Art Hanger

[Consumers' Choice Award, February 27th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, on February 23 of this, year I had the pleasure of being part of the Consumers' Choice Awards presentation to Calgary businesses chosen by Calgarians for their outstanding ethics and dedication. This prestigious award is given to businesses that not only have surpassed in excellence, but also in innovation, entrepreneurship and grassroots success stories.

The award recipients in Calgary Northeast are: Aardvark Pest Control Services; Alberta Permit Pro; Associated Cabs; Caldek Sundeck Systems.; Chesney Home Hardware; Classic Kitchens & Cabinets; Crestview Floors; Deltech Productions; Diamond Fireplaces; Discount Car Rentals; Greenwood Inn; PDL Mobility; Prestige Railings and Stairs; RGO Office Products; RUSCO Home Improvements; Save-On Telecom; Serv-Pro; Stealth Alarm Systems; T & T Honda; Techtronics Computers; Two Small Men With Big Hearts Moving; Western Windows.

Congratulations again to all the award nominees and recipients of this year's Consumers' Choice Awards.

[Supply, February 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I want to put the members on the opposite side of the House on notice because there have been several comments made in reference to our staying on topic on this side.

The motion reads:

That the government reallocate its resources from wasteful and unnecessary programs such as the sponsorship program, or badly managed programs such as the gun registry, to address the agricultural crisis at the farm gate across Canada.

The Prime Minister put the House and the media on notice that he was going to collect back those dollars that were illegally distributed. Has my colleague from Saskatchewan heard anything from any minister in the House as to the reallocation of those moneys to the farm crisis?

[Supply, February 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary is absolutely right that farmers indeed do not like the subsidies, but there is a unique need here, as he has pointed out. To keep the farm industry viable, subsidies will be forthcoming and they should be sufficient to keep the industry alive.

Many from the farm community that I was born and raised in have a real problem, as do I, with the way government does business, even when there is a unique need in front of it. There is a real lack of trust. Farmers see the scandal on the other side of the coin with money being thrown out and used to feather the nests of friends and business acquaintances of the government, and they have questions about where they fit in as hard-working, honest, tax paying people. They zero in on the politicians.

Let us look at the Auditor General's report on the sponsorship scandal. She found that payments were made “using false invoices and contracts or no written contracts at all”, apparently in order “to provide commissions to communications agencies, while hiding the source of funds and the true nature of the transactions”.

There is not an honest, hard-working taxpayer who is not going to look at that and question the government's motives. There is not a farmer around who is not going to look at that and say--

[Contraventions Act, February 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the member for Langley—Abbotsford for his research on the drug problems in this country and on the failure of government and government agencies to deal with this matter in an effective way. There is no question that it is a scourge on our society.

The other issue that keeps coming up time and time again, of course, is the issue of these grow operations. They bring vast amounts of dollars into organized crime, they destroy property and they feed and fuel the drug industry in a substantial way in this country, and our agencies cannot seem to get a handle on it.

On that particular point, I have a question for the member. What legislation would he like to see crafted that would deal with drug grow ops and put them out of commission for once and for all? How would the enforcement agencies actually be able to apply their strategies to knock them out?

[Petitions, February 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to be able to present these petitions in the House dealing with the issue of marriage.

The residents of Canada, the majority of them from my riding, say that the disintegration of the family will bring upon our citizens, our communities and our nation the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets, that marriage is between a man and a woman and was designed that way by God from the beginning.

Therefore the petitioners call upon Parliament to use the time and resources necessary to ensure that the institution of marriage remains confined to the union of one man and one woman.

The second petition, which is very much along the same lines, consists of 476 names and calls upon Parliament to maintain the current definition of marriage in law and perpetuity and to prevent any court from overturning or amending that definition.

[Resumption Of Debate On Address In Reply, February 12th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member for Yukon on his appointment as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

I was very interested in his comments about what kind of development will be taking place in the north. We hear all kinds of discussion about pipelines and the like. I have family who work up in the Inuvik area and it is all to do with oil and gas. Certainly that will be the future of the great north. There will be a significant need for that kind of development to make sure that we can tap those great resources in the north.

My question will not be so much on the north. My question is directed to the parliamentary secretary. I am interested in his comments. The parliamentary secretary used the word “delighted” I do not know how many times, perhaps a couple of dozen times over things that he observed, read or agreed with in the Speech from the Throne. However, he did not mention anything about how delighted he was when it comes to the democratic deficit. It is the issue that seems to be on the minds of so many people when it comes to dealing with parliamentarians and the way we do business here, or the way we do not do business here.

I will refer to the Speech from the Throne in a couple of places. The first place is on page 4 at the top of the page. The Prime Minister made note of this when he gave his comments on the speech:

We must re-engage citizens in Canada's political life. And this has to begin in the place where it should mean the most--in Parliament--by making Parliament work better. That means reconnecting citizens with their Members of Parliament.

I am sure the member is aware of the incident which took place in Switzerland. The Swiss people presented their parliament with a referendum. They declared to their parliament that they wanted to see a real crackdown on pedophiles in their community. In other words, the Swiss wanted to lock them up and throw away the key. That came from the people. Parliament was very reluctant to deal with the matter in that fashion. However, it had to go along with the Swiss people given the fact that it was through a referendum.

I ask the parliamentary secretary, how strong will he fight for the people in this country to make sure that they have the same kind of an opportunity and protection in law for such initiatives as referenda or citizens' initiatives?

[Resumption Of Debate On Address In Reply, February 12th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to hear the member for Pickering—Ajax—Uxbridge spend some time on the freedom that members of Parliament should have in not only representing their constituencies, but in bringing forth legislation that might even change the course of government.

However I want to pose a question to the member to see if indeed that is where he is going.

On the government side right now, the member for Sarnia—Lambton; the previous speaker, the member for Pickering—Ajax—Uxbridge; and also the member for Malpeque, the former solicitor general, all have views on the gun control issue. In fact, they have built their reputations on telling everyone where they stand on the registry.

The previous speaker, the member for Pickering—Ajax—Uxbridge, wants to scrap it. The member for Sarnia--Lambton wants to starve it so that it collapses. The former solicitor general from Malpeque wants to decriminalize it.

I would have to suggest that here is a chance for them to fulfill a good portion of the Speech from the Throne where they will not only re-engage citizens in Canada's political life, but they will also include significantly more free votes so that members can represent the views of their constituents as they see fit.

Is the member going to pursue and push these points on the agenda significantly and make it happen on that side?

[Pedophiles, February 11th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, today in the progressive western town of Okotoks, Alberta, a group of parents and concerned citizens will do something that the government refuses to do: their part to protect children from pedophiles.

Late last year Okotoks residents were stunned that two pedophiles were being released into their community. They know what we know, that pedophiles are always dangerous and cannot be treated.

In Switzerland a law has just been passed mandating life sentences for pedophiles because that is the only way to truly protect children. But this is not Switzerland, it is Canada, where a Liberal government has put protecting children permanently on a back burner, where true democracy remains unfulfilled.

Okotoks residents will be collecting children's shoes to send to Ottawa in the hope that they can wake up a government that thinks the rights of pedophiles trump the rights of children.

I applaud this group. I call on all Canadians from coast to coast to join this movement and to force the government to act.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, February 5th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member from Toronto. I appreciate his enthusiasm for his city. He reflects on the needs of his city and on what the future holds.

Certainly, when he relates to how much will be spent through government programs in his city, it is a significant amount of federal tax dollars, not to say there is not a need for much of what he is saying. There probably is. What disturbs me a little about the whole presentation is that Toronto is not the centre of the universe. Toronto is not the only large city with specific needs.

I will go back to my own City of Calgary and even take a step beyond into Vancouver. The very things that the member describes about the needs of Toronto, the City of Calgary also faces. The City of Calgary has a major problem with the Trans-Canada highway and very few federal dollars have gone into fixing that major problem, where heavy truck traffic goes right downtown through that city.

I am going to ask the member, since he is so stuck on Toronto, what does he know about the City of Calgary, its needs, and how will the federal government fix those problems, besides the $19 million that is allotted through GST rebate which will not even build one interchange?

[Petitions, November 5th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, finally, 321 petitioners call upon Parliament to protect the rights of Canadians to be free to share their religious beliefs without fear of prosecution.