Dave Batters

[Canadian Forces Snowbirds, June 15th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the citizens of Palliser, it is an honour for me to rise today to pay tribute to Canada's own Snowbirds, the pride of Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, and to welcome them to Parliament.

As all Canadians know, the Snowbirds are a Canadian icon second to none. For 35 years they have symbolized excellence in our armed forces. As ambassadors for Canada around the world, their skill and precision flying exemplifies the best in Canadian aviation.

Yesterday members of Parliament and visitors to Ottawa received a special treat when the Snowbirds flew past Parliament Hill multiple times and buzzed the Peace Tower.

As someone who has had the good fortune to fly with the Snowbirds, I can say there is nothing that compares with the thrill of joining this team of professionals as they execute their manoeuvres.

On behalf of the people of Palliser and our government, I want to thank Snowbird 1 Commander Ian McLean and his entire team for representing our country. They make a tremendous contribution to Canada. I know I speak for everyone in Moose Jaw when I say they are a source of great pride to our community.

[Criminal Code, June 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have to admit to the House that I am a bit confused. I do not know whether it is flip or flop with that member.

I sat in opposition for the longest time and heard the member say that he was against mandatory minimum sentences. However, just before the election and before his then government was toppled, all of a sudden he turned on a dime and his party was for minimum sentences, as were members of the NDP.

First, once and for all, could the member tell us, now that we are not about to go to the polls, if he is for or against mandatory minimum penalties today.

Second, if we read the offences that are contemplated to be covered by the bill, they include attempted murder and discharging a firearm with intent. Could the member tell us why he is siding on the side of the people perpetrating these offences and not on the side of protecting victims, victims like Jane--

[The Budget, June 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank my colleagues across the way for voting with the government yesterday. With the support of opposition members, the Conservative government's first budget passed with unanimous consent.

Canadians will be pleased that the opposition decided to support the budget. Parents will soon see the child care allowance delivered to their door. Because the budget passed, our farmers will see much needed additional funding. All Canadians will enjoy the reduction in the GST from 7% to 6%. Unlike the Liberal tax plan, this is a tax saving that affects every Canadian.

The opposition was originally opposed to the budget. We are not sure why as it contains so many good things for Canadians. On this side of the House, we are pleased that the opposition parties saw the light, reversed their position and offered their unanimous support to a budget that is good for all Canadians.

[Canada's Commitment in Afghanistan, May 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the member could recognize a few things for the record and for everyone in the House. The fact is that we are having a debate here tonight, a debate that was agreed upon by unanimous consent, and ministers have undertaken to answer serious questions here. We are also having a vote. This was not done in the initial deployment under the previous government, which was a two year deployment.

The Prime Minister is trying to build democracy in this place and send a clear message to our troops. Does the member who just addressed the House realize the big picture that is going to confront all members of the House tomorrow? The headlines tomorrow will simply say that this House is either with our troops on this mission or it is not with our troops on this mission. That is what our troops will see in Afghanistan. This is what the headlines will show. Does the member realize that he will be helping to send the wrong message to our troops and that it will not be good for morale?

The leader of the NDP is going to have to explain to the House why the NDP is opposed to fighting for equality rights for Afghan women. Why is the NDP opposed to fighting for the extension of the democratic franchise in Afghanistan? Last, why is the NDP opposed to fighting for public education for all Afghans?

[Canada's Commitment in Afghanistan, May 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the member's comments.

First I would like to express on my own behalf and that of my colleagues our deep condolences for the soldier who was lost today in the line of duty in Afghanistan as well as the other soldiers we have lost in theatre.

I am also very proud to have members of the Saskatchewan Dragoons from Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, serving in Afghanistan in theatre. Many members have served and returned.

I want to say for the member opposite that I hope no one in the House would be accused of playing politics with such a serious issue. I hope that all of us would stand solidly behind our troops.

I have three brief questions for the member opposite. First, we have been in Afghanistan for five years. Have the member and his party not had enough time to decide basically where they stand on the mission? Yes, the situation will evolve on the ground and there will be certain changes, but have the member and his party not had enough time to decide basically where they stand?

Second, if the member has questions that remain, could he ask them succinctly tonight and seek answers, as some members have done?

Third, does the member recognize that it is a bit odd to criticize the process leading to the vote tonight when the initial two year deployment was made by the then Liberal government with no vote at the time?

There are three easy questions.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2006, May 15th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member's comments with great interest. I believe he is using some language which he knows full well is unparliamentary and not to be used in this place.

He used the word misled, so let us use that word. Who were truly misled were Canadians in the mid-nineties. We would not be in the situation we are in today, with the terrible strain on our health care system in terms of wait lists and wait times, and people having to wait for knee and hip replacements and cataract surgery. Why is that? Why are we in the situation that we are in today? It is because of the $25 billion social transfer cut that was forced upon this country by the then Liberal government. That is why we are in the situation we are in today.

In January of this year, Canadians voted for change. They voted for a party that is going to finally address some of these issues that were left to us by the previous government.

This is the second time today that I have heard him speak about wait lists. This seems to be an important issue to him. I would like him to comment on what his feelings are about the huge social transfer cut of $25 billion by the then Liberal government and how that has impacted our health care system today. If he could comment on that, that would be great.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2006, May 15th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's comments. Perhaps the member could make a quick comment on the government's commitment to the environment, specifically in terms of the transit credit and the almost 16% credit for users of public transit. Certainly that will benefit Canadians whether they ride the subway in Toronto, or whether they ride the bus in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan in my riding.

The transit pass subsidy is something that has been very well received in my riding. It is something that will reward individuals who already utilize public transit, but it will also encourage a number of people to start using public transit. This will of course reduce emissions in the long run.

The member may be tempted to get into a big discussion on the environment. She may rest assured that the Minister of the Environment is working hard on these issues and is working hard on a made in Canada solution that will clean up our air, water and the land.

Would the member please comment on her reaction in the budget to an almost 16% tax credit for public transit? Does she support that tax credit for public transit? Does she think it is a good idea?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2006, May 15th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the comments by the member for Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River. Being a member from Saskatchewan, I felt the need to address some of his comments.

It seems odd to talk about concern for first nations people when that member is a member of the party which held government not long ago. In the waning months of the last government, a terrible tragedy unfolded at Kashechewan in Ontario. The then minister of Indian affairs went to Kashechewan and saw what was unfolding. There was E. coli in the water. He came back to Ottawa and apparently eight weeks passed without the then minister doing anything whatsoever about the problem. I remember in the last Parliament that many of my colleagues and I were in utter disbelief that one could see such a tragedy but come back and do absolutely nothing.

Could the member reflect upon what he thought about the Kashechewan tragedy? The current government has provided $450 million for improving the water supply and housing on reserve and I could go on. I would like to hear the member's comments on Kashechewan and that tragedy.

The choice in child care allowance is of real benefit to people in remote communities, in rural Saskatchewan, but definitely in northern communities which the member represents. It is not like we are going to have a lot of child care spaces at the YWCA in La Ronge. Does the member recognize that under the Liberal plan there would have been no spaces created, but under the Conservative government's plan we are going to see choice in child care?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2006, May 12th, 2006]

Absolutely nothing.

What about people in rural Saskatchewan, where there is no licensed day care facility? What did they get under the previous Liberal government? Absolutely nothing.

It goes on. Let us talk about the transit passes, the almost 16% credit that people across the country will get for any mode of transport they choose to use. We have to look at the totality of the package. That is a fantastic measure to improve our environment as well. As for the members opposite who say this is not going to encourage anyone to ride public transit, they clearly have not been in their ridings and they have not been listening to their constituents. My constituents are loving that measure. They think it is very positive.

As for money for farmers, that question is just a softball question, and it is almost as though one of my own members gave me this question, because no matter which way we look at it, it is $1.5 billion more than that party, the previous Liberal government, committed to our producers. Yes, it is not a panacea and it is not a cure-all, but it is real money for farmers, money that is going to keep people on their land and enable them to keep farms that have been in their families for generations.

That member is $1.5 billion short.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2006, May 12th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to respond to some of those comments. If we look at the press coverage of the budget, what we will see from poll to poll is that Canadians love this budget. They love what they are seeing from this Prime Minister and this government.

Let us look at the tax relief. There is $20 billion in tax relief over two years, which is incredible, more than the last four Liberal budgets put together. We have to look at the totality of the package. We have to look at everything. There is the employment tax credit, for example. We have to look at all the ways that the government is putting money back in the hands of hard-working Canadians.

There is money for child care, the $1,200 a year. The member talks about how much that equates to per day et cetera. Let us look at how much money hundreds of thousands of families across this nation received under the previous Liberal government.

Let us count it up.

What about shift workers in this country? How much did they get under the previous Liberal plan? Nothing.

How about people who utilized a neighbourhood day care or a trusted family member? What did they get? Nothing.

What about mom or dad who chose to stay at home and raise children? How much did they get under the previous Liberal government?