Jack Layton

[Government Policies, October 20th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

On his recent foreign trip, foreign leaders had to point out to the Prime Minister that he had not kept his promise on foreign aid.

Students, meanwhile, of course know that he has not kept his promise on student debt. People trying to breathe clean air know that he has not kept his promise on pollution control. Cities know that he has not kept his 5¢ promise and the result is property taxes are going up.

Will the Prime Minister give an undertaking that he will keep all his promises before he starts to reduce taxes?

[Tommy Douglas, October 20th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, on October 20, 1904, Tommy Douglas entered the world and set about changing it.

Today marks the 100th anniversary of the birth of Tommy Douglas, and I am honoured to salute his memory.

As the first premier in our party's history, he brought public medicare to the people of Saskatchewan. As the first leader of the NDP and an MP in the House, he helped expand that victory to all Canadians in a minority Parliament that worked.

Tommy Douglas modernized Saskatchewan with roads, water, telecommunications and electricity. He humanized Canada with his passion and ideas.

Fourteen years before John Diefenbaker, Tommy Douglas passed a bill of rights.

His commitment to these rights led him to take a stand against the War Measures Act, a brave step that inspired me to join this party.

A smiling bust of him sits in my office, reminding me that this place can make life better for people.

On behalf of a grateful nation, we remain awed by Tommy's courage and touched by his compassion. Let us be guided by his words, “Courage, my friends, 'tis never too late to make a better world”.

[Government Contracts, October 19th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the Prime Minister's Office is becoming a halfway house for recovering corporate lobbyists, and that's the truth of the matter.

The fact is that some of Canada's biggest polluters and biggest privatizers have made their way right inside the heart of the Prime Minister's Office and are now shaping public policy. Canadians do not appreciate that. They do not like government being run that way. Maybe the Prime Minister's campaign could be run that way, but the Government of Canada should not be.

Will the Prime Minister support, immediately, legislation that provides for a cooling off period for lobbyists coming into the government?

[Government Contracts, October 19th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, today we learn that up to $50,000 in so-called fringe benefits were paid to former corporate lobbyists who are now working in the Prime Minister's Office. In fact, while still on the corporate payroll, one of these individuals was earning up to $91 an hour from the government at the same time, working apparently on the forest file.

Can the Prime Minister tell the tens of thousands of workers who have been thrown out of work and who used to earn $19 an hour why she was worth so much money?

[The Environment, October 18th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, we have heard from the government that the Speech from the Throne has addressed the whole question of Kyoto. Two sentences were all we got on the biggest environmental crisis facing the entire planet, and yet we have had 11 years of inaction that has left us with a record as the worst polluter in the industrialized world. George Bush does a better job, quite frankly, at achieving environmental objectives than the government does.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Does he think it is quite all right to have no rules to govern our--

[The Environment, October 18th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of the Environment is watering the gas again, with respect to the environment and our Kyoto commitments. He thinks it is acceptable to do whatever one wants and then wait and see whether the necessary goals have been met. Because of that, we are the worst country in the industrialized world with respect to our greenhouse gas emissions.

I ask the Prime Minister: does he think that this kind of laissez-faire is an adequate response to this environmental crisis?

[Resumption Of Debate On Address In Reply, October 18th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, we want to acknowledge here the results of these discussions and we will be supporting the proposals brought forward by the Leader of the Opposition.

There have been extensive discussions and they have produced a very positive result. It sets a good tone for the work that the House can now embark upon.

Members will know that it has been a particular preoccupation of ours that electoral reform and proportional representation be considered by Canadians. We are off in a very positive direction to do that now. In fact, we will bring a motion to the standing committee in order to encourage public hearings on that matter.

On the question of national missile defence, we have called for a vote in the House. Now that it has been agreed to in the motion, we have made a significant step, all of us together, in terms of addressing the democratic deficit. We will bring a motion to the foreign affairs committee calling for public hearings on this matter to ensure that full information is indeed available.

On employment insurance, I want to salute the work of all parties to have the large surplus that has not gone toward the workers addressed by the House. This motion takes us in that direction. It will also allow us to discuss the adequacy of employment insurance to meet the needs of workers and people who have been thrown out of work.

This is all very positive and that is why we are going to be providing our support for the recommendation of the Leader of the Opposition.

[Public Service, October 15th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the government's ineptitude in the public service issue is extraordinary.

My question is for the President of the Treasury Board. Our employees of the federal public service are out of their jobs. They have been without a contract for a year and a half in many cases. The government's ineptitude here has been extraordinary. We did not need to be in this situation; we are awash in a surplus. Can we have an update on when this strike will end and what action the government is taking to bring it to an end?

[Taxation, October 14th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, there is absolutely no target anywhere for the reduction of homelessness. There is absolutely no target anywhere for the reduction of boiled water orders. There are absolutely no targets anywhere for the reduction of smog. The fact is that we set targets for debt reduction and we meet them, but we do not meet any other targets that are important to Canadians.

After having put $61 billion toward debt reduction, is the minister prepared to look a homeless person in the eye and say that absolutely every cent of that was worth it?

[Taxation, October 14th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the debt, the Prime Minister has established artificial targets. It is interesting to consider this business of targets. Why are there no targets for the environment? The national debt targets, which are artificial, are always met. Environmental targets are never met. The national debt is going down, but student debt is going up. Twenty-five million dollars a day is now going against the debt. The debts of municipalities are going up by $11 million a day according to the FCM.

Will the minister and the government finally determine that they will put something against clean water, and set some targets for clean water, not just the debt?