Jack Layton

[National Defence, December 1st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence. Yesterday Colin Powell told me that the current version of star wars--

[Privacy, November 30th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, so much for fixing the democratic deficit. There is a unanimous report from the House of Commons committee relevant to the issue and the minister will not act. It is very clear.

I would now like to ask the President of the Treasury Board a question about the Patriot Act and the protection of personal information. We know that CIBC customer files are subject to the Patriot Act.

What we do not know, and this is my question for the minister, is how many Canadian men and women are currently being investigated?

[Textile and Clothing Industry, November 30th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

Thousands of jobs in Canada's garment industry are at risk right now because the minister has not signed off on an extension of the duty remissions for imported fabrics. All it takes is the stroke of a pen and thousands of jobs could be protected right now. We will provide him with the pen if he will sign today. This would protect jobs in Winnipeg, in Vancouver, in Toronto, in Montreal, all across the country.

Why will the minister not act? Will he tell us today that he will sign off on this extension?

[National Defence, November 29th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, discussing the defence shield at the same time as opposing weapons in space is a little like considering eating a Big Mac and suggesting that a person is a vegetarian. It is just simply not possible.

There are other reasons to say no to the missile defence shield. This project is anything but a multilateral initiative. It is the starting signal for the next arms race. People do not want to be part of George Bush's arsenal.

Tomorrow, will he simply say no to George Bush regarding the missile defence shield?

[National Defence, November 29th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. For almost two years the Prime Minister has suggested that he favours missile defence, but on the other hand, he is opposed to weapons in space. This is despite all the factual evidence regarding the linkage of these two. It is a kind of voluntary ignorance that we are dealing with here.

Will the Prime Minister take the occasion of his meetings with the President to ask why the U.S. missile defence agency has put in its budget request the request for weaponization of space?

[The Environment, November 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, ignorance of the facts does not make them go away. The evidence is absolutely there and incontrovertible.

My next question is for the Minister of the Environment.

It is very interesting that we find Canada supporting the George Bush administration in Iceland in agreeing finally that the facts of climate change are incontrovertible.

However, why did Canada side with the U.S. in making sure that the recommendations of the scientists for an action plan were not adopted, once again, offside with Canadians?

[National Defence, November 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence.

Canadians are increasingly opposing George Bush's star wars project in missile defence. Now, incredibly, we learn that the Prime Minister will not even raise the issue with the president when he is here in Canada. This is shocking.

The fact is that this program will put weapons into space. The Prime Minister likes to pretend that he does not know this fact.

Will the Prime Minister at least ask the President what the facts are when they meet here in Ottawa next week?

[Canada-U.S. Relations, November 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, it will be to Canada's shame if this turns out to be another Liberal broken promise.

My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. A majority of Canadians do not share the values of President Bush. What we want to know is why the decision has been made not to ensure that members of Parliament have an opportunity to present their views to the president directly.

My question for the Deputy Prime Minister is, why will there be no opportunity provided, given that these values are having an effect here and around the world?

[Hiv-Aids, November 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, in the last election and over the last year the Prime Minister has said that Canada has a moral obligation to address the issue of AIDS in Africa. Yet not one pill, no medication, no drugs have flowed from Canada to Africa, and there is no sign on the horizon that there will be any action.

Big pharma refuses to reduce its prices. The generics do not have any incentive to actually produce these medications. Of course, 8,000 people a day are dying due to AIDS in Africa.

When will the first pills be delivered?

[Child Poverty, November 24th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, we welcome these initiatives and look forward to assisting in any way we can.

I want to congratulate the member for Ottawa Centre for standing to raise the issue of child poverty. Fifteen years ago in the House, with the unanimous support of all parties, he raised that issue and there was a commitment to reduce child poverty in this country.

What we have seen instead are targets for debt reduction and for every other kind of economic objective except the reduction of child poverty. We now have more than a million children living in poverty and we have disgraceful answers from the government. Will the finance minister allocate some resources?