conservatives chose to table the exact same bill with the identical wording. There was not a comma change, a period change or a letter moved in the bill except for perhaps the numbering now because it is a new Parliament.The heritage minister has said publicly that he will not accept any changes. Today, he seems to be singing a bit of a different tune but we will have to wait and see if that is true. His handlers in the Prime Minister's Office have let it be known that they do not even want full hearings on the bill. They do not want members of the House, many of whom are new to the House, to hear from different witnesses and to have the opportunity for a full debate on the bill. I hope not, but perhaps we can expect to see today what we have seen in the last few weeks from the government on every major bill so far, and that is it using closure to move it quickly forward and to ram it through the House. Because of this heavy-handed approach, the undue American influence and the government's unyielding and misguided stance on digital locks, the Liberals have no choice, in our view, but to vote against Bill C-11. A central concern heard at previous committee hearings was how the expansion of fair dealing into areas such as education would affect artists and creators. Many authors explained repeatedly that the changes in the bill would significantly affect their business models, and that is an important concern for us. However, in Bill C-11 we see no attempt to improve the definitions of fair dealing or provide any kind of certainty to these authors.(1145)Finally, the Liberal Party continues to believe that artists and creators deserve transitional funding in order to cope with the effects this bill would have on their revenue streams. For instance, by no longer allowing creators to charge for ephemeral recordings, artists will lose a revenue stream of roughly $8 million a year. We believe the government should provide some transitional assistance to help artists adjust to the new reality. That is why we proposed in the last election a fund to compensate artists.Many members will be aware that in the past there was a levy on blank cassettes and CDs. At one point that levy was producing revenue of $27.7 million for Canadian artists, and that was a very important revenue stream for them. Unfortunately, over time things change and people are not using as many cassettes or that many blank CDs and, therefore, the revenue has gone down to about $8.8 million a year. That is a dramatic drop for the artists who were relying on that. It seems to me that the government ought to be recognizing this and trying to find a way to respond to it, but it does not seem interested. It does not seem to have any concern for the impact this is having and we should be concerned.As a result of the many problems in the bill, particularly the fact that the government has demonstrated that, after hearing 142 witnesses, reading 163 submissions and hearing from thousands of Canadians commenting on it online, in emails and so forth, it does not feel the need for any changes whatsoever, I want to bring forward the following amendment. I move:AmendmentThat the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and submitting the following: “this House declines to give second reading to Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Copyright Act, because it fails to:(a) uphold the rights of consumers to choose how to enjoy the content that they purchase through overly-restrictive digital lock provisions;(b) include a clear and strict test for “fair dealing” for education purposes; and(c) provide any transitional funding to help artists adapt to the loss of revenue streams that the Bill would cause.C-11, An Act to amend the Copyright ActCanada-United States relationsContempt of ParliamentCopyright and copyright lawCopyright infringementCouncil of Ministers of Education, CanadaDiplomacy and diplomatsElectronic mailFinancial lossGovernment assistanceGovernment billsLeave to propose a motionLegislative committeeMotionsPublic consultationReasoned amendmentsSecond readingTechnological protection measuresUnited States of AmericaWikiLeaksWorld Intellectual Property Organization25091612509162CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayDeniseSavoieVictoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodThe EnvironmentInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1440)[Translation]Mr. Speaker, RCEN is a network of 640 environmental organizations in Canada. For the past 30 years, the network has been facilitating and supporting the work of Environment Canada. Last May, Environment Canada confirmed that funding for the network's operations would be maintained. Confirmation of the funds was to follow. After months of waiting, the network learned on Friday that its funding would be cut.Why did the minister withdraw RCEN's funding?Budget cutsCanadian Environmental NetworkEnvironmental protectionGovernment assistanceOral questions25082302508231StevenBlaneyHon.Lévis—BellechasseMichelleRempelHon.Calgary Centre-North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/58550MeganLeslieMegan-LeslieHalifaxNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/LeslieMegan_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodThe EnvironmentInterventionMs. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP): (1445)[English]What the Conservatives are doing, Mr. Speaker, is stifling dissent. They are muzzling or firing scientists and now they are eviscerating the communications network of environmental groups across Canada. The minister claims that it is a rigorous process to manage spending, but while he was cutting half a million dollars from Canadian environmental groups, the government announced $28 million to celebrate the War of 1812. Well, this just in, the real war is the war the government is waging on the environment. When will the minister do the right thing and restore this funding? Budget cutsCanadian Environmental NetworkEnvironmental protectionGovernment assistanceOral questions250823325082342508235MichelleRempelHon.Calgary Centre-NorthMichelleRempelHon.Calgary Centre-North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88PeterStofferPeter-StofferSackville—Eastern ShoreNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/StofferPeterArend_NDP.jpgGovernment OrdersKeeping Canada's Economy and Jobs Growing ActInterventionMr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): (1230)[English]Mr. Speaker, before the hon. member for Kenora leaves, I want him to know that I agree with him on two things: one, pickerel is very good; and two, small business tax reductions are always positive. However, I will tell him that the multinational corporate tax rates the Conservatives are planning would be wrong because they would shift the tax burden from multinational corporations to small businesses and individuals.While I am speaking to Bill C-13, I would remind members that it is the Conservatives who increased payroll taxes for this year and it is the Conservatives who will once again increase payroll taxes next year. I would remind them that every economist out there, every student who studies economics, every person who understands fiscal responsibility knows it is payroll taxes and income taxes that are a drain on our society. It is simply wrong that hard-working people have to pay those exorbitant taxes, yet the multinational corporations get further tax cuts.I remind this House that in the 1960s corporate tax rates were in the 40% range and tax rates for individuals were in the 20% range, but now they have completely flipped around. Corporate tax rates have gone down to 15% but tax rates for individuals are into the high 40% range. This is why Canadians say they are taxed too much. Add provincial and municipal taxes to that and there is outrage. Yet the Conservatives constantly say that it is the NDP that would raise taxes.With the greatest respect, I remind everyone that it is the Conservatives who raise these taxes. That is the truth. There is something that Bill C-13 and all the Conservatives' budget implementation bills never talk about. I have scoured the pages of all the Conservatives' budgets and not once did I see the two words “food banks”. Twenty-seven senators were appointed by the Prime Minister in one year at a cost over 20 years of $100 million. The Conservatives are still appointing their hacks and flacks to the Senate, but here is their economic action plan for the poor: there is none.In February 2006 when the Conservatives took power, there were 604,000 Canadians using food banks, but now, 910,000 Canadians are using food banks. It is bad enough that some Canadians would have to beg for food for themselves and their families, but what is worse is that in the city of Calgary, the richest city in Canada, in 2005 a food bank opened up for veterans only. Fifty-eight veterans were there as the first customers of that food bank. The volunteers at the food bank do a wonderful job looking after those veterans. Last year over 200 veterans used that food bank in the richest city in the country.As a person who was born in Holland, whose parents were liberated by those heroes, I say that is a sin, a shame and the fault of the Conservative government that the heroes of our country would have to do that. The ones who passed away we honour in our Memorial Chamber as we do those who are buried in over 72 countries around the world. It is a sin and a shame. The Conservatives should hang their heads in shame. As we celebrate Thanksgiving with our friends and families, I can go to a store and buy food. Most of my friends and family will purchase their food at a store or go to a farm to get their food. But many veterans and their families and many other Canadians will have to go to a food bank.Mr. Speaker, I do not know if you yourself have ever used a food bank, but I volunteer at one in my riding. It is the most humbling, upsetting experience to see people who at one time had a job have to stand in line at a food bank. They are asked a million questions about who they are in order to get food. This is occurring in one of the richest countries in the world. All projections are that next year there will be a million Canadians who have to use a food bank. That is the entire population of New Brunswick and P.E.I. Is that the track record of the Conservatives? Unfortunately, yes. That is a shame. Does their budget talk about that? No.(1235)Here is another thing about their budget. The Conservatives crow and brag about a $3,000 tax credit for firefighters. All the firefighters think that they are getting $3,000 out of that, but they are not. They are getting 15% of $3,000 to a maximum of $450. They already get a $1,000 tax credit. Therefore, it is either or. They do not tell us that in the budget. The $500 arts credit is not $500. It is 15% of $500. It is $75. It is similar to when we buy an item and the company offers a mail-in rebate. Most Canadians will not hold onto those receipts and subject themselves to an audit to get $75. It is a myth. It would be good if they said it was $500 clear. If they said it was $3,000 clear for paramedics and firefighters that would be good. However, it is simply not true. It is similar to when they gave parents $1,200 a year to look after their own kids through the child tax benefit. That is not true at all. That $1,200 is taxable. They did not tell us that when it came out in the budget.These are the sneaky ways the Conservatives try to pull the wool over the eyes of many Canadians. It is time to stop picking on the sheep of this country. They should not be pulling the wool over anyone's eyes. They should at least try to be honest and forthright about what they are doing. It is absolutely incredible. I look at this issue in terms of veterans and their families. I will give the government credit in that there have been some improvements since it has come here. I will give the government top marks for the income splitting plan on pensions, which is a very good thing to do for seniors. I personally thank the hon. members for that because I plan to use it if and when I ever leave politics. I know some of the Conservatives would like me to leave a little earlier, and I appreciate their sentiment. That is a good plan. However, it does not help anybody who is poor. It does not help anybody who is using a food bank. It does not help anyone who is homeless.While I am speaking of the homeless, is it not a shame that a growing number of those veterans who once wore this country's uniform are homeless? I will add an anecdote to this. A few years ago we had the consecration of the Queen's colours at the Garrison Grounds in Halifax. Governor General Michaëlle Jean came down. She was wearing a military uniform. She said one of the most poignant things I have ever heard. She said, “I am so proud as a Canadian to wear this uniform because when I was a little girl in Haiti I was afraid of uniforms”. This shows us the type of country we have. I ask the Conservatives to stop looking after their corporate buddies, to stop the $50 million slush fund for their ridings, to stop getting gold-embossed cards, and to stop taking Challenger jets or helicopters to fly from fishing camps to lobster festivals. We call that “Dingwalling”. When the front bench starts to “Dingwall” the Canadian people it means a level of arrogance is setting in. That is when the backbenchers start getting nervous. I have been around long enough to see what happened when the Liberals did that. The government is not entitled to its entitlements, but Canadians are entitled to proper governance. Bill C-13 does absolutely nothing for the poor and the homeless veterans of the country, or for the aboriginals on reserves who unfortunately are committing suicide at a record rate. These are the issues facing our country. Most of us can look after ourselves and we do a good job of it. However, there are millions who deserve the government's attention. I ask that the government, once and for all, have a national food strategy so that Canadians will no longer have to line up at a food bank to get sustenance, especially during Thanksgiving weekend. Aboriginal reservesBudget 2011 (June 6, 2011)C-13, An Act to implement certain provisions of the 2011 budget as updated on June 6, 2011 and other measuresChildren's arts tax creditCorporate income taxFood banksGovernment assistanceGovernment billsGovernment policyIncome splittingOld Age SecurityPovertySecond readingSuicidesTax policyTax reliefVeteransVolunteer firefighters tax credit24926982492699249270024927012492702GregRickfordKenoraPaulCalandraOak Ridges—Markham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88PeterStofferPeter-StofferSackville—Eastern ShoreNew Democratic Party CaucusNova Scotia//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/41/StofferPeterArend_NDP.jpgOral Question PeriodVeterans AffairsInterventionMr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP): (1135)[English]Mr. Speaker, from 6,800 veterans fighting the government in the Supreme Court to get their SISIP clawback done, from widows fighting for enhanced VIP services for themselves, from atomic veterans with no compensation package, to an agent orange compensation that left out thousands of people, we now have an increasing number of homeless veterans and veterans using food banks.When the minister said yesterday in the House that we have a seamless transition to civilian life, does this mean transition to the good shepherd's society, does this mean transition to the streets, does this mean transition to food bank shelters? When will the government--Government assistanceHomelessness and homelessOral questionsPovertyVeterans24739792473980PeterMacKayHon.Central NovaAndrewScheerRegina—Qu'AppelleINTERVENTIONParliament and SessionOrder of BusinessDiscussed TopicProcedural TermPerson SpeakingProvince / TerritoryCaucusSearchResults per pageOrder byTarget search languageSide by SideMaximum returned rowsPagePUBLICATION TYPE