Bill Graham

[Free Trade Area of the Americas, May 6th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that our goal, and the goal of all the countries, is to have a trade regime that will contribute to prosperity and thus to social justice in all of the countries.

The creation of a development fund is one thing that ought to be discussed, but we do have several major banks for this already, including the Bank for the Americas and the World Bank. The Canadian government believes that we now have the tools in place to help the developing countries.

As I have said, we are going to continue to work with these countries for prosperity and social justice throughout the Americas.

[Free Trade Area of the Americas, May 6th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, these negotiations are making progress and, naturally, everything is connected. The FTAA is connected to the WTO, to the OAS. Canada is concerned with the creation in the Americas of a system not only of justice and social solidarity, but also of international trade that will benefit all the people of South and North America.

[Foreign Affairs, May 6th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, as every member in the House knows, this was a procedural matter that came before the House. It was deferred into House business under the leadership of the House leader and I am confident it will be dealt with.

The hon. member knows very well that Taiwan is not a member of the United Nations and cannot have full membership at the WHO. Canada has always supported Taiwan's ability to get the information. The problem here is that Taiwan will get no more help in the world if it is up to these members, because they will not listen to anything and they will not give anybody else a chance to explain anything.

[National Defence, May 5th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister clearly indicated in the House today, we are currently examining this project. We will go ahead only if it is in the best interests of Canada. I can assure the hon. member opposite that Canadians do not want to see either debris or missiles falling on them. We must therefore seek a solution that is appropriate for the North American continent, and that is what we in this government will be doing.

[Points of Order, May 2nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, during question period the member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca asked me about the condition of Canadians who were held in a hostage taking off the coast of Nigeria.

I want to inform the member and the House that I have received information that the hostage taking and standoff is now over. The people are being removed by helicopters by the company in question. Our representative in Port Harcourt will meet them when they get there and we will be in contact with the family members.

[Foreign Affairs, May 2nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, we have already taken steps to do that. I sent a note to the Nigerian government.

The hon. member knows these are very delicate situations and we do not wish to encourage any act that would precipitate an act of violence in connection with a hostage taking.

We are not doing nothing. We have entered into contact with the Nigerian authorities. We are encouraging the president to speak to the company in question. We absolutely wish that the Nigerian authorities, who have in the past been able to resolve these issues without conflict, continue that path and not resort to acts that would endanger the lives of the hostages.

[Iraq, May 2nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, we are all concerned about the situation in Iraq. I think the conditions the hon. member refers to demonstrate exactly why this government and the international community should continue their humanitarian aid. The Minister for International Cooperation must continue his efforts for the people of Iraq.

This is a difficult and complex situation, but we are there for the people of Iraq. We must help put an end to the situation rather than making it worse.

[Foreign Affairs, May 2nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, this may be about ballistic missile defence but it is not rocket science to know that we in this government will look at what is in the interests of Canada and Canadians in all circumstances.

We have a long and proud tradition of co-operating with the United States. No decision has been made yet by the cabinet on this. We will be looking at it. We will only make a determination if it is in the interest of Canada and in the interest of preserving peace.

That has always been the basic position we have taken and we will not deviate from that when we discuss anything like this with our American colleagues.

[National Defence, May 1st, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, one thing the Prime Minister will not say no to, what this party will not say no to, and which I hope parliamentarians will not say no to, is the investigation and understanding and reaching a conclusion as to what is the best for the security of Canada and Canadians, and working with our American partners in North America, as we have traditionally done, to achieve that result. We will look at all proposals for the interests of security of Canadians. Surely the hon. member opposite cannot object to any such investigation.

[National Defence, April 30th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, this government's priority has always been to ensure the protection of Canada and Canadians. We are, of course, prepared to discuss anything related to that protection with anyone.

The idea of the missile defence shield is out there, and we are going to consider whether it is appropriate to examine the possibility of holding discussions with our American colleagues in the spirit of ensuring the protection of the North American continent. This is how we have always dealt with this matter with our American friends.