Rick Norlock

[Canada-EFTA Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, May 9th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the hon. member as she spoke about her objection to this great free trade agreement that we are debating now and which looks as though it will come to fruition.

I listened with interest to her criticism of the shipbuilding aspect of it but I also listened when the minister spoke about the agreement and the protection put in it to protect, for many years, our shipbuilding industry.

However, I find it rather curious that here we are creating hundreds of thousands of jobs and perhaps millions of man-hours for people who work in an industry that we all know was at risk, and, in one particular case, the Davie Yards, which was in financial distress and has been for some time, how this bodes well for the health of that particular industry.

I do not know how the member can construe the tremendous investment by the Minister of National Defence and the procurement by the Canadian government with regard to defence contracts, in particular, the refurbishing of our fleet, to be a negative. My goodness, I do not know how this could be a negative. It actually bodes well for employment and the long term viability of our shipbuilding industry.

Why does the hon. member and her party, time and time again, vote against the very thing that creates employment and brings back vitality to that industry?

[Liberal Party of Canada, May 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, when I travel through my riding and meet with my constituents, one of the main things I hear about is taxes. No, not higher taxes like the Liberals are proposing, but lower taxes like our government is providing.

My constituents are confused about why the Liberals want a new, massive gas tax, when gas prices have already significantly increased over the past year. They do not want to pay more at the pumps.

They also do not understand why the Leader of the Opposition has proposed raising the GST back to 7% or higher. The Liberals had promised to get rid of the GST completely, but as Canadians know, they did not get the job done. Our government committed to reducing the GST by 2%, and we kept that promise.

Speaking of promises, the Liberals have made so many spending promises that they could actually put the country $60 billion deeper in debt. That is not what our country and Canadians need in this time of economic uncertainty. What they need is a government with prudent fiscal discipline and strong economic leadership, and that is our Conservative government.

[The Economy, April 29th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, more and more Canadians are realizing that the Liberals are just too risky on the economy. While Canadians face increasing gas prices, the Liberal leader is promoting his plan for the economy, a new and massive increase in gasoline taxes.

This new tax, in addition to other Liberal promises, would mean that under a Liberal government the GST could increase to 12%, whereas our government reduced the GST from 7% to 6% to 5%. Only the party opposite would view giving Canadians their hard-earned money back as a bad thing. The Liberals' reckless spending promises would plunge Canada at least $62.5 billion deeper into debt.

Today taxes are at their lowest level in 50 years, unemployment is at the lowest level in 33 years, and Canada's debt burden is at the lowest level since the 1970s. The Liberal leader and his party would risk all of this success.

Under the leadership of this Prime Minister and Finance Minister, we are balancing the budget, reducing debt and lowering taxes for all Canadians.

[Criminal Code, April 18th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to most of the hon. member's comments with regard to the proposed legislation. I do not have time to hit on every point she raised, but there is one thing I would like to mention, and it has to do with our responsibility in the House and the issue of human rights.

People have a right to go to bed at night knowing there are laws in place to protect them from people who would come into our country, or are already in the country, and who want to do them harm through terrorist acts.

One of the reasons the legislation has been brought before the House is because there were concerns with regard to human rights. We went to the one body in the country, other than the House, that deals with these issues day in and day out, and that was the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has addressed these issues and the legislation conforms to the court's concerns.

We have talked about people being inconvenienced, while travelling, by some of the heightened regard we have for terrorism. We do not mind having the odd bottle of hairspray thrown in the garbage at the airport because we know it is being done to protect us. An organized terror group in another part of the world planned on blowing up aircraft by concealing these types of things. That is why we are being inconvenienced. The vast majority of us do not necessarily like it, but we understand why it is necessary.

That is why we do not necessarily like this type of law, but we know it is necessary to protect us so we can continue to be a country that is respected around the world for our human rights and how we take care of our citizens.

The hon. member mentioned Maher Arar. That incident happened under the previous Liberal regime. We are making all the changes that Justice O'Connor recommended. We did that almost immediately upon receipt of those recommendations, and that has been the hallmark of this government.

We will continue to defend Canadians against people who would do them harm, and the legislation does absolutely that.

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, April 18th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, when I go home to my riding I hear from my local farmers that our Conservative government is delivering real results for Canadian farmers.

I hear how we listened to industry and made changes to the advance payments program. I hear how we delivered $50 million for the cull breeding swine program. I hear about how we delivered $600 million for Kickstart.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food speak to some of the other accomplishments of this Conservative government?

[Criminal Code, April 17th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Selkirk—Interlake for enlightening us on the law that is being debated here today. In particular I want to expand on what he mentioned a few moments ago with regard to the United Nations requiring its member nations to begin to enact the anti-terrorism laws and to begin to fight the global war on terror.

Some high school students were in to see me last weekend. With regard to human rights and what is occurring around the world vis-à-vis countries using children to do some very improper things, such as strapping ammunition or explosives to their bodies and sending them into places where people are shopping, et cetera, I reminded them of what a late great world leader said. She said that this war between us and our foes will end when the enemy begins to love their children more than they hate us.

However, we are discussing the Anti-terrorism Act today and in particular some of the issues surrounding it. I want to ask my friend, the member for Selkirk—Interlake, what are some of the safeguards in respect to investigative hearings that are currently in this law?

[Criminal Code, April 17th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to my good friend and colleague speak on this important amendment and bill. I would like him to expand a bit, but it is important to understand why we need anti-terrorism laws, why we need this legislation and where this began.

We know about 9/11 and we know that the United Nations passed a resolution requiring all its member nations, thus most of the world, to begin to enact measures to defeat terrorism or to protect their citizenry and the world against terrorism. Canada, of course, being the good member of the United Nations that it is, took upon itself the need to have anti-terrorism legislation.

I wonder if the hon. member might expand a bit on that and other items concerning this legislation.

[Committees of the House, April 17th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, in his speech, my friend mentioned the issue of biofuels and how that affects agriculture and food prices.

I would like to submit, both for him and for many Canadians, the tremendous good that biofuels will do for not only our farming community but for our environment and for other industries in Canada.

I do not know if many people are aware that in 2007 food prices increased by 4%. While we want to have reasonably priced food, it should not be at the expense of our farming community. I bring that 4% up because oil prices in the past year have jumped nearly 100%. At the same time, the U.S. produced a record amount of ethanol from corn. The U.S. increased its surplus of corn to more than 1.4 billion bushels, and that was in a record ethanol year.

We need to know that farm marketing costs now account for about 80% of the total cost of food. Marketing costs are different between farm value and consumer spending for food at grocery stores and restaurants.

The other evening I was speaking to some folks in the automobile industry when one of the fellows said that what the government was doing with regard to ethanol and the amount of corn and other farm produce going into ethanol, will double the price of breakfast cornflakes. For those who think it will, corn amounts to less than 5% of a box of cornflakes.

I think folks need to realize that ethanol and biodiesel will be of great benefit to our farmers, not a negative, and they will be of benefit to all Canadians.

[Income Tax Act, April 15th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his hard work on this file and, particularly, for bringing this legislation into the House.

Could he share with us some of the stories has heard with regard to the rising costs of housing in certain parts of the country, perhaps specifically in his region, the Lower Mainland of B.C.?

Finally, would my colleague comment on how certain measures that our government has brought forward help Canadians lower the cost of home ownership? I am thinking specifically of our cut to the GST.

[CFB Trenton, April 14th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, Northumberland--Quinte West is the proud home of Canadian Forces Base Trenton, the hub of Canada's air force. Since the Conservative Party became the government there has been an unprecedented amount of investment at the base in Trenton. The frequent flights of Canada's new C-17s are a visual reminder of this.

Over the next 10 years the government will invest many millions of dollars into the base. The economic spinoffs are and will continue to be an economic boon for the entire region. Contracts have been let to businesses in Cobourg, Colborne, Trenton, Brighton, and there will be more to come.

CFB Trenton is a vital part of the community, and the thousands of military families and support staff are the backbone of our community. I am proud to represent them and all of the people of Northumberland—Quinte West, and proud to be a member of a government that recognizes the importance of protecting our sovereignty. We have placed a priority in rebuilding the Canadian Armed Forces which were shamefully neglected for far too long.