Marc Garneau

[Children's Commissioner of Canada Act, June 11th, 2009]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-418, An Act to establish a Children’s Commissioner of Canada.

Mr. Speaker, as a new parliamentarian, it is a great honour and pleasure for me to present my first private member's bill to create a commissioner for children for Canada, supported by my colleague for Winnipeg South Centre.

Canada ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child almost 20 years ago. I believe that it is now time for Canada to create the position of commissioner for children to ensure that their rights are protected. I will limit myself to reading the very short purpose of this proposed act. It states:

The purpose of this act is to establish an independent official to ensure governmental accountability in respect of the Convention, and to promote, monitor and report on the effective implementation of Canada's obligations under the Convention that are within the legislative authority of Parliament, in order to advance the principle that children are entitled to special safeguards, care and assistance, including appropriate legal protection.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[International Trade, June 8th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, since the minister was there, he will have heard Canadian municipalities express their frustration with growing U.S. protectionism by threatening to retaliate in kind.

While we all know that protectionism is the worst possible reaction to a global recession, the government's absence from the bargaining table in Washington has forced the hand of Canadian cities and communities. Canadian manufacturers and steel producers are being locked out of U.S. contracts because of buy America provisions.

Since the American Congress has yet to listen to the Conservatives, what is their plan now?

[International Trade, June 8th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, our towns and municipalities feel that they have been abandoned by the Conservatives. It seems as though the infrastructure money will never come, and it is already June 8. Furthermore, the protectionist measures passed by Congress are threatening the Canadian companies that rely on the American market. No one in the United States seems to be listening to the Conservatives.

What is their plan to combat American protectionism and to avoid a trade war?

[Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement Act, June 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague and I would like to ask her a question. What contradiction or paradox does she see in an approach that favours free trade with another country and, at the same time, acceptance by Canadian mines of their social responsibilities?

[Automotive Industry, June 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada will become part owner of both GM and Chrysler, as Canadian taxpayers provide 20% of the rescue package.

The Council of Canadian Academies has recently pointed out that private sector R and D advancement in Canada is low. This is a priceless opportunity for the government to ensure that both GM and Chrysler commit to performing some of their R and D in Canada in proportion to Canada's investment.

Canadians can, and should, contribute to developing the cars of tomorrow. Will the Conservatives seize this opportunity and make it happen?

[Aerospace Industry, May 15th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I was hoping to hear about a strategy.

I have already asked this question twice in recent months. Let me try again a third time.

My question is very simple. It relates to a promise made by the Conservatives during the last election, namely, to provide $200 million in new funding for the strategic aerospace and defence initiative. That program is essential to the development of new technologies.

When will the Conservatives follow through on that promise?

[Aerospace Industry, May 15th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, CAE has just announced that it is laying off 700 employees, including 600 in the Montreal area. These layoffs are in addition to the job losses at Bombardier, Pratt & Whitney and other aerospace companies. The Canadian aerospace industry is the fourth largest in the world, and half of that industry is located in Quebec. In fact, the aerospace industry is to Quebec what the auto industry is to Ontario.

What do the Conservatives intend to do for the aerospace sector?

[Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act, May 5th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question.

The issue of a charitable registration number has not been raised during debate this time, but it was raised in the past when I was not yet sitting in the House of Commons. The question was not raised again during these discussions and meetings with the witnesses.

We know there is another department involved when it comes to charitable organizations, the Canada Revenue Agency. At this point, there is a consensus among the members of the committee, who believe it is important to keep these two areas, not-for-profit organizations and charitable organizations, in their own niches.

[Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act, May 5th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague from Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca is always thinking broadly in terms of policy in an incredible number of different areas dealing with government business.

During our deliberations in the three months that we saw witnesses, the issue of tax benefits did not come up. Like the hon. member, I certainly agree that people in the not-for-profit corporations, and I am an honorary patron of one myself, devote an incredible amount of their personal time to good causes, without remuneration. The great majority of not-for-profit corporations are made up of volunteers, and they do wonderful things.

The idea of recognizing the enormous contribution they make through some form of tax benefit is certainly appropriate, and perhaps it should be brought up at a future time. For the purposes of Bill C-4, it was not an issue that was raised specifically within the context of the law itself.

[Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act, May 5th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from the Bloc for his very pertinent question which was thoroughly presented by his colleagues who were members of the committee.

The classification of not-for-profit organizations was presented as the member did in his question. However, after listening the Bloc members' arguments, the committee decided not to proceed with a classification of not-for-profit organizations for the moment.