House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2008, with 60% of the vote.
Chile April 16th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the people of Canada were exceptionally generous in the situation in Haiti. The Government of Canada matched that kind of generosity.
The difference is the difference in the economies, the difference in the countries. The approach the Government of Canada is taking with respect to Chile is significantly different from the approach with respect to Haiti.
The member's question belies the fact that he does not recognize the difference between the two societies and the two situations.
Jobs and Economic Growth Act April 13th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I am a little bit unclear. If the member does not want an election which is why she did not turn up or she did not turn up because she was busy in her constituency, I am terribly confused. Perhaps the member can clarify this. Is she going to turn up next time and perhaps she could also tell us why she did not turn up last time or was it something to do with the Liberal inaction policy? How does this all fit together? It seems so bizarre.
Privilege April 12th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to this debate today as well as to previous submissions that have been made in Parliament. I recognize that you are the longest-serving Speaker of this chamber, and it says much about your ability to be able to parse an awful lot of the stuff that ends up going in your direction. It also says a lot about the confidence members have in your judgments.
I would suggest there are a couple of practical issues here. First off, I happen to sit on the special committee on Afghanistan and I have never been able to figure it out. Even if the information was given to the members of the committee, myself being one, we could not use it. It is information that is highly secret, information that many nations in the world would have a lot of difficulty with the release of, if we take into account the submission of my colleague.
We may be able to consider it, but how would we be able to put it in the public domain, in any event? It is information that is being shielded because of the public interest, information that is being shielded because of our concern for our armed forces and personnel who are putting their lives on the line minute by minute, second by second, not only in Afghanistan but in other parts of the world. If this information is given to the committee, how can the committee use it? It cannot.
It cannot use it, because if it were to use it and come forward with particular conclusions without revealing what the information was, the people of Canada still would not accept that explanation. They would want to know on what basis the committee came to that conclusion. The fallacy of committee members asking for uncensored or unredacted information is evident in and of itself.
Furthermore, I take a little exception to my friend from the NDP trying to indicate that these redactions, these blank pages, happened by some kind of whim, as if there were no organization to it. Mr. Speaker, of course, you would be fully aware, as I think most Canadians are, although perhaps my friend from the NDP is not, that redactions are very common in legal proceedings and are covered under the Canada Evidence Act.
These are not whimsical redactions. These redactions are done by people who are completely outside the political process, particularly the partisan political process, who are looking at the best interests of our nation and the people who have gone to Afghanistan and are putting their lives on the line.
Here is where we are. I have been really quite interested over the last decade in watching many of the decisions that have been made by the Supreme Court of Canada, particularly on the issue of the charter. As we have seen the Supreme Court come to some conclusions, some of us have been marginally and sometimes grotesquely critical, but nonetheless we watch what has been going on.
It has come to the conclusion in many instances, notwithstanding what the law is, that for the common good, for the good of the nation, the people of Canada and society, notwithstanding what the charter or the Constitution may say, the decision to go in the other direction would be in the best interests of the people of Canada. Mr. Speaker, I suggest that you have that opportunity.
I recognize, as did my colleague from Saskatchewan, the expertise of the member for Scarborough—Rouge River, particularly his ability to bring forward many of these historic precedents. These are good lessons, lessons that could be taught in universities well into the future. It is good history, which is good to know, but we come down to the basic fact.
Number one, the evidence the committee is looking for, should it be brought forward, in practical terms could not be used by the committee in any event. You, sir, have the opportunity to judge that, notwithstanding all the arguments, the fact is that this information, for the good of our nation, for the protection of our armed forces, cannot possibly be brought forward. As a consequence, I would suggest your judgment might be to consider that, notwithstanding all the arguments, you might save the opposition members from their own folly, you might give them a way out of this box they have put themselves into, because there is no responsible government of any partisan description that, as Government of Canada, could possibly release these documents in an unredacted and a grossly irresponsible form. It could not happen.
Mr. Speaker, I suggest you might come back with the judgment that, notwithstanding all the good arguments that all lead in this particular direction, the practical reality is that my judgment must be that this question of privilege fail.
Jobs and Economic Growth Act April 1st, 2010
Mr. Speaker, it has been very entertaining to listen to my friend. His speech could have been better started with, “Once, long ago and far away”, and he could have started his fairytale that way. His explanation of how the Liberals handled employment insurance is absurd. The fact is that the Liberals constantly ran a surplus so that the employment insurance fund became a form of employment tax.
I can recall sitting on his side of the House when the finance minister, Paul Martin, stood in this place and admitted that he had taken the unemployment insurance surplus, had put it into general revenue and spent it. The money is gone. It was spent by the previous government. Let us be clear that the money no longer exists because it went out through the Liberal government. It is gone.
I do not understand how the member can possibly stand there and tell us this fairytale.
Madam Speaker, apparently, I have been speaking to the deaf because the reality is that we have set priorities and these priorities have been well publicized, unlike the Liberals who just used to shovel money out the door.
Furthermore, the member is completely distorting the truth when he says that the countries of Africa are concerned. It was our government, of all of the G8 countries, that ended up doubling our aid to Africa in the last five years.
For him to stand and say that they are concerned because the aid is being cut is simply untrue, and quite frankly unworthy of the member.
Madam Speaker, I suppose we do reach points of disappointment with some of the opposition members. We have been down this furrow many times. I do not know how much deeper we can dig it.
The member, in his speech tonight, again has made some gross exaggerations, distortions of truth to the point of putting it in a place of unrecognizability. I really do not understand what he does not understand about setting priorities. Our government has set priorities and we have enunciated those priorities in a very public way. KAIROS, along with every other organization with whom our government and previous governments have had a relationship, was aware of those priorities before it ever made its application.
Unlike the Liberals, who just used to take taxpayers' money and kind of shovel it out the door and see what kind of results they could get, we have decided that we are going to be very precise. We want to increase food security. We want to put an emphasis on children and youth, and we want to create a situation of sustainable economic growth.
Further, we have now come to our 20 countries of focus. It might be of interest to the member, maybe not, I do not know, but I happen to have had a meeting with a foreign affairs minister from Africa just yesterday. He came to Canada with a tremendous question in his mind, “What have we done wrong as a nation? Why is our relationship with Canada falling apart?”
It was based, in no small part, on the kind of exaggerations that the member, the Liberals, the Bloc and the NDP have all been creating; this myth, this aura that somehow we are not concerned about countries like Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya and in that area, and other countries of Africa. He came with this big question, “What have we done wrong?”
I sat down and I took 20 minutes with him and I went through our program as to what our 20 countries of focus are all about and what our priorities are. I told him that there was a much bigger picture that he could take advantage of going into the future. After 20 minutes he was totally satisfied because he had been persuaded by me that in fact the distortions that have been created by our political opponents, for their own Canadian domestic needs, was incorrect. When he left with the correct information from me on behalf of the government, he was perfectly happy and perfectly satisfied.
Member organizations that relate to KAIROS, in fact, over the last three years have received $100 million. If KAIROS wishes to reapply in another season at another time, and comply with our priorities, it too would have the opportunity to be successful in receiving funding.
Foreign Affairs March 31st, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the member is getting involved in speculation. There has not been any decision made at this particular point. No decision has been made on this particular program. It would be really valuable if the member were to do her research and wait for the response from the government before attacking the government.
Prostate Cancer March 31st, 2010
Mr. Speaker, over 90% of prostate cancer cases can be cured if physicians diagnose and treat the most common cancer to afflict Canadian men in its earliest stages.
The member for Toronto—Danforth has my admiration for raising the level of awareness about this disease. His public gesture of courage showed Canadian men and their families that they are not alone in their daily fight to combat this illness, but more needs to be done. Prostate Cancer Canada is totally dedicated to eliminating this disease through research, education and awareness.
By uniting this country and this chamber today in the fight against prostate cancer, the organization has made great strides in becoming a world leader in the fight. Government members are proud to wear the ties and scarves that are a symbol of Prostate Cancer Canada to show their support for the member for Toronto—Danforth and all Canadians who have had or are battling this disease.
I suggested to the NDP leader that he looked very good in a blue tie today. He suggested his father would be proud and I agree, because we can all be proud of the unity in the House on this issue.
Canada-Jordan Free Trade Act March 29th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I listened with great intent to the NDP speaker and I have finally concluded that the NDP sees the glass as half empty whereas most Canadians see it as being half full.
Canadians have the capacity to be competitive in so many ways, as we have shown repeatedly. Whether it is in sports, industry or society, we can compete. We are the best in the world in so many different areas and yet as I listened to the member and the other NDP member who I made a comment about, I kept hearing that the glass was half empty and that we are somehow deficient. I just do not understand that.
Just by way of observation, I would note, however, that the coalition is alive and well. I see that the leader of the NDP's thoughts about corporate tax reductions have rubbed off on the Liberal leader. It is nice to see that the coalition lives. I am very pleased about that.
Canada-Jordan Free Trade Act March 29th, 2010
I'm sorry I missed it.