House of Commons Hansard #77 of the 38th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was students.

Topics

Pope John Paul II
Statements By Members

April 6th, 2005 / 2:15 p.m.

Conservative

Jason Kenney Calgary Southeast, AB

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the man of the century, my hero, a man who will no doubt come to be known in our lifetime as St. John Paul the Great.

We are moved to see how even in death this man of God can evoke such an outpouring of love. During the 26 years of his pontificate, he attracted the largest crowds in human history and was encountered by more people than any man or woman who has ever lived. He did so because he was an icon of self-giving love and a constant and courageous voice of moral clarity.

In every field of human endeavour, in every language and on every continent, he preached and lived the fundamental Christian truth about the human person: that every human life, from the moment of conception to natural death, is created in the image and likeness of God and therefore possesses an inviolable dignity.

He preached this truth in the face of the inhuman ideologies of what he called the century of tears. In the face of the terror of Communism and Nazism, he relentlessly defended the freedoms of conscience and religion.

He was a man whose memory we will always hold dearly. Requiescat in pace.

Sponsorship Program
Statements By Members

2:20 p.m.

Liberal

Françoise Boivin Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois and the Conservative Party are playing a dangerous game threatening Canadians with another election. The two parties are making their disdain for public opinion quite clear.

The Conservatives, by joining with the Bloc, are de facto supporting the cause of sovereignty, and the Bloc is supporting the reactionary policies of a party that has no respect for official languages or human rights.

The stranglehold on virtue is weakening. How does the leader of the Conservative Party justify his support for Quebec's separation? How can the leader of the Bloc Québécois call himself the apostle of transparency, knowing full well that the mother house in Quebec received some one hundred thousand dollars from Groupaction, the company of Jean Brault? Given his ambition to head the Parti Québécois, will he demand an inquiry into the awarding of these sums as he did for the Liberals?

The new slogan of the unCanadian alliance should be—

Sponsorship Program
Statements By Members

2:20 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Elmwood—Transcona has the floor.

The Environment
Statements By Members

2:20 p.m.

NDP

Bill Blaikie Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Mr. Speaker, at a time when so many other issues dominate the domestic and Canada-U.S. political scene, I rise to ask the House to focus for a moment on the fact that an entire Canadian ecosystem is in imminent danger because of the Liberal government's failure to get the American government to refer the Devils Lake diversion project to the International Joint Commission on Boundary Waters.

Premier Gary Doer has been working all out on this issue but he needs a federal counterpart who is fully focused on this issue.

The Prime Minister came back from Texas empty-handed. Time is short. Lake Winnipeg, our sixth great lake, is in danger of being permanently contaminated and soon.

I urge all MPs to join in the campaign to save Manitoba from this disaster. It is not a regional issue. It is an issue of national environmental integrity. Security is a two-way street. Violating Canada's environmental security by trans-boundary water pollution is not an example of what good neighbours do to each other.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, after Jean Chrétien testified and showed his complete contempt at the Gomery inquiry, the Prime Minister met with his caucus, punched his fists wildly in the air and told them that Chrétien did, “a tremendous job for Canada and for the Liberal Party”.

Since I do not hear any applause for that today, does the Prime Minister still stand by that statement?

Sponsorship Program
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard
Québec

Liberal

Paul Martin Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I do not remember the hon. member being at the caucus. I am not quite sure how he would be able to describe that, but if he would like to join us and become a bit more progressive, I am sure he could. After all, we too in our caucus have chairs that can be kicked.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Sponsorship Program
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

The Speaker

I am afraid that is all we will have on that answer.

The hon. Leader of the Opposition.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the Prime Minister that I do not want to be under investigation.

It has now come to light that hundreds of thousands of tax dollars may have been funnelled through the Liberal sponsorship program to the Parti Québécois. I guess the keystone crooks stole the money and gave it to the wrong people.

Could the Prime Minister stand in his place and guarantee Canadian taxpayers that not one red cent of their money went to the separatist cause in Quebec in the name of national unity?

Sponsorship Program
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard
Québec

Liberal

Paul Martin Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, let me say that I am delighted, after so many months of an attempted co-habitation, that the Leader of the Opposition has finally recognized the threat of the separatist cause and the problems that he has in working with them hand in hand.

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, what the Gomery commission will show is that the best friend of the separatist cause in Quebec is the Liberal Party of Canada.

Yesterday the Prime Minister refused to split the Atlantic accords from the budget bill. He told the House, falsely he will have to admit, that the health accord was part of the budget bill. It is not. It is Bill C-39. The Conservative Party will agree today to pass this bill through all stages this afternoon.

If the Prime Minister is serious about passing the bill, will he agree to this proposal?

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard
Québec

Liberal

Paul Martin Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, this is absolute nonsense. The Leader of the Opposition, the Conservative Party, and the NDP had absolutely nothing to do with the successful signings of the Atlantic accord for Newfoundland and Labrador and for Nova Scotia.

I want to say that it was the members of the Newfoundland and Labrador caucus and the members of the Nova Scotia caucus who pushed for it. The opposition members were 100% absent from the file. They did not support the government. They were not there and it is ridiculous for them to stand up now and try to take any credit.

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Conservative

Loyola Hearn St. John's South, NL

Mr. Speaker, what a pile of unadulterated bull and the Prime Minister knows it.

The Prime Minister also knows that it would take 15 minutes on a word processor to prepare a new bill that would cause revenues to flow to Newfoundland and Nova Scotia immediately.

He is using the longest possible route to approval. Last year's budget implementation bill is still with the Liberal controlled Senate. If the Prime Minister can split Bill C-43 for Kyoto, why can you not do it for Atlantic Canadians?

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member knows that I am not in the business of splitting bills.

The right hon. Prime Minister has the floor and the hon. member for St. John's South—Mount Pearl will address the Chair.

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard
Québec

Liberal

Paul Martin Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, not only did the official opposition have nothing to do with the successful signing of the Atlantic accords, but let me say that in the case of Nova Scotia, the Leader of the Opposition during the election campaign, and confirmed in the Conservative Party's recent convention, brought forth a suggestion that would have deprived Nova Scotia not only of the Atlantic accord, but would have reduced its equalization. The member for Central Nova once again got suckered by the Leader of the Opposition.