Rahim Jaffer

[Minister of National Defence, February 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the lives of our troops and the welfare of their families should not be taken for granted. Canadians demand that the government provide responsible, engaged leadership at the Department of National Defence.

The minister's judgment has been called into question. His ability to discern the important from the unimportant appears to be impaired.

How long must Canadians be forced to worry that their troops are being led by someone whose judgment appears to be so poor?

[Immigration, January 30th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it is completely unacceptable to Canadians that every time there is a problem with security the government wants to study the problem. Canadians demand more from the government. The government has failed them.

Canadians believe that people coming to Canada with visas have been thoroughly screened. The reports out of Tunisia raise many questions. With over 700,000 people a year travelling to Canada on visas, Canadians want to know if this minister knows how many visa applications have been thoroughly screened.

[Immigration, January 30th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the daily La Presse reports that our embassy in Tunisia is delivering visas to young Tunisians without even having met them. No security checks or financial audits are conducted.

Could the minister confirm whether these allegations are true?

[The Budget, January 29th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, I will not go into great detail. Obviously this is an area of concern to us in the Alliance and to me in my riding, as the hon. member has identified. We look forward to the chance to debate the changes the government will propose and we hope that it actually will introduce some meaningful changes, something that we have not seen from the government.

[The Budget, January 29th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, I thank the Bloc Quebecois member for his question. I agree with him. This government does not have any priority; it is very wasteful in its spending.

As for health care, it is true that the government does not make it a priority to spend money for the benefit of the provinces.

I am in favour of one of the points raised by my Bloc colleague. As we see the health care debate erupting across the country, many provinces are discussing options on how they can take care of the health care problems that exist in the administration of health care in their provinces.

There has been widespread debate on how the provinces and the premiers will have to look for additional resources, seeing that much of those resources have been cut by the government over the years and that the amounts it has put back in past budgets have been very restricted.

On the one note, I agree with my colleague that we have to give the ability to the provinces to do the job effectively, to administer health care and to take care of the people in their provinces as effectively as they can. That requires flexibility.

In my home province there is an ongoing debate about the Mazankowski report that was tabled not too long ago. The province is looking at the options in that report and at how it can serve its public best. Given the crisis in health care and given the challenges the provincial governments are facing, we need to give them flexibility to do so.

At the same time it is a shame, as I said, that in the budget the government did not make transfers to the provinces a priority, especially in the area of health care. I dare say the crisis that is erupting across the country in various provinces clearly can be put on the shoulders of the government and its lack of attention to this file.

[The Budget, January 29th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, I commend my colleague from Surrey Central on an excellent speech and an excellent response to the question he threw back in the face of the Liberal member on the other side. I was happy he did so. There are a lot of problems in our foreign missions and he should take note of some of the examples my colleague raised.

It always gives me great pleasure to rise in the House to speak for and represent the constituents of Edmonton--Strathcona but I do so with a heavy heart today dealing with the budget. The budget was a disappointment to Canadians across the country. They expected much more from the government and in fact got far less.

There is a host of areas about which my colleagues have spoken during their addresses to the budget speech, especially in the areas of security, tax relief and debt payment. There is a host of areas where we as Canadians were hoping to see some vision and leadership from the government but in fact there was absolutely none.

In my remarks today I will especially focus on a few issues when it comes to the Canadian currency and the symptoms of the Liberal government decade of drift. There is a lineage of missed opportunities, misplaced priorities and mismanaged resources which has led Canadians to the brink of recession. We are in a recession.

Another point I would like to focus on is the opportunity to review the ethical standards of the Liberal government and how it has led to the erosion of confidence in our national institution, a very serious problem that Canadians across the country talk to me about.

The government's statement of priorities in the Liberal 2001 budget, especially once we remove the glossy cover and flowery hyperbole, is a great disappointment. That disappointment is clearly illustrated in the value of our currency. On the open market a product is only as valuable as the demand for it. Demand for a currency is determined by the competitiveness of a nation's economy and its potential for growth.

Last week the Canadian dollar hit another all time low. I would extrapolate that international confidence in the Canadian economy has never been lower. Why should it not be? Canadians continue to be overtaxed and overregulated. Canada still has the highest personal income tax burden in the G-7.

The Liberals have missed an opportunity to get our fundamentals right and arrest the long term decline in our standard of living, productivity and currency. Canadian businesses that rely on American products and materials are literally paying the price for Liberal incompetence.

In the early 1960s the Canadian dollar slid in its competitiveness. This erosion in confidence raised the ire of Canadians who nicknamed the devalued loonie the Diefendollar. Concern over currency ultimately cost the Tories their majority.

One might ask how low did the dollar go. In fact it was 92 cents. Can we imagine? That created the outrage. Just last week the Canadian dollar hit an all time low of nearly 61 cents. This is an embarrassment.

Never has the world had such low regard for our currency and never have Canadians had more contempt and disdain for the government. What concerns me the most are the thousands of Canadians, almost 40%, who no longer care even to vote.

Let us imagine a ship in the ocean without the captain at the wheel. The ship is subject to the ebb and flow of the sea without being able to navigate a course of its own. This is the plight of the Canadian economy. The Prime Minister and his government will do the very least to keep Canadian's heads above water, all the while riding the economic tides south of the border.

Why is this? I believe the Prime Minister would rather be a good Liberal than a good Prime Minister and as such holds the interests of his party as his top priority. If he had the best interests of Canadians at heart he would have listened to the official opposition, business leaders and taxpayers before he tabled his budget. Let us make no mistake about it. This is his budget. The words may have come out of the finance minister's mouth but the ink on the page was the Prime Minister's.

Last fall the Canadian Alliance had a supply day motion which focused specifically on the budget. Our recommendations echoed the wants and needs of Canadian businesses and workers. The government did not heed these recommendations. Nor did it heed the scathing recommendations of the auditor general. The consequences of the Liberal decisions are reflected in the performance of the Canadian dollar.

The government opposite has continued to sleepwalk through the brink of a recession while bringing forward half-measures to try to deflect attention from the heaps of wasteful spending and unethical patronage. Governments are supposed to tap into the best and brightest minds of a nation, utilizing domestic ingenuity and innovation to improve the living standards of its citizens and increase its wealth and competitiveness.

The government opposite exports our best and brightest to the United States while it rewards the efforts of its political friends. History shows us that there is only so much Canadians will take before they demand a change.

We have seen this kind of government in Canada before. Prior to 1837 both Upper Canada and Lower Canada were plagued with patronage, nepotism and corruption. Only those with the closest ties to government prospered. The rest were shut out of decision making and full participation in their own country's administration.

During the Liberal decade of drift, the ugly face of nepotism has returned to Canadian government, this time stronger than ever. The Liberal Party of Canada has replaced the chateau clique and the family compact.

We need an electoral rebellion, a peaceful means for Canadians to take back the reins of power and implement responsible, accountable and ethical government. I believe the Canadian Alliance is the vehicle to institute these crucial reforms, fortified by policies and principles resolved and ratified by concerned grassroots Canadians who believe that politics and patronage are higher priorities for the government than national security, economic stability and health care sustainability. The new budget substantiates these beliefs.

The government opposite has been in office for over eight years. It stands and espouses the elimination of deficits and trade surpluses, but let us remember that the very fundamentals of our past economic prosperity such as free trade and debt reduction were policies against which the Liberals fought tooth and nail.

There has been a long held belief in politics that public officials need not only be free of unethical behaviour but the appearance of unethical behaviour. It is reprehensible that the Prime Minister rewarded the former public works minister with a cozy Scandinavian ambassadorship when he was embroiled in controversy. The Prime Minister owed it to the Canadian people to properly investigate the allegations to clear the air.

My colleagues will continue to cover the full range of the budget and its implications. As my colleagues continue to speak we will hear the disgust in their voices, disgust that has been given to them by Canadians across the country who have been completely disappointed, who still see the government without clear vision, and who still see our dollar continuing to erode and our taxes continuing to rise.

We suggested simple things in the budget like trying to eliminate capital tax to help stimulate business at a time of recession and paying down debt. The auditor general identified millions of dollars of waste in the way in which the government manages itself. Yet the finance minister could not find one red cent toward cutting that waste and putting some effective payment toward debt. This sends a terrible message, not only to Canadians but to international investors and money market managers who look at our country and say we do not have the fundamentals right.

It is clear we need to address these issues over the coming months and years. We know the government is not committed to putting the fundamentals right. It is only up to the official opposition in the House to raise these issues and convince the government to change its priorities and to change is principles. We will continue to do that.

I take this opportunity to state for the record my disgust with the actions of the government and give notice of my commitment to seek out and uncover the unethical and corrupt practices of the government.

[Immigration, January 29th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, we all want to give the rooky minister a chance to find his feet. We appreciate that he is taking time to look into this, but other officials have revealed that because Canada's immigration officials are tired and overworked, 150 Tunisians came in two years ago with tourist visas, only $50 to $100 cash and no hotel reservations. Now they have completely disappeared.

How can the minister reassure Canadians he is addressing this lax security at one of our biggest entry points?

[Immigration, January 29th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, according to an article in La Presse , a spokesperson for Immigration Canada confirms that we were right in doubting this government's commitment to improving our security.

This spokesperson admits that Tunisians posing as tourists arrived in Dorval and then vanished into thin air. We have learned that some Tunisian members of al-Qaeda were operating in Montreal.

How can the minister justify such sloppiness at Dorval?

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police, December 14th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the minister discredits justice because he does not give a damn about justice in this country. This investigation involves the integrity of the Prime Minister and the independence of the RCMP. This apparent leak to a journalist may bring the administration into disrepute.

Will the solicitor general assure the House that there is an independent investigation into the leak of this at arm's length of both the RCMP and the PMO?

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police, December 14th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the RCMP conducted its second raid on François Beaudoin's home in its investigation of whether a BBC document connecting the Prime Minister to the Auberge Grand-Mère is forged or authentic. Apparently a Southam news journalist was informed of the raid before Mr. Beaudoin or his lawyer.

What is the solicitor general doing about this breach of confidentiality of an RCMP investigation?