House of Commons Hansard #45 of the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was language.

Topics

Finance
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Markham—Unionville, ON

Mr. Speaker, apart from that GST nonsense, I have not heard anything so geographically challenged since the public safety minister told Canadians that the Niagara River flows south.

I have heard that the Prime Minister's two favourite words are “discipline” and “consequences”.

Why was this minister, who broke the rules, not disciplined, and why did he not suffer the consequences of his violations? Will the Prime Minister at least apologize to Canadians?

Finance
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Whitby—Oshawa
Ontario

Conservative

Jim Flaherty Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite says that the GST is nonsense. He ridicules Canadians and the taxes they pay by saying that the GST is nonsense.

The GST is a permanent tax reduction for Canadians, a $12 billion per annum tax reduction for Canadians. He would raise it. When he was asked about the GST, the member for Markham—Unionville said, “It's an option. All I can say is that it is consistent with our approach”.

The Liberal approach is to tax and spend and raise taxes.

Ethics
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

Karen Redman Kitchener Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are increasingly seeing the government for what it is: vindictive, dishonest and incompetent.

There is no better example of the dishonesty of the Conservatives than their in and out scheme. Elections Canada caught the Conservative Party in the act breaking the law. For seven months, the government has refused hearings on this issue and now has resorted to simply shutting down the committee.

Clearly, accountability means little to the Prime Minister when it is about his own party's ethics and it is under the microscope. Why?

Ethics
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

York—Simcoe
Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform

Mr. Speaker, for the Liberal Party all it is about is hijacking the institutions of Parliament for partisan purposes. The Liberals do that all the time. They have done that with the procedure and House affairs committee by seeking an investigation into election spending of one party while steadfastly resisting any investigation into their own activities and using their majority as opposition party to ensure that happened.

That is called partisan hijacking of parliamentary committees. They did that with the foreign affairs committee to block any debate on the Afghanistan Manley panel and it is what they have done over at the Senate where they are blocking the tackling violent crime bill that this House voted for as a confidence matter.

Ethics
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Karen Redman Kitchener Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, it was the Chief Electoral Officer who said that the Conservatives breached the law. Every other party in this House followed it.

For months we have been trying to get to the bottom of this scheme. The Conservatives have no shame about using their dirty tricks manual to shut down our committee. Rules are simply thrown out the window when the PMO directs what is happening in committees.

Why is the government so afraid of allowing Conservative candidates to testify before the parliamentary committee? What have the Conservatives got to hide?

Ethics
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

York—Simcoe
Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform

Mr. Speaker, the question is very simply what does the Liberal Party have to hide? Why will the Liberals not allow this investigation they want to apply to their party? Why will they not open up their books? When there is affidavit evidence documenting exactly their spending habits, why do they prevent that from being considered by the committee?

We want all the books open. We want every party investigated. We know why the Liberals do not want it. They saw what happened the last time their party was investigated: $40 million went missing and they lost government. They do not like that.

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Vivian Barbot Papineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, we learned that millions of dollars sent from Canada for humanitarian aid in Afghanistan are in fact in private banks and impossible to trace. Yet in budget 2007, the Conservative government promised greater accountability.

The truth is, nothing has been done. How can the government explain that, despite its promises, it is still impossible to know exactly where the money intended for humanitarian aid in Afghanistan is going?

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Durham
Ontario

Conservative

Bev Oda Minister of International Cooperation

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, there are full processes for full audits, monitoring, reports and site visits. What do those results bring? They bring more children in school. They bring an increase in income. It means that seven million more children have been immunized for polio. Infant mortality is 22%.

That is where Canadian dollars are going and that is why Canadians support our efforts in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Vivian Barbot Papineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is easy to tell us how much money was promised for schools, for children and for which children. But this still does not give us an answer, an exact answer, to our question.

Furthermore, the Prime Minister said he accepted the main points of the Manley report. That means that he agrees with the recommendation to ensure greater accountability.

Does the government intend to implement that recommendation any faster than it plans to make good on the promise in its own budget?

Afghanistan
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Durham
Ontario

Conservative

Bev Oda Minister of International Cooperation

Mr. Speaker, we do provide the information. In fact, this government provided $60 million to the Afghan government to support the education system. The results that we are going to see from that are thousands of schools, hundreds of female teachers being trained, school books, and curriculum development. The results are there, the numbers are there, and $60 million will go a long way to improving the education system in Afghanistan.

The Francophonie
Oral Questions

February 6th, 2008 / 2:40 p.m.

Bloc

Richard Nadeau Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who is Minister for la Francophonie and a francophone Quebecker no less, spoke solely in English at the gala of the Canada-Arab Business Council. Does he not know that in several Arab countries, French is used as a second language, and that a number of them are part of the Francophonie?

Does the minister realize that it is shocking for him to use only English, as Minister for la Francophonie, to address an audience for whom French is not a foreign language?

The Francophonie
Oral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Beauce
Québec

Conservative

Maxime Bernier Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is trying to make something out of nothing. He is exaggerating. His comments are exaggerated.

What has the Bloc Québécois done for the French fact here in Ottawa in over 13 years? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

The Francophonie
Oral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Bloc

Richard Nadeau Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, we speak French. The minister, who boasts about recognizing the Quebec nation, is not able to use his own language to greet his audience.

Does he realize the image that he is sending to the international community, as Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister for la Francophonie? Does he not think that under the circumstances, the least he could do is apologize?

The Francophonie
Oral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Beauce
Québec

Conservative

Maxime Bernier Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, if I were the hon. member, I would be ashamed. I would be ashamed of asking such a question in this House. I would be ashamed of questioning my personal attachment to my mother tongue. I am a proud Quebecker and a passionate Canadian.

Canadian Grain Commission
Oral Questions

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

Raymond Simard Saint Boniface, MB

Mr. Speaker, this vindictive, dishonest, incompetent government will stop at nothing to silence the voices of dissent. The latest attempt is a gag order issued to Canadian Grain Commission employees. The gag order says employees are allowed to express their views, but only as long as they do not criticize the Conservative government.

Given the numerous firings by the government, the union representing these workers is taking the gag order as a threat.

Will the government let these employees speak to the issues that affect them and put an end to this Conservative reign of terror?