2277 OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) House of Commons Debates VOLUME NUMBER 037 2nd SESSION 41st PARLIAMENT Wednesday, January 29, 2014 Speaker: The Honourable Andrew Scheer HOUSE OF COMMONS CANADA (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) COMMONS DEBATES January 29, 2014 DEBATES Edited Hansard * Table of Contents * Number 037 (Official Version) Official Report * Table of Contents * Number 037 (Official Version) Compte rendu officiel * Table des matières * Numéro 037 (Version officielle) 147 037 29 01 2014 2014/01/29 14:00:00 House of Commons Débats de la Chambre des communes House of Commons Debates The House met at p.m.

Prayers Statements by Members (1400) [ English ] The Speaker : It being Wednesday, we will now have the singing of the national anthem led by the hon. member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue . [ Members sang the national anthem ] STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Statements by Members [ Translation ] Francine Lalonde Mr. Louis Plamondon (Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, BQ) : Mr. Speaker, our colleague Francine Lalonde passed away during the night of January 16. Francine leaves behind an impressive political and social legacy.

She was the first woman to serve as vice-president of the CSN, and she was the minister of status of women in René Lévesque's cabinet in 1985. A Bloc Québécois MP from to 2011, Francine left her mark as foreign affairs critic, serving as a dedicated and respected ambassador for Quebec. She was also an ardent defender of the need for Quebec sovereignty. There are those individuals who strive to make a difference in society and who leave their mark everywhere they go. Francine was one of those people.

A woman of values, conviction and courage, she was one of the first people to initiate the social debate on the right to die with dignity, which will soon become law in Quebec. The great French author Alexandre Dumas once said that those whom we have loved and lost are no longer where they were, but they are still everywhere we are. My deepest sympathies go out to her spouse, Guy, and her three children. Farewell, Francine. [ English ] Justice Mr. Rob Anders (Calgary West, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, rape is a crime like no other. It is a violation of the spirit as well as the body.

It is an assault on trust, privacy and control. It can leave the victim with a sense of bruising, shame and guilt, and it happens to a woman in Canada every 17 minutes. These are women who are teachers, nurses and judges. They are women whose husbands may be doctors or lawyers. Thirty years ago, rape was folded along with indecent assault into a new crime called “sexual assault”. It covered everything from unwanted touching to any form of penetration, including offences involving a weapon or bodily harm. Getting rid of the term “rape” did not stop it.

Many argue that it negatively changed the justice system and resulted in lighter not tougher sentencing. The average jail sentence for sexual assault offenders is two years. Today, I will be introducing a private member's bill that would help to change this. The bill would establish much tougher mandatory minimum sentences for sexual assaults that fall within the definition of rape, and those sentences would be served consecutively. The bill would help keep offenders behind bars longer and help keep Canadians and their families safe.

(1405) Northwest Territories Devolution Act Mr. Dennis Bevington (Western Arctic, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the aboriginal affairs committee held hearings in Yellowknife on Bill C-15 , which combines devolution with the elimination of regional land and water boards. A clear message from the hearings was that there is a strong opposition to the Conservative plan to shut down these regional boards. These boards give a local voice to development decisions, which is a system that works. They were created through constitutionally protected land claims agreements.

Even the chamber of mines said they have a good working relationship with the local boards. The aboriginal governments of the Gwich'in, Sahtu and Tlicho have pledged that they will use every avenue available to fight these changes, meaning greater delays for future development. “Canada has returned to the old colonial ways of thinking they know what is best for us. They are silencing our voice. This is not the constitutional promise made in the Tlicho agreement,” said Tlicho Grand Chief Eddie Erasmus. Mompreneurs Ms. Eve Adams (Mississauga—Brampton South, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to praise Mompreneurs. Mompreneurs are a dynamic group of moms who are also leading business owners, experts and innovators within their respective fields. On Monday, I had the pleasure of hosting a pre-budget consultation with GTA Mompreneurs from Oakville, Burlington, Mississauga, Brampton and Hamilton. The working moms shared suggestions, offered concrete policy advice and were grateful for the opportunity to be heard.

I was pleased to hear that many initiatives in our government's economic action plan, such as the children's arts and fitness tax credit, the small business hiring tax credit and improvements at CRA are helping make everyday life more affordable for these working families. As I wrap up this year's pre-budget consultations, I am proud to stand up for my local community in Ottawa to advocate for my neighbours' priorities and to deliver exceptionally constructive feedback to our great Minister of Finance .

The women at Mompreneurs are smart and hard-working, and they are a testament to the business spirit and entrepreneurship that is alive and well in Canada. John Ross Matheson Mr. Ted Hsu (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the Hon. John Ross Matheson, who passed away in Kingston last month, served his country in World War II, in this House as the Liberal member for Leeds, in the Ontario courts as a judge, and in many other roles. He did much of the background work that led to the creation of the Order of Canada. He himself became an Officer of the Order of Canada in 1993.

John Matheson was the co-designer and an advocate in Parliament for the adoption of our Maple Leaf flag. To change the most important symbol of a country, to leave behind the old and journey ahead with the new, required a deep faith in Canada's potential, Canada's future and Canada's place in the world. To his family, I offer, on behalf of this House, our sincerest condolences. John was true to the very motto he proposed for the Order of Canada. John Matheson desired a better country, and his faith in what kind of better Canada could be built led him to devote his life to it. We thank him.

School Workers in Nova Scotia Mr. Scott Armstrong (Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, at the end of January literally thousands of students across Nova Scotia write exams. It is a difficult time in Canada, as we have inclement winter weather and many times school is cancelled. This causes increased stress, not only among the students writing exams, but their families who are trying to get them to school on time.

Thank goodness we have the bus drivers and the custodians and the maintenance workers that we do in our school system, who get our students to school on time so they can write their exams and enjoy their school day. This is a terrible time of year for a job action or strike that prevents students from going to school, particularly those who live in the rural areas of the province. We need our bus drivers, custodians and maintenance workers at school so our students can write their exams during this difficult and stressful time of year.

That is why I want to congratulate both the school board and the union for coming together, putting students first, agreeing to mediation and stopping the strike after only a few hours. For once, we saw great collaboration by the adults who are involved in the school system in making sure that students are put first. (1410) [ Translation ] Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier Ms. Élaine Michaud (Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, on the night of January 3, a devastating fire broke out downtown in Old Donnacona, in my riding of Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier . It destroyed four businesses and left six families homeless.

In response to the disaster, the people of my riding have shown absolutely remarkable solidarity and generosity. In just three weeks, $61,500 has been raised to help the victims of the fire. A significant quantity of non-perishable food items have also been collected. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of the generous donors for helping those who have lost everything start a new life.

With less than a year before the town celebrates its 100th anniversary, the mayor of Donnacona, Sylvain Germain, is calling on the various levels of government to help rebuild the nearly 100-year-old buildings in the downtown area, which represent a significant portion of Donnacona's heritage buildings. I urge the government to show its support and heed the mayor's call so that we can proudly celebrate Donnacona's 100th anniversary in 2015. [ English ] Governor General's Medal of Bravery Hon. Keith Ashfield (Fredericton, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honour four outstanding members of the Fredericton Police Force who were recently presented with a Medal of Bravery from His Excellency the Governor General of Canada. On January 8, 2012, Corporal Dwight Doyle, and Constables Shawn Fraser, Samantha McInnis and Jeff Smiley, who was also awarded the Star of Courage, rescued an elderly woman from a vehicle submerged in the Saint John River, in Fredericton, New Brunswick. The courageous police officers ventured on to the unstable ice to reach the car of the unconscious victim.

Constable Smiley jumped into the frigid water to bring the woman to the edge of the ice where the other officers resuscitated her and brought her to safety. On behalf of all Canadians, I wish to sincerely thank those officers and every one of their comrades in uniform for their bravery and dedication to duty. These men and women are truly deserving of the honour that was bestowed upon them for their courageous and selfless act. Founders Cup Champions Mr. Phil McColeman (Brant, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, my riding of Brant is home to an iconic sporting legacy, and I am not talking about hockey.

Today I rise to pay tribute to an emerging legacy of sporting excellence and sheer dominance in the game of lacrosse on the Six Nations of the Grand River. In 1996, a new lacrosse dynasty was born during the inaugural season of the Six Nations Jr B Rebels. The Rebels have earned a reputation for their high octane offence, which simply overwhelms opponents. Last summer, they shattered the record books to become the first franchise to win three consecutive and six total national Founders Cup championships. They posted an astounding and record on the season.

Thanks to the leadership of their coaches and GM Wray Maracle, the Rebels are changing the way the game is played and blazing a new trail of unprecedented success. I can assure the House that their sights are already set on another national championship next August. Go Rebels! Natural Resources Mr. Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, the joint review panel studying the northern gateway pipeline spent millions of dollars and years hearing from experts, hundreds of first nations, B.C. municipalities, the B.C. government and tens of thousands of British Columbians who were virtually unanimously opposed to this project. They faithfully participated in public hearings to have their voices heard by the Conservative government.

Yet, in the face of Enbridge's dismal track record and total lack of social licence in British Columbia, the decision from the JRP tells us that they, like Conservatives, could hear just one voice in this country, that of the oil lobby. Barely a month after the panel's decision, the results are as predicted. Ten lawsuits have been filed finding fundamental flaws in the panel's environmental review, and a total lack of proper consultation with first nations.

It is the result of Conservative neglect for the environment and first nations, and disdain for anyone who has the audacity to criticize the government's proposal. Northern gateway pipeline has been a test of beliefs and values in British Columbia. We will stand with British Columbians and oppose this project. [ Translation ] Abortion Ms. Laurin Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, on January 28, 1988, the Supreme Court decriminalized abortion in Canada by striking down

section of the Criminal Code. Part of the ruling reads as follows: Forcing a woman, by threat of criminal sanction, to carry a foetus to term unless she meets certain criteria unrelated to her own priorities and aspirations, is a profound interference with a woman's body and thus an infringement of security of the person. The right of Canadian women to decide whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term is not a done deal. The Conservatives have introduced three bills as well as Motion No. 312 to eliminate that right.

In addition, young Canadian women are facing more and more economic and social uncertainty because the Conservatives are behind the times when it comes to gender equality. The NDP believes it is time to take action. (1415) [ English ] Veterans Affairs Mr. Blake Richards (Wild Rose, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, November is an important day of remembrance. It is one where we set aside our differences and remember our veterans for their sacrifices.

That is except for, of course, the senior Liberal veterans spokesman who went on national television on November and slammed Canadian veterans, suggesting that providing money to them is like hanging a case of beer in front of a drunk. It is incredibly sad that 79 days later the leader of the Liberal party continues to stand by the member and his reprehensible and false comments. I call on the leader of the Liberal Party to reject this overtly partisan behaviour of his senior veterans spokesman and find someone else who has his facts right. [ Translation ] Fernand Leduc Mr.

Jacques Gourde (Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, today I want to pay tribute to the life and legacy of Quebec painter Fernand Leduc, who died yesterday at the age of 97. Mr. Leduc was born in Viauville, in the east end of Montreal, in 1916. He was educated by the Frères maristes from to and graduated from the Montreal School of Fine Arts in 1943. He was an important figure in the Automatiste movement. He moved his art from the non-figurative to the abstract. In 1987, he said: “As an artist, I see myself as working in an Impressionist tradition of 'painters of light'”.

I invite all my colleagues to visit the Musée national des beaux-arts du Québec to see the exhibit of or so of his works. The exhibit opens on February 20. Without question, Canada has lost one of the greatest painters and artists in its history. [ English ] James Schroder Mr. Frank Valeriote (Guelph, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, just before Christmas, Guelph and Canada lost a great man, one for whom humility, compassion and care for his community and his country were lifelong tenets. On December 13, former Guelph MP Jim Schroder passed away at the age of 95.

Jim preceded me in the House, serving his country and his community from to 1984, first as the parliamentary secretary to the minister of the environment and then as the parliamentary secretary to the minister of health where he worked diligently on the Canada Health Act. He was a giant in the community, a devoted husband to Elizabeth, who predeceased him, and father to Elizabeth, Anne, James and Don.

He was a beloved veterinarian and professor at the Ontario Veterinary College and a dedicated volunteer, serving as the inaugural chair of the Guelph-Wellington District Health Council and working with organizations like 2nd Chance employment. Jim was a model for so many in Guelph, and I valued his counsel dearly. We are better for his service and we will all miss him profoundly. Canal Classic Mr. Rick Dykstra (St. Catharines, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, hockey's place in Canadian culture is more than a simple sporting pastime.

It is a unifying force that brings the whole country together, regardless of age, gender, language or political affiliation. That being said, I would like to invite everyone to come down to the Rideau Canal tomorrow morning to watch the first annual Canadian Tire/Sport Chek Canal Classic. It is a hockey game between parliamentarians, NHL and Olympic alumni, representatives from the media and the team at Canadian Tire and Sport Chek in support of Jumpstart Charities.

Canadian Tire Jumpstart Charities is a national charity that helps kids from financially disadvantaged families participate in organized sport and recreational programs by covering the costs of registration, equipment and transportation, thus helping more Canadian kids get physically active through sport and recreation opportunities. With the Sochi Winter Olympics just a week away, what better way to celebrate Team Canada than to strap on a pair of skates and play Canada's official winter sport, even if it is against the opposition?

(1420) Veterans Affairs Mr. John Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have cut vital services that veterans rely on. They have called veterans “NDP hacks” when they complain. Now the minister has held a so-called round table. Why? Apparently it was so he could insult veterans to their faces. In Thunder Bay, the Conservative government has betrayed local veterans and is closing our Veterans Affairs office on Friday. Second World War veteran Roy Lamore said it is “a disgrace”. This office was helping to support veterans when they were at their most vulnerable.

Our military personnel and veterans are facing a crisis. There have been eight suicides in just two months. Sadly, the Conservatives have been more focused on using the military to boost their brand than listening to veterans. These brave men and women serve Canada with courage and distinction. Our duty is to be there for them in their moment of need, not abandon them to budget and service cuts. Members should make no mistake. New Democrats have always stood, and will continue to stand, shoulder to shoulder with our veterans. Cyberbullying Mr. Gerald Keddy (South Shore—St. Margaret's, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, earlier this year the ministers of justice and public safety launched our government's anti-cyberbullying public awareness campaign: Stop Hating Online. The campaign raises awareness of the impact of cyberbullying and makes sure youth know that this behaviour often amounts to criminal activity. Our government took concrete action by introducing the protecting Canadians from online crime act , which would create a new criminal offence to prohibit the non-consensual distribution of intimate images. This bill would give police the tools they need to do their job.

We have also launched a Stop Hating Online website as a comprehensive resource for parents and youth, with the information and tools they need to prevent and stop cyberbullying. I am pleased that our government is taking strong steps to help protect our children and youth from cyberbullying. They deserve it. ORAL QUESTIONS Oral Questions [ Translation ] Veterans Affairs Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Veterans Affairs was disrespectful of the people he is supposed to be serving. Some of the veterans were in tears.

The Prime Minister must apologize and fire his Minister of Veterans Affairs. What is he waiting for? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the minister has already apologized for yesterday's events. The record of this government and this minister is clear. Our government has increased services for veterans without precedent and we will continue to do so. [ English ] Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, when the veterans complained that the minister had missed their meeting, he said he was not going to stand there and listen to that, and he stormed out.

How is that acceptable to the Prime Minister ? Will the Prime Minister do the right thing, apologize himself and fire that incompetent? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the minister has apologized for the events of yesterday, but the fact of the matter is that this government and this minister have increased services for our veterans without precedent. It is an important priority for our government—it always has been—to protect those who wear the uniform and who once wore the uniform, which is why we have overwhelming support for veterans and we will continue to serve them. Hon.

Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Overwhelming support for veterans, Mr. Speaker; let us look at that. Can the Prime Minister of overwhelming support explain why the Conservative government wrote to the family of a veteran who took her own life on Christmas Day, demanding that it repay her benefits because she died before the end of the month? How could this happen? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the Leader of the Opposition raises that question because of course it is unacceptable.

As soon as the minister heard about that, he immediately said it was unacceptable and ordered a change. That is the kind of work we get from this minister.

(1425) Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, that is what we get from that minister after that minister has asked the family to repay the benefits. The first thing that comes to the mind of the Conservatives is to ask for the money back, not help the veterans. On Friday they will close eight more veterans offices. One is in Charlottetown, P.E.I., where they have just doubled the ministerial staff. Why is it more important for them to find budgets for their ministerial staff than to help Canadian veterans who risked their lives for our country? Right Hon.

Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, what the leader of the NDP will not accept is that sometimes government officials and bureaucrats make mistakes. When that happens, it is up to the elected government to make sure they do the right thing, which is what the minister has done in this particular case. More generally, when we have a small number of duplicative veterans offices that have a very small case load, it makes a lot more sense—I know the unions do not like it—to have points of service for veterans that will be closer to that— Some hon. members: Oh, oh! The Speaker : Order, please. The hon.

Leader of the Opposition has the floor. Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Actually, Mr. Speaker, the veterans do not like it either. [ Translation ] Until now, veterans were able to go to individual appointments to get help. As of Monday, those same veterans, some of them over 90 years old, will have to line up at a Service Canada office only to be sent to a computer. They even talked about that yesterday when they met with us. Does the Prime Minister understand the difference between a human and a computer? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, veterans have access to in-person services not just in a few service centres, but at points of service across Canada. [ English ] It is important that we state the facts and ensure veterans get these facts. This government is increasing points of service for veterans from a very few number of offices, the points of service across the country. I know why the unions and the NDP oppose that, but this is in the best interests of veterans. They can play politics; we are going to keep delivering services to veterans. Mr. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.) : Mr.

Speaker, those who have served their country and put themselves in harm's way for all of us deserve our respect, and they deserve our courtesy. The Canadian heroes who tried to meet with their minister yesterday received neither. Will the Prime Minister fire his Minister of Veterans Affairs ? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, once again, this government's record, not only of increasing services to veterans and funds for veterans, is unprecedented. So is our support for the men and women who actively wear the uniform of the Canadian Forces, and we will continue to serve them.

The Senate Mr. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not need to wait for his government's reference to the Supreme Court. Liberals have taken action this morning to remove partisanship and patronage from the Senate. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! The Speaker : Order, please. the hon. member for Papineau has the floor. Order. The hon. member for Papineau. Mr. Justin Trudeau : Mr. Speaker, we believe that the only people who should be in our party caucus are those put there by the people of Canada.

Will the Prime Minister finally take action and only allow members of Parliament in his Conservative caucus? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I gather the change announced by the leader today is that unelected Liberal senators will become unelected senators who happen to be Liberal. In fact, his leader in the Senate said the following in response to his announcement: “I'm not a former Liberal. I'm a Liberal and I'm a Liberal senator”. He also said, “I suspect that not a great deal will change”. That has to be the understatement of the year. (1430) [ Translation ] Mr.

Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the government is in a tough spot because the Liberals took action this morning. We took action to remove partisanship and patronage from the Senate. We believe that the only people who should be in our party caucus are those elected by the people of Canada. Will the Prime Minister finally take action on the Senate, and only allow elected members of Parliament in his caucus? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, this announcement is just as odd in French as it is in English.

His leader in the Senate said the following in response: “I am not a former Liberal senator. I am a Liberal. I suspect that not a great deal will change”. [ English ] What the Liberal Party does not seem to understand is that Canadians are not looking for a better unelected Senate. Canadians believe that for the Senate to be meaningful in the 21st century, it must be elected. Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, it would have been interesting were it not for the fact that the Prime Minister has broken Brian Mulroney's record for naming unelected senators: 59 in total.

Three months ago, Liberals and Conservatives stood hand in hand in this House to defeat the NDP motion to end partisan activity in the Senate by removing senators from party caucuses and making them sit as independents. That's impossible, they said. Well, we are glad the Liberal leader has changed his mind. Hopefully he will see the light again and work with us to abolish the Senate. Why will the Prime Minister not also support the NDP motion to abolish the Senate? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, as you know, the Government of Canada cannot abolish the Senate.

That is ultimately a power that rests with the provinces, which is why we have suggested, in the absence of that, that we undertake some meaningful reforms. Conservative senators are not trying to pretend they are anything other than senators who support the elected government of Canadians. Canadians are not fooled. The only problem the NDP has with the Senate is that it does not have any senators. Ethics Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : And we are quite proud of that, Mr.

Speaker, because you see, the NDP is a party of principle, something the Prime Minister used to believe in nine years ago when he was in opposition. Speaking of the Senate, yesterday we learned about a $10,000 payment from Canadian taxpayers to cover the legal bills for Mr. van Hemmen, Nigel Wright's former executive assistant. Since taxpayers are paying the legal fees of PMO staff now, would the Prime Minister not agree that this means that, indeed, his office is under investigation? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, of course, it is a long-standing government policy, predating this government, to provide legal assistance to such individuals. I cannot let the previous comment pass about the so-called party of principle over there. We put to the Supreme Court the question about abolishing the Senate, and what happened? NDP governments went to court to argue against it. The NDP's problem is it has not had the chance to name any senators, and it is never going to get any chances. Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Liberals tried to name someone.

Poor Madam Dyck, who is there now, thought she was going to be named an NDP senator, and we said no thanks. Now she finds out she is not even a Liberal senator. What will the law firm of Carroll & Wallace in Ottawa be providing Conservative staffer van Hemmen that all the lawyers in the Canadian Department of Justice cannot? Why does the Prime Minister think that is worth an extra $10,000 of taxpayers' money?

(1435) Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Once again, Mr. Speaker, as you know, the payment of legal assistance for crown service under certain circumstances is a long-standing policy that predates this government. Indeed, as we know well, the House of Commons, through the Board of Internal Ecology—Economy—has similar policies for members of Parliament. Hon. Thomas Mulcair (Leader of the Opposition, NDP) : We do need a board of internal ecology to clean things up, Mr.

Speaker. [ Translation ] On Monday, the Prime Minister told the House that Conservative Senator Irving Gerstein is not under investigation. He officially stated that here, in the House, more than once. Since the RCMP does not comment on this kind of investigation, and especially not on this investigation, how was the Prime Minister able to make that statement? How is he able to tell us that Mr. Gerstein is not under investigation? Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the RCMP has been quite clear with respect to the matter under investigation.

We will obviously offer our assistance to the RCMP in its investigation, which is its responsibility. [ English ] Ms. Megan Leslie (Halifax, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday it was the Minister of the Environment who was caught out at another questionable Conservative fundraiser. The minister must have known that there was something not quite ethically right about this event when she snuck in via the back door, but perhaps she hoped that sneaking in through the back door would mean that no one noticed she was breaking the same ethical rule her colleague, the Minister of Canadian Heritage , did just last week.

When is the Prime Minister finally going to put an end to this unethical behaviour, and what sanctions will this minister face? Hon. Leona Aglukkaq (Minister of the Environment, Minister of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency and Minister for the Arctic Council, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank that member for the question so that I can correct that inaccurate news story and that inaccurate question. There was an event for a local riding. It was never advertised as anything more and was fully consistent with the guidelines that are in place.

The local riding association has taken great care, before and after the event, to follow those guidelines, and only appropriate donations were accepted. Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the Minister of the Environment used the same playbook as the Minister of Canadian Heritage , who got tripped up for it. Just this month alone, we have the Minister of Canadian Heritage , the Minister of the Environment , the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke , and Chuck Strahl, the Enbridge lobbyist. It is like they take their ethics lessons from the Conservative Senate.

When it comes to the bar of accountability, the Conservatives are over there every day doing the ethical limbo. How low will they go before the Prime Minister finally sets some rules for them? Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, this Prime Minister and this government have always had the highest ethical standards. That has been the norm since this Prime Minister was elected the leader of our party. When it comes to ethics, this is a gentleman who really has nerve getting up and asking those questions.

When we look at the donations that he has accepted into his EDA, he seems to have gone after the very same people who are lobbying him with respect to his file. That does not show the same type of standard the member is advocating here. At the same time, we know he has broken Elections Canada rules with respect to how his last campaign went. He also sends out press releases saying how great a job we are doing, but he votes against it. [ Translation ] Ms. Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, let me recap.

The Minister of the Environment attended a fundraiser where guests included people who receive funding directly from her department. The Minister of Canadian Heritage did more or less the same thing last week. Yesterday, the Minister of Veterans Affairs had nothing better to do than insult and run roughshod over veterans. How does the Prime Minister determine when a minister should be asked to resign? What is the ethical standard of the day? Mr. Paul Calandra (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, the Prime Minister has always demanded the highest ethical standards from his caucus and staffers. [ English ] That is the example, of course, that this Prime Minister has set since the first day he was elected the leader of our party. Contrast that to the opposition that accepted illegal contributions from their big boss union friends. Members opposite accept donations from individuals who are lobbying them to make changes on policy. When it comes to accountability, we have taken action. We have shown leadership.

That is what Canadians expect, and that is what we are delivering. (1440) [ Translation ] Veterans Affairs Mr. Sylvain Chicoine (Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday, dozens of veterans came here to argue for the maintenance of essential services that the Conservatives are going to eliminate this week. The Conservatives are cutting services for veterans so that the Minister of Finance can save a few dollars and balance his budget on the backs of veterans. The closure of these offices means that many veterans will simply no longer seek help, and we know what the consequences of that are.

When will the Prime Minister show some compassion and respect and finally admit that these budget cuts are having a devastating effect on veterans? [ English ] Hon. Julian Fantino (Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, in fact, at the beginning of February, there will be locations across Canada where veterans can receive in-person service from the Government of Canada, which is times higher than in 2006. The NDP and the Liberals voted against increased investments for Canadian veterans. I bet they are going to do so again in the next few weeks.

Veterans have told us that they want less paperwork and fewer trips downtown, which begs the question: Who is the member actually working for? The record will show that they have consistently voted against our initiatives to increase benefits and services to veterans. Mr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, as the member of Parliament for and half years, on my tenth minister, from two different parties, yesterday was the lowest of the low in my advocacy for veterans, RCMP members, and their families across this country.

I guess we should be thankful that the minister did not fall asleep in front of them, as the member for Calgary West did previously. The Veterans Bill of Rights, which the Conservatives brag about, says our veterans deserve respect and dignity. Yesterday they received neither one. The only thing left to do is to ask the Prime Minister of Canada one very simple question: Will he ask for the Minister of Veterans Affairs ' resignation? Yes or no. Hon. Julian Fantino (Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I absolutely regret yesterday's events.

As I did last evening, I apologized directly to the veterans, and again, I apologize now. I wanted to meet with them to hear their case and their stories and explain to them the changes we are making that will, in fact, look after their interests and their families in the long term. I reach out to veterans from yesterday to reiterate that apology. Ms. Joyce Murray (Vancouver Quadra, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, our men and women in uniform stand up for Canada, but the government does not stand up for them. Veterans yesterday made that abundantly clear.

The Prime Minister wrongly asserts that support for injured forces members is there, and they should just ask for it. False. Insulting. In fact, the government's own staffing freeze blocked the hiring of dozens of desperately needed medical staff. This lack of support is resulting in tragedy. I would like to ask, when will the Prime Minister stop blaming those who serve and apologize for this disgraceful Conservative negligence? Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, unlike the Liberals, we have made this a priority.

No government has done more to reach out to ill and injured veterans and members of our armed forces than this Canadian government, and I am very proud of that. What the hon. member did not mention is that we have increased the health care budget by over $100 million. Now we have full-time mental health professionals to assist veterans and to assist people in the armed forces. We are going to continue that hiring process, and they should get on-board with that. Hon. Jim Karygiannis (Scarborough—Agincourt, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister .

Yesterday was a horrible day for the veterans who came to Ottawa wanting to meet with the Minister of Veterans Affairs to discuss the closing of the nine VACs. The way they were treated by the minister was despicable and demeaning. In the words of one veteran, is the minister going to fall on his sword and do the honourable thing and hit the trail? Or when is the Prime Minister going to fire him and give him his walking papers? Hon. Julian Fantino (Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, it beats me how the leader of the Liberal Party can continue to ignore that member's disgraceful comments about veterans: ...that's like hanging a case of beer in front of a drunk.... [T]hey go and spend it, either trying to buy a house or buying a fast car or spending it on booze and addiction. When will the leader of the Liberal Party either force that member to apologize or just fire him?

(1445) Mr. Rodger Cuzner (Cape Breton—Canso, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, when the Canadian government asked them to march across Europe, they did. When the Canadian government asked them to march into Korea, Bosnia, and Afghanistan, they did. When they were asked to march into every hellhole on this earth, they did. They responded to the call. Now, in their time of need, when they can march no more, what does the current government do? It shuts down nine veterans service centres and turns it back. Will he reconsider this wrong-minded decision? Hon. Julian Fantino (Minister of Veterans Affairs, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, the fact remains that we are increasing services to our veterans at more locations and that are more convenient to them. Our government has made record investments to support Canada's veterans, including an increase of almost $5 billion in programs and services since 2006. I might add, of course, that we on this side of the House are committed and are fulfilling our obligations. They should get on-board and vote with us to support veterans. [ Translation ] The Environment Ms. Laurin Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, as you can see, the Conservatives continue to govern with their blinders on. We have recently learned that they hired an oil lobbyist to advise them on the transfer of the Experimental Lakes Area. These lakes are international scientific and environmental gems that do not exist anywhere else. The Conservatives do not care about the opinion of scientists. They think that the oil industry is much better suited to make decisions about scientific research. Why did the Conservatives hire a friend of the oil industry to consult on the Experimental Lakes Area? [ English ] Hon.

Gail Shea (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has been active in assisting and facilitating the future ownership of the former Experimental Lakes Area. This decision was made by departmental officials due to Mr. Protti's experience and skills in many sectors, not just the oil and gas sector, which they felt could be relevant in creating a solid financial base for a potential new operator. The department is very optimistic that a suitable arrangement for the operation of the Experimental Lakes Area will be in place very shortly. Mr.

Robert Chisholm (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, the government's attacks on the Experimental Lakes Area program have defied common sense. Its experiments were critical in helping us better understand things like acid rain, phosphates, and the environmental impacts of the oil sands development. However, news that the Conservatives hired an oil lobbyist to advise them on the ELA begins to make things a lot more clear. When will the government start listening to scientists on science rather than to oil lobbyists? Hon. Gail Shea (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, we have signed a memorandum of understanding with the International Institute for Sustainable Development and the Province of Ontario concerning the Experimental Lakes Area. We are working toward a final agreement by March of this year. The Government of Canada is close to being able to return the ELA site to Ontario in a safe and clean condition. The decision to hire Mr. Protti was made by departmental officials because he had plenty of experience and skills in many areas, including oil and gas, and that, it was felt, would be of great benefit to a potential operator. Public Service of Canada Mr.

Mathieu Ravignat (Pontiac, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, time and again we have seen the government's lack of respect for public service employees. Now the Conservatives are turning to a fear campaign. The Conservative government is trying to clamp down on whistleblowers. Public service representatives are reporting intimidation and monitoring. This is simply unacceptable. Will the minister condemn these practices, rein in his managers and protect the right of free speech of our public service employees? Hon. Tony Clement (President of the Treasury Board, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, certainly this is not the policy of this government to have that campaign that the member refers to. Our managers are professionals; they have to act professionally in all cases. But I would say to the hon. member that it is our duty as the government to be fair and reasonable in our negotiations with the public service, which we will continue to be and, of course, at the same time, represent the taxpayer, which the NDP knows nothing about.

(1450) Mr. Mathieu Ravignat (Pontiac, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, a witch hunt is not fairness. [ Translation ] The reality is that intimidation is going on within federal departments. This intimidation needs to stop right away, and the President of the Treasury Board needs to rein in his managers. Shop stewards in the federal public service are being subjected to a fear campaign. We know about the Conservatives's anti-union stance, so we can imagine where the directive came from. These intimidation tactics do not belong in the workplace.

Will the President of the Treasury Board issue a directive to his managers and protect the right of free speech of our public servants? Hon. Tony Clement (President of the Treasury Board, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, that is not the policy of our government or our managers. Our goal, our challenge, is to be reasonable and fair to public servants, of course, but also to taxpayers, who are footing the bill. [ English ] Small Business Mr. Lawrence Toet (Elmwood—Transcona, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, as a former small business owner, I remember the stress of complying with burdensome and ineffective government regulations.

We know the NDP's position on red tape is that more is better, and the only rules the leader of the third party wants to get rid of are those ones that protect our children from dangerous drugs. Would the President of the Treasury Board please update the House, Canadians and small business owners on what the government is going to do to reduce the regulatory burden on Canadian businesses? Hon. Tony Clement (President of the Treasury Board, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, this is one of the top concerns of Canadian businesses, particularly Canadian small businesses, that all levels of government continue to tackle red tape.

I am looking forward to introducing in this chamber a red tape reduction act, which as an informal policy has already saved small businesses $20 million and 98,000 hours of time filling out government forms. Now the leader of the Liberal Party has called this a gimmick. This is the gimmicker in chief over there calling this a gimmick, but we are going to continue to stand on behalf of the taxpayers and small businesses. Canada Post Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Conservatives voted to end a service that so many Canadians depend on.

Did none of the Conservatives think of Canada's seniors? At this time of year, temperatures are freezing and sidewalks are slippery. Services like home mail delivery make it possible for seniors to live out their retirement in dignity in their own homes. How can the minister possibly justify pulling the rug out from under our seniors? Hon. Lisa Raitt (Minister of Transport, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, there are one billion fewer pieces of mail being put in the system than there were in 2006, and as a result Canada Post is facing an issue with respect to its business model.

It has chosen to put together a five-point action plan and has the support of the government. [ Translation ] Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday, by voting in support of the assault on Canada Post that was launched by their $10 million buddies, the Conservatives proved just how out of sync they really are. Montreal's mayor is very angry, and rightly so. Urban centres simply do not have space for community mailboxes. In addition, there has been a total disregard for people with reduced mobility and the thousands of jobs that could vanish in the blink of an eye.

Why are the Conservatives stubbornly supporting such a flawed plan instead of doing what other countries are doing and considering other options to secure the future of a public service that is valued by Quebeckers and Canadians? [ English ] Hon. Lisa Raitt (Minister of Transport, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, Canada Post is an arm's-length crown corporation and makes its own decisions on a day-to-day basis. One of the decisions that it has taken is to address its issues with respect to its business model by putting this five-point action plan together.

However, the reality of the situation is that currently two thirds of Canadian households already receive their mail in these community mailboxes. The other one third will be converted to do the same over the next five years. [ Translation ] Ms. Hélène LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, once again, the Conservatives have shown that they are completely out of touch with Canadians. There are other ways to maintain current levels of service. For example, Canada Post could start offering banking services.

The postal service is dealing with some challenges, but it is worth pointing out that the past 16 years have been profitable even though top executives are getting paid $10 million. Why are the Conservatives supporting this move to dismantle Canada Post services instead of looking for solutions? (1455) [ English ] Hon. Lisa Raitt (Minister of Transport, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, the way the business model worked at Canada Post in the pre-digital era was very different from the way it does now when people are utilizing email.

With respect to incorporating banking in postal service outlets, it is very clear that Canada Post considered the model and rejected it for the very reason it is having a problem now. Maybe the member should wake up to this, too. People are actually using banking online, just as they are sending correspondence online. The opposition members are trying to solve a problem by creating another problem. No amount of money can get them or tax them out of this situation. [ Translation ] Ms. Manon Perreault (Montcalm, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, the measures that Canada Post decision-makers are proposing, with the support of the Conservatives, will make life even harder for people in wheelchairs and with disabilities. Many will have to wait for paratransit so they can go get their mail. Will the minister make money available to improve access to paratransit, or will she drive these people to their mailboxes herself? [ English ] Hon. Lisa Raitt (Minister of Transport, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, in its five-point action plan, Canada Post has outlined a number of things that it will be doing. Of course, these are Canada Post's business decisions.

One of the things it indicated is that it will accommodate the situations it may be facing with respect to people with disabilities, or seniors. It does that already for the two thirds of family households that already receive mail through this method, and it will move the other one third, eventually, over the next five years, to have the same amount of service. Ethics Mr. Scott Andrews (Avalon, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, the Conflict of Interest Act is clear. The ministerial handbook is crystal clear: ministers cannot fundraise using people who get money from the department.

However, the Minister of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency sent out an email inviting stakeholders to a fundraiser featuring Nellie Cournoyea, head of a group the minister gives hundreds of thousands of dollars to in grants. The minister's office only started handing out free tickets yesterday afternoon when the media started sniffing around. Why will the Prime Minister not enforce his own ethical rules and stop this illegal fundraising? Hon. Leona Aglukkaq (Minister of the Environment, Minister of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency and Minister for the Arctic Council, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, I would like to thank the member again for raising this question so that I can correct the inaccurate news story. This was an event for a local riding. It was never advertised as anything more, and was fully consistent with the guidelines that are in place. The local riding association took great care both before and after the event to follow those guidelines, and only appropriate donations were accepted. [ Translation ] Intergovernmental Relations Hon. Stéphane Dion (Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, Lib.) : Mr.

Speaker, the centrepiece of last year's budget, the non-existent Canada job grant, is an appalling boondoggle. How could the government have thought for one second that it would work? Therein lies the mystery. How could the Conservatives have thought that the provinces would agree to a program concocted by the federal government alone and financed by $300 million in cuts to the provinces, forcing them to reduce their own training programs? Why did the government inflict such a predictable fiasco on Canadian workers? Hon.

Jason Kenney (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Multiculturalism, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, it was indeed our government that created this transfer to the provinces to help with job training. Still, we can do even more, because the goal is for workers to find a good job at the end of training. It is not training just for the sake of training. It is training to create jobs, to increase private sector and corporate investments in job training. It is a good idea, which is why the vast majority of organizations and businesses supported it. [ English ] Agriculture and Agri-Food Mr.

Malcolm Allen (Welland, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday when I asked the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food what he was planning to do about the pig virus epidemic, he said, “...this is a provincial issue”. Does the minister really believe that viruses do not cross provincial boundaries? Where is the minister's plan to prevent this epidemic from becoming a national crisis? If he actually has a plan, will he share it with his agricultural counterparts in Ontario and Quebec when he speaks with them tomorrow, or is he just simply waiting for the pork industry to have another crisis and eventually collapse?

(1500) Hon. Gerry Ritz (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. We stood with the pork industry through the highs and lows they have endured over the last few years and we will continue to do that. Of course, this is a provincial issue. Reporting of PED is a provincial issue. Having said that, CFIA stands ready to work with the province of record in monitoring, assessing, doing testing, and all of those good things.

We as a government have continued to work with the pork sector to build its biosecurity, to make traceability barn to barn workable and usable, and make sure that they have the tools within their tool kit to protect their own barns. [ Translation ] Ms. Ruth Ellen Brosseau (Berthier—Maskinongé, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I do not really think that the minister has a plan. Yesterday, the minister tried to shift all the responsibility for porcine epidemic diarrhea to the provinces. Farmers and pork producers across Canada expect the federal government to present a plan of action to contain the virus.

The minister has dropped the ball again. Tomorrow he is meeting with Quebec and Ontario's agriculture ministers. What is he bringing to the table tomorrow? Hon. Maxime Bernier (Minister of State (Small Business and Tourism, and Agriculture), CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind my colleague that porcine epidemic diarrhea poses no threat to human health. Let us be clear on that. However, it does pose a risk to pork producers and we are fully aware of that.

We are working closely with the Government of Quebec and the people in the pork industry to ensure that they are putting effective biosecurity measures in place. [ English ] Natural Resources Hon. Rob Merrifield (Yellowhead, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, our government is focused on jobs, economic growth and long-term prosperity, and developing our natural resources sector is absolutely critical in accomplishing that goal. Recently there has been misinformation in the United States in a TV ad on our energy sector and the Keystone XL pipeline. We have seen propaganda before, but it is usually from the NDP.

When those members go to the United States, they go there to hurt Canada's interests. When we go down there, we go down there to promote Canada's interests. Can the Minister of Natural Resources stand and take this opportunity to set the record straight? Hon. Joe Oliver (Minister of Natural Resources, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Yellowhead for the relevant question. This is an over-the-top xenophobic attack ad by an American billionaire who made money trading in oil stocks. It attempts to mislead Americans about the overwhelming advantages of Keystone for both our countries.

In fact, Canadians own over 50% of oil sands reserves, while China's share is about 6%. Furthermore, no oil is designated for export from the United States. Is the NDP really comfortable in supporting this attack on Canada by a— The Speaker : The hon. member for Labrador. National Defence Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, in May 2013, the government signed an internal agreement to increase services and staff at CFB Goose Bay, yet it is cutting jobs, eroding services, and providing no explanation.

The Conservatives' commitment was to increase support services for training for northern regions, yet nothing has been implemented. I ask the minister to make good on his commitment to Wing Goose Bay, stop misleading working people, stop misleading and playing political games, and stop cutting first-line military staff in the country. Hon. Rob Nicholson (Minister of National Defence, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth.

After the decade of darkness that was implemented by the Liberal Party, we have made the support of our men and women in uniform and our armed forces a priority, and we will continue to do so. Health Ms. Niki Ashton (Churchill, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, RU-486 could help women access safe abortions in Canada, especially in remote areas, but it is not yet available. Despite its being available in over countries and being on the World Health Organization's essential medicines list, we know that the Minister of Health and many of her colleagues have a strong anti-choice record.

Can the minister assure this House that an ideological agenda is not behind the delay in approval of RU-486? Hon. Rona Ambrose (Minister of Health, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, drug approval decisions are made by Health Canada scientists, not by ministers or politicians. In terms of any delay or timing when it comes to a review of drug submissions, they vary depending on the information that is provided by the manufacturers themselves.

(1505) Regional Economic Development Mr. Bryan Hayes (Sault Ste. Marie, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, recently the member for Timmins—James Bay celebrated our Conservative government's investments in northern Ontario. He stated: Timmins—James Bay is a centre for economic development in Ontario. It is good to see that we are getting strong federal investment in the region. While we agree with the member opposite, it is shameful that the member and his shrinking NDP northern Ontario caucus— The Speaker : Order, please. I have not heard anything that has touched on the administration of government in that.

The hon. member for St. John's South—Mount Pearl. The Environment Mr. Ryan Cleary (St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, it has been more than nine months since the Canadian Coast Guard confirmed the source of oil washing up on the shores of Newfoundland's northeast coast, the sunken paper carrier Manolis L . She went down in with tonnes of oil aboard. The Coast Guard has made attempts to plug the leaks, but the government must move to stop this environmental disaster once and for all. Everyone agrees that plugging the leaks is a Band-Aid solution.

Will the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans tell the people of my province when this oil will be removed? Hon. Gail Shea (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, we are committed to protecting our oceans from oil spills. We have made this clear through our efforts to establish a world-class tanker safety system. That work includes the Coast Guard completing installations of new seals on the Manolis L , which took place on January 18, along with new monitoring equipment. A complete survey of the hull was conducted, and no further leakage was detected.

The Coast Guard will continue to monitor the situation very closely and take the necessary steps to protect our environment. This member should be listening to people like Fogo Island resident Barry Brinson, who said of the Coast Guard, “I think they've done an awesome job”. [ Translation ] Intergovernmental Relations Mr. Jean-François Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ) : Mr. Speaker, for almost a year now, the federal government has been doing everything in its power to force Quebec to implement a new job training program that was rejected by all of the province's economic players.

However, over the holidays, the Minister of Employment and Social Development recognized that: ...Quebec has been doing a better job than the rest of Canada of getting businesses, private sector employers, unions and educators involved in a more integrated training system. Since the minister recognizes that Quebec's approach is working, what is he waiting for? When will he scrap his unacceptable project and renew the job training agreements as they stand? Hon. Jason Kenney (Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister for Multiculturalism, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, as the hon. member just said, we recognize that, over the last number of years, there have been good working relationships between entrepreneurs, employers, unions and the government in Quebec. We have taken note of this. We are holding discussions and negotiations with the provinces in order to find a solution that will improve the implementation of these job training programs and thereby increase the number of workers who get jobs at the end of their training. Mr. Jean-François Fortin : Mr.

Speaker, I ask for unanimous consent for the following: That this House condemn the Prime Minister's tactic of equating any legitimate criticism of the State of Israel with anti-Semitism and deplore his refusal to condemn the establishment of new Israeli settlements in occupied territory in violation of UN resolutions; that this House urge the government to return to a just, fair and balanced position that is respectful of international law and human rights; that this House reaffirm the fundamental importance of a total and permanent end to confrontations that prevent dialogue between the two parties and that it condemn any act of violence toward Israelis and Palestinians; and finally that this House reaffirm its support for a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that is based both on Israelis' right to live in peace within their secure and recognized borders and on Palestinians' right to self-determination. [ English ] The Speaker : The hon. member had a very lengthy motion.

There does not seem to be consent for him to be able to move it. The hon. member for Avalon is rising on a point of order. Mr. Scott Andrews : Mr. Speaker, I am seeking unanimous consent. The minister welcomed my question in question period today. I would like to table the email that was forwarded to many people regarding the fundraiser. If she has nothing to hide, I would like to table this email. The Speaker : Is there unanimous consent? Some hon. members: Agreed. Some hon. members: No. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Routine Proceedings (1510) [ English ] Red Tape Reduction Act Hon.

Tony Clement (President of the Treasury Board, CPC) Bill C-21. Introduction and first reading moved for leave to introduce Bill C-21,

An Act to control the administrative burden that regulations impose on businesses . (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed) [ Translation ] Interparliamentary Delegations Mr. Ryan Leef (Yukon, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the reports of the Canadian parliamentary delegation of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association respecting its participation at the meetings of the Standing Committee of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region, held in Longyearbyen and Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard, Norway, from June to 6, 2013, and in Murmansk, Russia, from September to 20, 2013. Mr. Bernard Trottier (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the reports of the delegation of the Canadian branch of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie concerning its participation at the Bureau meeting and XXXVIIIth Session of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie, held in Brussels, Belgium, from July to 12, 2012, as well as bilateral meetings and the XXVI Session of the Europe Regional Assembly of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie, held in Paris, France, and Chisinau, Moldova, from November to 21, 2013. [ English ] Governor General Appointment and Removal Procedure Act Mr.

Scott Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, CPC) Bill C-569. Introduction and first reading moved for leave to introduce Bill C-569,

An Act respecting the procedure for the appointment and removal of the Governor General . He said: Mr. Speaker, this legislation attempts to establish rules governing the manner in which a Governor General is appointed and might be dismissed. Constitutionally these powers belong to the Queen, but in practice and by convention they are exercised on the advice of the Prime Minister. This places a vital power in a position to be exercised far too casually. This problem was addressed by the creation of an advisory committee to make recommendations as to candidates for the position of Governor General.

In its first ever recommendation, the advisory council's advice resulted in the Prime Minister advising Her Majesty to appoint the Right Hon. David Johnston to this post. The bill attempts to entrench this very successful mechanism in law, requiring the participation of opposition leaders, or alternatively of the House itself, prior to the submission of advice to Her Majesty as to the appointment of a Governor General and, as well, with regard to advice to Her Majesty as to the dismissal of a Governor General. (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed) Criminal Code Mr.

Rob Anders (Calgary West, CPC) Bill C-570. Introduction and first reading moved for leave to introduce Bill C-570,

An Act to amend the Criminal Code (mandatory minimum sentences for rape) . He said: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce my private member's bill,

an act to amend the Criminal Code, mandatory minimum sentences for rape. This enactment would amend sections 271, 272 and of the Criminal Code to establish mandatory minimum sentences for sexual assault to fall within the definition of rape as defined for the purpose of those sections. It would also establish that sentences for such offences must be served consecutively to any other punishment arising out of the same event or series of events.

It is my hope that this piece of legislation will keep offenders behind bars longer and help keep Canadians and their families safe. (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed) Meat Inspection Act Mr. Alex Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior, NDP) Bill C-571. Introduction and first reading moved for leave to introduce Bill C-571,

An Act to amend the Meat Inspection Act and the Safe Food for Canadians Act (slaughter of equines for human consumption) . He said: Mr. Speaker, the bill I am proposing would prohibit the sending or conveying from one province to another, or the importing or exporting of horses or other equines for slaughter for human consumption, or the production of meat products for human consumption. However, it also provides for an exception to that prohibition.

That exception is that if the horses or other equines are raised primarily for human consumption and if the horse is accompanied by a medical record that contains its standardized description and a complete lifetime record in chronological order of medical treatment then this meat would then be acceptable. We do not have a system that has stringent regulations right now, and in the name of food safety, the bill fits in with the new Safe Food for Canadians Act. It is an expansion of Bill C-322 . It conforms with trade regulations and it tightens up the whole aspect of food safety.

I would urge all members of the House to support the bill, especially all of those hundreds of thousands of people who supported Bill C-322 . (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

(1515) Petitions Canada Post Ms. Linda Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure today of tabling two petitions. The first petition is from Albertans who are concerned that without consultation Canada Post is making cuts to postal service, increasing postal costs, job cuts and impacting seniors and disabled. The petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to reverse the cuts and to pursue innovations. Income Tax Act Ms. Linda Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, the second petition is from a broad array of Alberta communities, from Edmonton, Spruce Grove, Grand Cache, Camrose, Sherwood Park, St. Albert, Devon, Calmar, and Turner Valley. The petitioners support Bill C-201 , introduced by the member for Hamilton Mountain , to allow tradespeople and indentured apprentices to deduct travel and accommodation expenses from taxable income to support workers who are required to secure employment outside their region. Mining Industry Mr. Mike Wallace (Burlington, CPC) : Mr.

Speaker, I present a petition from my constituents for the creation of a legislative ombudsman mechanism for responsible mining. [ Translation ] Labour-Sponsored Funds Mr. Massimo Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I have a number of petitions, but I will read just one of the many signed by thousands of Montrealers and Quebeckers. The people are asking the following of the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister : WHEREAS 1. Labour funds are often the primary source of savings for retirement; 2. Labour funds are a savings tool for the middle class; 3.

Labour funds invest in SMEs, creating jobs and driving economic growth; 4. The Government of Canada announced in its Budget Speech that it intends to eliminate the 15% labour fund credit— The Speaker : I would like to remind the hon. member that according to the rules, members must be very brief when presenting petitions. That is a reminder for all members presenting petitions today. The hon. member for Montcalm . The Senate Ms. Manon Perreault (Montcalm, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, the people of Montcalm believe that there is no room for a Senate made up of unelected officials, and that the $92.5 million it costs to run this institution could be better spent. They also believe that appointed senators, in particular those who abuse their privileges, do not truly represent the interests of Canadians. I am therefore pleased to present this petition on behalf of the people of Montcalm. [ English ] Income Tax Act Ms. Chris Charlton (Hamilton Mountain, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, as you know, my private member's bill, Bill C-201 , is going to be coming to a vote in the House next Wednesday, and I have more petitions in support of the bill from Cornwall, Prescott, Ottawa, Napanee, Kanata and Oshawa. All of the petitioners want the government to support Bill C-201 so that trades people and indentured apprentices would be able to deduct travel and accommodation expenses from their taxable income so they can secure and maintain employment at a construction site that is more than kilometres from their home. Employment Mr. Glenn Thibeault (Sudbury, NDP) : Mr.

Speaker, I am very pleased to rise to table a number of petitions from constituents in my great riding of Sudbury. The petitioners are asking the Minister of Employment and Social Development to reconsider the decision to end funding for the targeted initiative of older workers. According to the petitioners, the program has been vital for aging unemployed workers seeking employment opportunities. The program has a real and lasting impact on their lives and the termination of the program will have an adverse impact on job seekers.

(1520) The Environment Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP) : Mr. Speaker, I rise to present two petitions today. The first is predominantly from residents of London, Ontario, but there are a number from Vancouver. They are calling on the government to act to protect the pollinating bee population in Canada by eliminating dangerous nicotine-based pesticides. International Trade Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP) : Mr. Speaker, the second petition is in relation to the Canada-China investment treaty. It is from residents of Hornby Island, as well as my own riding, and Vernon and the Interior.

Petitioners are calling on the Governor in Council to refuse to ratify a treaty that would so profoundly undermine Canadian sovereignty. [ Translation ] Income Tax Deductions for Tradespeople Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition in support of Bill C-201 , introduced by my colleague from Hamilton Mountain , which would allow tradespeople and their apprentices to deduct accommodation and travel expenses. These are people from Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick who support my NDP colleague's bill. [ English ] Animal Welfare Mr.

Alex Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have over a thousand names of people from Ontario, B.C., and Alberta, who are in support of my Bill C-322 to end horse slaughter in Canada. Petitioners point out that horses are commonly administered drugs that are strictly prohibited from being used at any time to food producing animals destined for human supply. Petitioners would like to see the bill enacted. [ Translation ] Air Transportation Mrs. Maria Mourani (Ahuntsic, Ind.) : Mr. Speaker, aircraft noise is a real problem in my riding.

Since I have taken several steps in the House, such as presenting a brief to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, and introducing a bill on the placement of airports. My constituents have filed a number of complaints with the ADM, but the government has not done anything. I am therefore very pleased to present this petition today, which is signed by more than people. They add their names to those who signed the petition I presented on November 20, 2013.

These people are calling for better representation of the public on the ADM board of directors and on the Airport Soundscape Consultative Committee. They are also calling for a real curfew, as well as a review of the flight paths and flight levels of commercial aircraft. [ English ] Foreign Affairs Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by many Manitobans who are asking that we stand with the people of Ukraine during this difficult time and continue to forcefully oppose all efforts to repress their rights and freedoms.

They call for us to impose personal sanctions against those individuals, family members and associates who are responsible for human rights violations, criminal activity or corrupt business practices in Ukraine. Copyright Law Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from a number of citizens of London who wish to draw the attention of the Government of Canada to our current copyright laws because they believe they no longer help the growth of the Canadian economy but rather hinder it. They are asking the Parliament of Canada to put in two simple changes.

The first is that the government should create a charter of digital rights for Canadian citizens to prevent unwarranted and unwanted censorship and viewing of citizens' Internet browsing accounts, histories or emails. They also want a limitation to the amount of time that something is protected under copyright, to 50 years since creation, rather than 50 years after the death of the creator. Questions on the Order Paper Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand. The Speaker : Is that agreed?

Some hon. members: Agreed. Motions for Papers Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I ask that all notices of motions for the production of papers be allowed to stand. The Speaker : Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed. GOVERNMENT ORDERS Government Orders [ English ] Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act Hon. Steven Blaney (for the Minister of International Trade) Bill C-20. Second reading moved that Bill C-20,

An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Honduras, the Agreement on Environmental Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Honduras and the Agreement on Labour Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Honduras , be read the second time and referred to a committee.

(1525) Mr. Erin O'Toole (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today in this House for my first speech of 2014, and welcome all my colleagues back, to speak about the Canada-Honduras free trade agreement. This agreement represents yet another important step in the diversification of our trade relationships around the world and our efforts to find new markets and to grow markets for Canadian goods and services. The priority of our government has been focused on opportunity and prosperity for Canadian families.

This begins and ends with ensuring that our producers and firms have new markets to trade their wares. Trade leads to employment and prosperity for Canadian families. Whether in the towns of Bowmanville, Port Perry or Uxbridge in my riding or indeed in the cities and towns across the country, families are made stronger by the simple fact that mom or dad can find meaningful employment if they want to be engaged in the workplace. Canadian exports already account for an astonishing one in five Canadian jobs. More than 40,000 Canadian companies are global exporters.

Canadian companies and their innovative products are leaders in sectors ranging from aerospace, transportation and agriculture to information and communications technology. With trade being critical to Canada's prosperity, Canada has long been a key architect of international trade rules at the World Trade Organization, through the free trade agreement with the United States and ultimately with NAFTA. Our country relies upon strong international agreements and treaties to counter protectionism and keep global markets open for our employers.

We remain very engaged and positive about our most important trade relationship with the United States. Trade with the United States has been a defining part of the Canadian story. From north-south mercantile trade before Confederation to the national policy of Sir John A. to the free trade agreement signed by the Conservative government in 1988, trade with our American friends has brought prosperity to generations of Canadian families.

The need to diversify Canadian trade relationships has been raised for decades because of a growing dependence on trade with the U.S., and this need to diversify came into sharp focus with the global recession in 2008. In 2008, Canadian exports to the United States totalled $368 billion. The following year, amid the global economic crisis, these exports dropped to $270 billion. While there has been a recovery in the U.S. economy and exports have been rebounding, statistics from show that our exports to the U.S. still remain 10% below levels.

The strong economic leadership of our Prime Minister and this government has helped Canada weather the global turmoil better than most developed countries, but we cannot rest on our laurels when it comes to trade. We also must come up with a dual strategy that builds and strengthens our critical trade relationships now while also building new and growing markets to sell our goods and services. The global economy is changing rapidly, and new markets are exploding around the world. Trade is helping lift millions out of poverty while also promoting peace and security through stronger international engagement.

Canada needs to pursue these new markets that are growing with gusto. We need not only to keep up with our global competitors but to leverage our natural advantages to penetrate new markets faster and deeper than our competitors. Standing still will not create jobs for Canadian families. Over time, inaction could erode our position in the world and our quality of life. This is why our government has responded with an ambitious international trade agenda.

Opening new markets for Canadian companies, large and small, is cornerstone to this plan, as we continue to grow the Canadian economy and the jobs in our economy created as a result of trade. We have made significant progress on opening new markets for Canadian goods and services. Last October, the Prime Minister announced an agreement in principle on the Canada-European Union comprehensive economic and trade agreement, the most ambitious trade agreement Canada has ever negotiated.

(1530) Our agreement with the European Union would give Canadian companies preferential access to an economy of more than million consumers and a $17 trillion GDP. That is tremendous opportunity. A joint study by Canada and the EU, as part of our negotiations, concluded that our agreement with the European Union could boost Canada's GDP by $12 billion annually and increase bilateral trade by 20%. Most importantly, the deal could result in the creation of 80,000 net new jobs once the benefits of the Canada-EU trade agreement are realized.

While the Canada-EU trade agreement represents the culmination of many years of work with a group of nations, with our provincial stakeholders, with industries and with municipalities who are eager to access the million consumers of Europe, our government has also been tirelessly pursuing trade opportunities in markets of all sizes. Since 2007, our government has concluded free trade agreements with Peru, Colombia, Jordan and Morocco. New agreements and relationships are being struck while existing ones are being expanded.

We have also concluded or brought into force new or updated foreign investment promotion and protection agreements to provide better access to growing global markets for Canadian exporters, while also providing more certainty in these markets through the secure framework that a foreign investment promotion and protection agreement offers. It gives me great pleasure to advise the House that Honduras will soon be yet another market that we have opened for Canadian employers through this Canada-Honduras free trade agreement.

While our EU deal represents Canadian opportunities across the pond for exporters, there are also tremendous opportunities here in the Americas. Total merchandise trade between Canada and the countries in the Americas stood at $56.2 billion in 2012. This has increased by 32% in the last six years alone. Canadian direct investment in the Americas totalled $168 billion in and has increased by 59% over the same period. We are already engaged in South America and Central America, and our government knows that we need to do more in our own backyard.

Canada's trade agenda is not just about the planes, trains and automobiles we manufacture in Canada—and great ones, to boot—nor does it only represent natural resources and agricultural products. We are increasingly pursuing markets for our intellectual property, academic excellence and delivery of professional services around the world. Canada is very much engaged in negotiations surrounding the trade in services agreement, which would provide a secure legal framework and new market access for Canadian service suppliers in many of the world's most important and growing service markets.

We also remain an active participant in multilateral negotiations at the World Trade Organization, where just a few weeks ago Canada helped conclude a trade facilitation agreement that will boost trade by cutting red tape for Canadian companies. However, we are not just stopping there. Canada is also committed to advancing our ongoing free trade negotiations with other partners in the Caribbean, in Morocco and here in the Americas.

We are also looking for new opportunities to grow Canada's international trade and are undertaking exploratory discussions with Thailand and Turkey to determine what benefits Canadians and Canadian employers could see from trade agreements with these partners in the future. In addition, we continue to update our existing free trade agreements to ensure that Canada remains a global leader in trade and commerce. We recently announced the modernization of the Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement.

This expansion and modernization builds on an agreement that dates back to and a trade relationship that is now worth over $2.5 billion. The updated agreement with Chile includes the addition of a new financial services chapter, which will help world-class Canadian financial institutions develop new markets in the areas of banking, insurance and asset management in Chile. It also includes new roles on government procurement, customs procedures and dispute settlement.

(1535) As members are aware, the Prime Minister announced last week that we would also modernize our existing free trade agreement with Israel. The Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement really has been a cornerstone of a growing and important relationship for our country. While our countries enjoy a sophisticated trade relationship, an updated free trade agreement with Israel would enhance bilateral commercial flows by reducing technical barriers, enhancing co-operation, increasing transparency in regulatory matters and reducing transaction costs for exporters.

It would also create greater visibility for Canadian companies in the Israeli and Middle Eastern market and support closer ties with this dynamic economy and important democracy in the Middle East. It is clear that the government is working hard to ensure that Canadians reap the economic benefits of global trade, which as I said at the outset, accounts for one in five jobs in Canada. The Canada-Honduras free trade agreement is part of our efforts to liberalize trade with our partners here in the Americas.

It is also a realization of our global markets action plan, which will grow existing and important trade relationships while forging new ones around the world. The Americas offer great potential. Trade has been growing dramatically in the last six years, as I said. We also need to promote increased mutual economic sharing of ideas and increase engagement.

Canada's strategy for engagement in the Americas focuses on intensifying trade promotion and relationship-building efforts, to ensure that the Canadian private sector can take full advantage of the trade and economic agreements, as well as helping to build the capacity of our trading partners to capitalize on the benefits of free trade with Canada and the benefits that come along with a growing and emerging middle class in many of these countries.

Canada is committed to a strong economic partnership with Honduras that would contribute to enhanced prosperity and sustainable economic growth for both our countries in the long term. This Canada-Honduras free trade agreement is a key component in advancing the goals of Canada's strategy for engagement in the Americas and would support our growing commercial and social relationship with that country. Canada's two-way merchandise trade with Honduras grew by 46% in the last six years. Canadian companies are active in Honduras in the areas of apparel production and mining.

However, there are other sectors of huge potential opportunity, such as green building, clean technologies and information and communities technologies, to name just a few. Once implemented, the Canada-Honduras free trade agreement would eliminate tariffs on 98% of the tariff lines going both ways. We would gain better access to a growing market in our hemisphere, with grain and oilseeds, beef, pork, potatoes and processed foods being some of the early and big winners and the potential for more industries and, particularly, service areas, as the relationship with Honduras develops over time.

Canada's Trade Commissioner Service already works with Canadian companies that are interested in doing business in Honduras. These are recognizable and important employers across Canada, such as Gildan Activewear, Aura Minerals and Canadian Bank Note, to name just a few.

Once the trade agreement is ratified, our trade commissioners would ensure that companies, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises, are aware of how they could benefit from this free trade agreement so that they could take full advantage of the greater transparency, stability and protection the agreement would provide in the Honduran market. In addition to opening doors for Canadian companies and building our trade relationship, Canada is also committed to supporting Honduras in other ways.

Canada and Honduras first established diplomatic relations in and have a broad and diverse relationship, driven by a wide range of links and collaboration, from political dialogue and commercial exchange to people-to-people ties, as well as long-standing and substantial Canadian development co-operation. We maintain an open dialogue with the Government of Honduras, as we believe that engagement is the best way for us to help Honduras meet its challenges, grow its economy and promote stability. Engagement on all levels will grow prosperity and security for Hondurans.

(1540) As one of the countries of focus for Canada's development assistance, Honduras is Canada's largest bilateral program in Central America and the fourth largest in the hemisphere. In 2011-2012, Canada provided over $39 million to the country through all development channels. This makes it the largest bilateral donor in all of Honduras and the sixth largest overall donor in the hemisphere. Canada's development program will support and promote economic opportunities in Honduras in a way that will allow its trade with Honduras to grow steadily over time.

It is our view that prosperity, security, and democratic governance, including full respect for human rights, are interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Increased prosperity through trade can contribute to the reduction of poverty and social exclusion by increasing economic opportunity for all Hondurans. Once ratified, this free trade agreement would be a cornerstone of our bilateral relationship with Honduras and would benefit both our countries. This is a comprehensive trade deal that would give Canadian businesses a secure and predictable framework in a growing Honduran marketplace.

The United States and the European Union already enjoy free trade with Honduras, so it is especially important that we ratify this agreement and put Canadian companies on a level playing field with our main competitors. Let me turn to some specific examples of the benefits of the Canada-Honduras trade agreement. First and foremost, it would help make Canadian products more attractive in the Honduran market by eliminating tariffs. Today Canadian exports to Honduras face average tariffs in the 11% range for agriculture and the 5% range for non-agricultural goods.

Once the agreement is in place, Honduras would immediately eliminate tariffs on almost 70% of its tariff lines in respect of goods imported from Canada. This agreement represents an important component of our government's global markets action plan. This plan would coordinate the funding and expertise inherent in our foreign policy, trade, and development arms, and focus them in countries where we can make a difference, recognizing that benefiting the social and human rights of a country will also help benefit its local economy. Jobs for Hondurans will help promote stability in the country.

This government is on an unparalleled track for promoting the trade of our goods and services across the world. The Canada-E.U. trade agreement represents a huge leap in terms of global trade agreements in that it will provide opportunities for Canadian exporters in a market of million people while it also allows penetration right down to services and mutual recognition of professions. It really is taking trade agreements into this new millennium. In my riding of Durham, one in five jobs relates to trade.

The communities of Uxbridge, Scugog, and Clarington need these new markets for their goods, particularly at a time when the American market is slowly rebounding from the world economic crisis. Our government is firmly committed to building new markets for our goods and services to maintain the job creation that trade promotes. These deals are not just with mammoth markets of million people, like the Canada-E.U. trade deal. They are also in other important areas of the world, such as Georgia and Morocco and now Honduras.

There our trade, our prioritization of our services, and our engagement through our global markets action plan could not only promote trade in that country but could also promote stability and engagement in a range of labour, environmental, and other areas. This is a pivotal part of our government's global markets action plan. It is a pivotal part of keeping Canadian families employed and engaged. I am truly hoping all members of the House will support this important agreement.

(1545) Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, extending preferential trade terms to other countries is a major economic privilege, and countries that are democratic and that respect environmental, human rights, and labour standards are deserving of this extension. The government of Honduras was essentially installed in a military coup in 2009. It has conducted two flawed elections since then that have been roundly condemned as corrupt.

It violates its citizens' human rights; suppresses freedom of speech and association; tolerates killings, kidnappings, and the arbitrary detention of thousands of its citizens; has the highest murder rate in the world; is the planet's most dangerous place for journalists; represses the media, opposition, and citizens who peacefully express their political views; is a major drug trafficking centre, with 80% of cocaine shipments from South America; has an average of massacres per month; and allows paramilitary squads to operate with impunity.

Canadians would not support a free trade agreement with the government of Ukraine, North Korea, or Iran. Why does the government believe it should support an agreement with Honduras that has an equally bad record of violating the democratic and human rights standards not only of Honduras but of Canada and the world? Mr. Erin O'Toole : Mr. Speaker, what troubles me about the position of the New Democratic Party on trade is that its members are continuing their decades-long, almost generations-long, opposition to trade of any kind.

In fact, the hon. member, in an interview with The Huffington Post , when talking about countries like Honduras, Peru, and Chile, which are important countries and allies of ours in the Americas, said that these countries should not be considered. He actually said that they have no strategic value for Canada. That is not diplomacy at its finest.

We are about promoting economic opportunity and jobs in massive markets, like the million the Canada-European Union trade agreement will lead to, but also in smaller markets, where our input and our engagement will actually benefit Hondurans and will promote stability in that region. Hon. Wayne Easter (Malpeque, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, one has to ask: Where will the government not go just to add another number and say that we now have x number of trade agreements? That is what it is all about. I listened to the words of the parliamentary secretary.

He went to great lengths to use all the right words in all the right places, but the facts on trade do not bear out his words. This is the first government that has had a trade deficit in 30 years. He talked about the CETA agreement at great length, not Honduras, and he said it could create x number of jobs. Could? We have not even seen the text yet. It has not even been presented in the Parliament of Canada. What he did say, though, was that there are new rules on dispute settlements. I have a question on that. In of the last 44 months, they have had a trade deficit.

In the dispute settlement in our agreement with the United States, Canada's beef industry is suffering badly because of the aged cattle restriction the Americans have and because of the COOL agreement. Instead of negotiating with Honduras, which has a terrible human rights record, what are Conservatives doing to settle the trade dispute with the United States, which really matters to Canadian farmers? Mr. Erin O'Toole : Mr. Speaker, in the member's question or statement, he asked what lengths we would go to.

I think it is clear that this government will go and sell Canadian goods and services abroad as much as possible if it will lead to jobs here at home. I would remind the hon. member that in the 13 years of the Liberal government, it signed three trade agreements. In fact, during the Prime Minister 's recent trip to Israel, we are expanding on the less than ambitious trade deal the Liberals signed with that country. We are clearly about promoting trade for our country. As I said, I used the European deal as an example.

In big markets and in small markets, if there is a win for Canadians and our world-class goods, services, and products, we will be there for Canadians.

(1550) Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP) : Mr. Speaker, I have to say that I was enormously grateful to the member for Vancouver Kingsway for so clearly reciting the reasons the bill before us is odious, as is the trade agreement. This trade deal is with a country that has just had a populist democratic leader knocked out by a coup. It has a military regime that suppresses human rights, indigenous rights, and labour rights, but we would rush to an agreement that would only benefit certain parts of Canada.

I love my country, but an agreement like this would support Canadian mining companies’ taking advantage of indigenous rights in other countries. It would give a Canadian mining company the kind of rights that I do not want the Chinese state-owned enterprises to have, which is to bring arbitration cases against us if we toughen our laws. This agreement would work against the interests of equity, democracy, civil society, and human rights in Honduras. I would beg my hon. friend, the parliamentary secretary, who is an honourable friend, to have nothing to do with promoting this agreement. Mr. Erin O'Toole : Mr.

Speaker, I would like to thank my friend from Saanich—Gulf Islands and welcome her back to a new year of jousting in this place. I think there is a philosophical disagreement with our government and the opposition, including the Green Party, which really wants to isolate Canadians and isolate our opportunity to create jobs. While our largest trading partner is having slow growth, we are out selling our markets and our goods and services, but we are also engaging.

I think the hon. member should look and see that this agreement has a corporate social responsibility component, it has a labour component, and it has an environmental component. I believe firmly that engagement, and elevating struggling countries into the global community, where these things are taken very seriously, would not only enhance those countries but also deal with those root issues.

Our global markets action plan not only targets the economic opportunities that trade promotes, but it also strengthens our diplomatic work by targeting some of our aid and targeting our diplomacy, and growing jobs at the same time. [ Translation ] Mr. Alain Giguère (Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, I listened to the parliamentary secretary 's comments, and I want to say that he was right about our parties having different philosophies on the importance of free trade. That is not what matters in this case though. What matters is knowing who we are signing this treaty with.

The Conservatives cannot guarantee that the current Honduran government will not use this free trade agreement to facilitate illegal shipments of cocaine. That is what it comes down to. Crime rates in Honduras are times higher than in Canada. There is no doubt that the political authorities in that country are crime bosses. How can the Conservatives ask us to sign an agreement with people so mired in crime? How can they themselves be willing to sign it? That is the question. [ English ] Mr. Erin O'Toole : Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important to note that we are trading with Honduras now.

It is a key destination for our aid now. It is trading and has free trade agreements with the United States and with the European Union, now, putting Canadian job creators at a disadvantage. My position has been clear. I would ask the member to challenge his colleagues, in a party that has been isolationist and anti-trade for 50 years, by saying that this is a way we can engage with countries, to actually help lift their economy out of much more difficult circumstances while also promoting job creation here in our country.

Our changes to DFATD would make sure that we not only target economic opportunity but that it be alongside aid, engagement, and institution building. This would actually help the people of Honduras. The isolation of the opposition would do no good.

(1555) Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP) : Mr. Speaker, New Democrats believe that Canadians recognize the importance of trade to our economy and want an effective, strategic trade policy that expands trade opportunities and supports Canadian exporters. We believe that Canadians want a trade policy that produces good jobs in our communities and encourages the development of value-added production to our many resources here in Canada. We believe that Canadians want a trade policy that strengthens our economic relationships with growing significant economics that add strategic value to the Canadian economy.

We believe that Canadians want trade agreements that preserve our ability to legislate in the public interest, protect our social programs, and promote local economic development. We believe that Canadians want their government to pursue a balanced trade policy that builds trade and at the same time fosters positive democratic development, human rights, and environmental standards, both in Canada and in the nations with whom we trade. New Democrats also know that Canadians care about the process by which we implement trade policy.

Canadians want an open, transparent, and accountable process in all aspects of the development of trade policy and agreements. Canadians want and deserve to be consulted about their priorities and kept advised about the progress of trade negotiations. After all, they know that trade agreements are not negotiated on behalf of political parties or special interests but are negotiated on behalf of all Canadians and all sectors of our economy.

This is particularly the case as trade agreements have become more comprehensive and increasingly deal with areas of policy that have historically been considered to be of purely domestic concern. Since the Conservatives took office in 2006, by all objective measurements Canada's trade performance has been deplorable. In 2006, the Conservatives inherited a current account surplus of some $18 billion. Today, after eight years in power, Canada has a current account deficit of $62 billion.

That is a negative swing of some $80 billion, an average decline of $10 billion for every year the Conservatives have been in power. Over the last two years, even as we have pulled slowly out of the global recession, Canada has experienced consecutive months of merchandise trade deficits. We have also seen an alarming shift in the quality of our exports. Under the Conservatives, there has been an increase in the percentage of our exports that are raw or barely processed, reversing a decades-long trend toward an increase in our value-added products.

Nor can this poor performance be explained away by the recession that Canada experienced between and 2011. A comparison by the Library of Parliament of Canada's trade performance to other countries around the world between and 2012, countries that experienced the exact same global recession, collapse in commodity prices, and currency fluctuations, found that Canada came dead last in current account performance. This poor trade record is consistent with the Conservatives’ poor performance economically, across the board.

A look at major economic metrics provides comprehensive evidence of the government's economic failure since it took office in 2006. I hear laughing on that side, but we will see if those members still laugh after hearing these statistics. The national unemployment rate in was 6.6%; today it is 7.2%. The youth unemployment rate in was 12.2%; today it is 14%. Among the OECD nations in employment creation since 2006, Canada ranks 20th. The number of governments since 1935, in the last 80 years, that presided over a slower rate of real economic growth per capita is zero.

The per cent of our federal debt accumulated since is one fifth. The percentage increase in our real average manufacturing wage from to now is zero. The percentage drop in productivity since the Conservatives came to power is a negative 1.9%. The conclusion is obvious. The Conservatives have had eight years to implement their trade and economic policies, and the unacceptable results are there for all to see. The Bank of Canada has explicitly stated that a major contributing factor to Canada's stalled economic performance is due to our under-performance on the trade file. Canada is a trading nation.

Our economy is historically, and continues to be, substantially dependent on our export sector and increasingly, with global supply chains and integrated production, on our import experience as well.

(1600) It is therefore vital that Canada implement a smart, effective trade policy and pursue well-negotiated beneficial trade agreements with strategically important growing and significant economies that will help Canadian businesses and create good jobs for Canadians. That brings us to the matter before the House: Bill C-20 . With all the issues and deeply entrenched problems facing Canada's trade sector, what do the Conservatives bring to this Parliament today? They bring Canadians a free trade agreement with Honduras. Now, this is not surprising.

Although the Conservatives like to brag about the trade agreements they have concluded in the last eight years, the facts, again, tell a different story. In truth, they have concluded a total of six trade agreements with the following countries: Jordan; Panama; Peru; Colombia; a goods-only agreement with four small European countries including Liechtenstein and Iceland; and now Honduras. As is obvious, these are agreements with small economies of limited strategic interest to Canada.

Trade agreements with major developed and developing economies like Japan, India, South Korea, Brazil, China, and South Africa—agreements that would have a material and positive benefit for the Canadian economy, if negotiated well—the Conservatives have been unable to conclude. New Democrats believe that we should apply three important criteria to assess trade agreements.

First, is the proposed partner a democracy that respects human rights, adheres to acceptable environmental standards and Canadian values, and if there are challenges regarding these, can it fairly be said that they are on a positive trajectory toward these goals? Second, is the proposed partner's economy of significant and strategic value to Canada? Third, are the terms of the proposed agreement acceptable? The proposed free trade agreement with Honduras fails this test.

Again, let us look at the facts, and take a closer look at the country to which the current Conservative government wants Canadians to extend preferential trade benefits and closer economic relations. Honduras is a country with a seriously flawed human rights record; weak institutions; corrupt police and army; and a history, both entrenched and recent, of repressive, undemocratic politics. The last democratically elected government, that of President Manuel Zelaya, was toppled by a military coup in June 2009.

This coup was staged by the Honduran army under the pretext of a constitutional crisis that had developed between the supreme court and the president. Following the coup, the government suspended key civil liberties, including freedom of the press and assembly. In the ensuing days, security forces responded to peaceful demonstrations with excessive force and shut down opposition media outlets, causing deaths, scores of injuries, and thousands of arbitrary detentions.

The coup was widely condemned around the world, including by all Latin American nations, the European Union, the United States, and the UN General Assembly. In January 2010, Porfirio Lobo Sosa assumed the presidency through what has overwhelmingly been deemed undemocratic and illegitimate means. Of course, holding an election mere months after the violent military overthrow of the elected administration is hardly an acceptable context for a free and fair election.

Indeed, most foreign governments and election-monitoring agencies refused even to send observers, and many countries rejected the results of the election. The recent election held in November has similarly been condemned by independent observers. Since 2009, NGOs of all types have documented serious human rights abuses. Extra-judicial killings; kidnappings of political figures; intimidation of citizens; severe restrictions on public demonstrations, protest, and freedom of expression; and interference in the independence of the judiciary are well established in Honduras.

Here are some basic facts from independent sources about the situation in Honduras. Honduras ranks 85th out of on the Economist Intelligence Unit's democracy index. That is a slide from being 74th; in other words, it is getting worse. Honduras is now classified as a “hybrid regime”, rather than its previous designation as a “flawed democracy”. Transparency International ranks Honduras as the “most corrupt country in Central America”, which is no small feat. It is a major drug-smuggling centre, and it has the worst income equality in the region.

The U.S. state department estimates that 79% of all cocaine shipments originating in South America land in Honduras. Drugs move from South America through countries like Honduras and other Central American states into Mexico and the United States and Canada.

(1605) Independent observers have noted the increasing levels of violence, as well as organized criminal and gang activity associated with the trade in illegal narcotics. According to The Economist , “the countries in 'the northern triangle' of the Central American isthmus”—and that includes Honduras—“form what is now the most violent region on earth”. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime reports that in there were murders per 100,000 people per year in Honduras, making it the most violent country in Latin America.

In 2012, Honduras became the murder capital of the world, reaching a record high of 7,172 homicides in 2012, or per 100,000 people. In 2013, on average there have been massacres per month, according to the investigative website InSight Crime, which defines “massacre” as an instance where three or more people are murdered at one time. In the previous four years, fewer than 20% of homicide cases have been investigated, let alone prosecuted. As pointed out by the Americas Policy Group, this high level of impunity serves to mask political violence.

Since 2010, there have been more than politically motivated killings and Honduras is now regarded as the world's most dangerous place for journalists. According to a Human Rights Watch report, Honduras has the region's highest rate of journalists killed per capita, with some having been assassinated in the last three years alone. According to the Honduran national human rights commission, 36 journalists were killed between and mid-2013, and have been killed since President Lobo took office.

Today, journalists in Honduras continue to suffer threats, attacks and killings, and authorities consistently fail to investigate these crimes effectively. Peasant activists and LGBT individuals are particularly vulnerable to attacks, yet the government routinely fails to prosecute those responsible. In June 2013, 24 U.S. senators signed a letter expressing concern about the human rights situation in Honduras. Ninety-four members of Congress have called on the U.S. State Department to halt all military aid to Honduras in light of its violent repression of political activity.

At least activists and candidates from the main opposition party, LIBRE, were assassinated since June of 2012, and more have been attacked. On August 25, 2013, just months ago, three leaders of the indigenous Tolupan were shot and killed. There are extensively documented cases of police corruption, with extrajudicial killings by police recorded between January and November alone.

In January 2013, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers called the dismissal of four Supreme Court justices by the Honduran government a violation of international norms and a grave threat to democracy. This is what Mr. Neil Reeder, the director general of the Latin America and Caribbean bureau in DFAIT testified before committee: ...institutions...are...weak. Impunity is pervasive and corruption is a challenge. Corruption within the Honduran police force is a particular problem, which the Government of Honduras...recognizes.

Largely because Central America is situated between the drug-producing countries of South America and the drug-consuming countries to the north, Honduras...[has] been particularly affected by the growth of transnational drug trafficking, human trafficking, and the impact of organized crime. Another element of the violence affecting Honduras is the presence of street gangs, known as maras, which rely on extortion and other forms of crime as...income. Honduras has more of these gangs than all other Central American countries combined, and their activities contribute to crime and insecurity in the country.

Honduras now has...the highest homicide rates in the world, at per 100,000, as compared with 1.8 per 100,000 in Canada. This is the profile of the country that the Conservative government wants Canada to extend preferential trade access and closer economic relations to. In terms of significance to the Canadian economy, the facts reveal the following. Honduras ranks 120th out of countries on the United Nations Human Development Index.

The World Bank categorizes Honduras as a lower-middle income country, and Honduras suffers from extremely unequal income distribution, extreme social inequality, high unemployment, poor health and education. This is the country that the government wants Canadian businesses to compete with. Honduras is currently Canada's 104th export market in terms of export value. In merchandise exports totalled a meagre $38 million and imports $218 million, marking a significant trade deficit. Internal DFAIT analyses confirm that only marginal benefits for the Canadian economy are expected from this deal.

(1610) Although Canada's extractive sector has interests in Honduras, Canadian mining companies have been ensnared in controversial local struggles with citizens and indigenous groups and face allegations of environmental contamination. In terms of the process used by the Conservatives to arrive at this deal, there has been a complete lack of transparency in the negotiation process of this trade agreement.

Despite repeated demands by civil society in Canada, the Government of Canada failed to make public the text of the agreement during the negotiation process, and further, the government's token environmental impact assessment of the free trade agreement, released in October, omitted any assessment of the impact of Canadian investments in Honduras because these figures are considered “confidential”. Also, as is usually the case with the Conservatives, they have allowed no opportunity for either this Parliament or Canadians themselves to comment upon or influence the agreement before it is signed.

We are left with a choice of only voting yes or no. The labour and environmental side agreements are inadequate, given that they are not accompanied by any real enforcement mechanism to ensure they are adhered to. Through the investment

chapter of the Canada-Honduras trade agreement, corporations can sue the Canadian government in international tribunals, hindering Canada's ability to make decisions aimed at protecting the public good. Considering that Honduras is an undemocratic country with weak institutions and low standards, and is of insignificant strategic interest and has a record of serious human rights abuses, New Democrats believe that the majority of Canadians would not agree that preferential trade terms be accorded such a nation.

What the New Democrat opposition wants is a strategic trade policy where we restart multinational negotiations, where we sign trade deals with developed countries that have high standards and developing countries that are on positive trajectories. These are countries like Japan, India, Brazil and South Africa. These are the countries we should be signing trade agreements with, not undemocratic countries like Honduras that are drug trafficking centres, human rights violators and have low standards that will hurt Canadian business. I could do no better than to adopt the words spoken by two Canadians, Mr.

Garry Neil and Ms. Stacey Gomez, who said: ...we really do not believe that it is good public policy for the government to be pursuing trade and investment agreements that are economically basically meaningless with volatile and undemocratic nations like Honduras.... We have long maintained that under the right conditions, trade can generate growth and support the realization of human rights. These conditions simply do not exist in Honduras. Canada should refrain from signing the FTA with Honduras until there is a verifiable improvement in the country’s democratic governance and human rights situation.

Until these things are achieved, the Canada-Honduras FTA will do more harm than good. I believe these are wise words. New Democrats will vote against the agreement accordingly, and I urge all members who want trade to be a positive force in the world economically, politically, socially and environmentally to join us in doing so as well. Mr. Erin O'Toole (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, CPC) : Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague and friend from the trade committee for his speech. He clearl