Rob Anders

[Petitions, June 22nd, 2011]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to bring forth a petition to the House of Commons to condemn the illegal persecution of Falun Gong by the Chinese communist regime.

The petition, signed by Canadians, looks to help rescue the family members of Canadians who are incarcerated simply for their belief in Falun Gong in China: Liz-Hong He, Yu Yao, Ming-li Lin, Yun-he Zhang, Feng-jiang Tan, Ge-hong Yu, Ge-key-ang Han, Ying Zhang, Yan-hua Ge, Shen-lun Wang and Yu-shu Zhen. All are family members of Canadians who are serving jail times of up to 12 years simply for their belief in Falun Gong.

Many organizations, such as the UN committee against torture, have shown concern that Falun Gong practitioners en masse have been slaughtered for their vital organs.

[Tax Freedom Day, June 8th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank the voters of Calgary West for electing me to my sixth term in the House of Commons. It is a great honour and privilege to continue to serve them in this capacity.

Earlier this week, the Fraser Institute proclaimed tax freedom day. This is the day when the average Canadian family has earned enough money to pay all of their taxes.

This year tax freedom day fell on June 6. This is a significant improvement from 2000 when it fell on June 24. With this stable and reliable majority federal government, I hope to move closer to Alberta's tax freedom day of May 18 or, even better, the 1961 record of May 3.

With the help of my colleagues in this majority government, I hope we can continue to move tax freedom day significantly earlier. Let us have more freedom through less government.

[Petitions, March 2nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I stand on behalf of constituents in Calgary West today who have brought forward a petition regarding the current policy surrounding the arrival of illegal migrants and that it does not reflect the severity of the crime and the wishes of Canadians.

Therefore, the petitioners call upon the House to adopt legislation providing that vessels containing illegal migrants be turned away at Canadian jurisdictions. Furthermore, that illegal migrants who enter Canadian jurisdiction be deported.

I believe the petitioners were watching what Australia did and want to see us act similarly.

[Opposition Coalition, February 16th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the coalition continues its scheming. On Saturday, at its general council meeting, the Bloc added a phrase to its election platform stating, “The Bloc Québécois reserves the possibility to enter a coalition of parties” in the event of another minority government.

While our Conservative government is focused on jobs and the economy at this time of global economic uncertainty, the separatist Bloc is plotting to create a coalition with the Liberals and the NDP.

In 2008 the NDP was willing to make the Bloc the driving force in the coalition. The NDP did this in spite of the Bloc leader calling Canada “ruinous”.

The Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition plan is back out in the open.

In 2008 Canadians were overwhelmingly opposed to a reckless Liberal-led coalition. They still are, and we agree with them. Canadians do not want to hand a veto to the party that wants to break up the country.

[The Prince Arthur Herald, February 2nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the students at McGill University for founding The Prince Arthur Herald. This newspaper was founded last month and promises to be a beacon of freedom.

All Canadians, including myself, can be proud of the principles this paper seeks to promote. These include: a dedication to the free market system that has provided Canadian society with wealth, prosperity and opportunity for all; the belief in the limitation of state regulation to only the most fundamentally necessary aspects of Canadian life; the freedom of speech and expression, particularly in Canadian political life; along with a belief in a strong and viable national defence to secure the safety of Canadians.

Once again, I would like to congratulate The Prince Arthur Herald and I look forward to the wealth that this nation shall derive from its moral sentiments.

[National Parks, November 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand in the House today to acknowledge the 125th anniversary of Canada's first national park. Exactly 125 years ago, thanks to Canada's first prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, an order in council set aside 26 square kilometres near Banff, which began our system of national parks.

Banff has come a long way in 125 years. It began with the dream of a transcontinental railway and along that rail line is built a series of grand hotels, the grandest of all being the Banff Springs Hotel. It is the jewel of the line and comparable to any European castle. It was built in Scottish baronial style and the area was named after a location in Aberdeenshire, Scotland.

Banff today remains the only incorporated municipality within the Canadian national parks.

Our national parks system started 125 years ago with Banff. Today, she is still the majestic queen of our natural refuges. It is truly a remarkable legacy of heritage creation and preservation on behalf of all Canadians.

[Firearms Registry, September 23rd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it has been said that there is no greater fraud than a promise unkept, and that is why yesterday marked a sad day for our democracy.

Members of the opposition from rural and northern Canada had a chance to make good on their promises to vote against the long gun registry. However, they failed to do so.

Though we do not know whether the flip-flopping opposition MPs betrayed their own conscience, we can be certain that they have betrayed the will of the constituents who voted them into office.

It has now become clear that the Liberals and NDP will do anything to make their leaders in downtown Toronto happy, even if it means turning their backs on western and rural Canadians.

The only comfort we can take from this is knowing that Canadian voters will remember which MPs chose to listen to the people who elected them and which ones chose to represent the fears and prejudices of the caviar crowd.

[Business of Supply, June 1st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Last week I wrote a note on a card to our troops in Afghanistan. I meant to say, “Keep safe and defend yourselves”. For those who found my note inappropriate, I apologize for any offence taken.

[Business of Supply, April 28th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I will pose the question in a different way for my colleague across the way.

There is an old expression that says “you don't sell a rope to an opponent who wants to hang you with it”. So, if we were allowing, for example, one private enterprise to buy other private enterprises, most people would say that was probably a good idea. However, if we allowed another state's enterprises owned by the state to buy our private sector enterprises, some people may raise issues with that. However, some people might ask about the case of Norway or France which are friends of NATO. What if we had other state owned enterprises, which were open military threats to our way of life, that wanted to buy those private assets in our country?

The question then becomes: Do we sell the opponents the nickel to harden their missiles to hit us with or do we sell our opponents the telecommunications to go ahead and spy on us with? I pose those questions for my colleague.

[Business of Supply, April 28th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I will pose a question and then give a bit of background to it.

What is the member's definition of free trade? What I mean by that is the following.

If I ask people generically who are believers in free trade if they believe in free trade, their hand will automatically go up. However, if I nuanced that with regard to the Cold War with the west and the Soviet Union and asked them if they believed in free trade regardless of any circumstances and then I asked if they believed in free trade when it comes to precision small ball-bearings, those people might say yes. However, if they then found out that precision ball-bearings were used by the Soviets for their MIRV missiles so that those missiles could more easily target things in North America, all of a sudden those people became concerned and did not like the idea of selling precision small ball-bearings.

Free trade sometimes sounds good but if it is done with strategic assets that can be used or abused by enemies in a military context, that is a problem.

I am wondering what the member's definition of free trade is.