Bill Casey

[War Veterans Allowance Act, March 25th, 2009]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-345, An Act to amend the War Veterans Allowance Act (allied veterans).

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to table this bill today. The purpose of the bill is to amend the War Veterans Allowance Act to restore access to war veterans allowance benefits to allied veterans who did not reside in Canada when they began serving with an allied force or at an any during their service or who resided outside of Canada for any time after 1996.

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

[Infrastructure, March 12th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, in my prebudget submission to the Minister of Finance, I highlighted the Colchester Civic Centre as a priority by the province and the municipality as an infrastructure project that is shovel-ready. In fact, the province has already committed $10 million to the project, the municipality $11 million and the community $4 million.

Both the mayors of Truro and the municipality of Colchester wrote to the minister in December asking for federal participation.

I wonder if the minister could indicate when a positive answer might be forthcoming?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, March 12th, 2009]

With regard to the federal emergency preparedness funding to the provinces and territories over the last five years for firefighting equipment: (a) how much funding has the government contributed to those specific projects which involved the purchase of firefighting equipment through the Joint Emergency Preparedness Program (JEPP); (b) what is the specific breakdown of the government's emergency preparedness contributions, by province and territory; and (c) other than the JEPP program, what other funding has been made available to the provinces, territories and municipalities to specifically support the purchase of firefighting equipment?

[Business of Supply, March 10th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, my whip was not paying attention when the vote came by and I would like my vote counted yes on this motion.

[Public Works and Government Services, March 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, when Public Works and Government Services Canada called for tenders for the refit and overhaul of submarines, the tenders came in at $53 million and $57 million, but when the contract was announced, it had somehow gone to $370 million, $313 million more than the highest tender.

I wonder if the minister could explain to the House why the contract was granted for $370 million when the highest tender was only $57 million.

[March 3rd, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I still did not get the answer to my question about the ongoing transitional payment but I think it is just for one year, if I am not mistaken.

However, I want to slide into another issue that we talked about before. The October 10, 2007 deal had a 3.5% escalator clause for Nova Scotia when the fixed base formula based on the 2005 agreement was used. Each year, Nova Scotia was supposed to get a 3.5% cumulative escalator increase in its equalization payments.

In the budget it says that increases to equalization will be capped at the overall growth of the economy. In fact, I think the parliamentary secretary just said that again a moment ago. I wonder if he could confirm for sure that the 3.5% escalator for Nova Scotia will remain in place until 2020 as originally agreed to in the October 10, 2007 agreement.

[March 3rd, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to follow up today on my question about a $75 million equalization payment that was committed to Nova Scotia. I asked the minister, at the time the payment was promised, if he could table the details of the $75 million agreement. It seemed to be a verbal arrangement but I think that anything worth $75 million should be committed to paper when it is between two levels of government. I thought that was a reasonable question.

I also asked if the transition payment would only happen one year, this year, or whether it would happen for the subsequent years for the term of the agreement. The minister replied that they had made the arrangement and that Nova Scotia was happy. However, this is not Nova Scotia. This is the House of Commons and it is our job as opposition members to find out the details of these arrangements and these deals and hold the government accountable.

I am again asking the very distinguished parliamentary secretary, who is here to answer the question today, whether the $75 million arrangement is only verbal or has it been committed to paper and whether it extend for more than one year. All we have seen in the media is that it is just for one year. Had the changes not been made, we would have had that equivalent amount for five years at least and maybe even till 2020, which is the extent of the term of the Atlantic accord.

Could the parliamentary secretary tell us whether the arrangement has been committed to paper, what the details are of the deal and whether it will continue on to subsequent years or is it just a one shot deal?

[The Environment, February 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the 2007 United Nations Panel on Global Warming identified the Bay of Fundy as one of only two regions in all of North America most vulnerable to rising sea levels from global warming. In late December, the area near Advocate Harbour, Nova Scotia, suffered the worst erosion damage in living memory. This is just the beginning according to the United Nations Panel on Global Warming.

Now that we know that this is a global situation and a global problem, will the federal government agree to partner with the provinces involved in building protective structures to prevent disastrous effects of the predicted rising sea levels from this global warming situation?

[Business of Supply, February 12th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I vote yea.

[Ethics, February 12th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, on September 23, 2007, the RCMP informed the Conservatives that there was no evidence to back up their accusations of theft and embezzlement against me by their official agent. Yet, two weeks later, other Conservatives distributed the same accusations of theft and embezzlement to the media and on the Internet. In fact, members can see those accusations against me on the website stephentaylor.ca.

Last week, the Minister of Public Safety said there was only one person involved, but now obviously there is more than one Conservative, and I do not mean Conservatives in this House, but there is more than one Conservative involved. Will they now release the names of all those Conservatives?