Dave Batters

[Federal Accountability Act, December 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, for almost six months, the Liberals have delayed and dithered over the toughest anti-corruption law in Canadian history, the federal accountability act.

This past weekend, we heard a lot of platitudes from the Liberals about renewal. Sadly, it was nothing but a sham. We just need to look at who was elected as the new Liberal Party president, an unelected, unaccountable senator.

However, Canadians have a long memory. They remember the Liberal brown envelopes of cash being passed around. They remember that David Dingwall was entitled to his entitlements. They also remember Alfonso Gagliano's legacy of corruption at Public Works.

The new Leader of the Opposition needs to tell Canadians why he is allowing his unelected Liberal senators to block the accountability act. Unlike the Liberals, it is this Conservative government that is rebuilding the public's trust day in and day out, and that is real leadership.

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, December 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I get a chuckle when listening to the member for Burnaby—New Westminster. It reminds me of the last person standing on the island in the television show Survivor, but he is not going home with any kind of a cheque. He is alone on the island.

The member is probably going to get a chuckle out of my question. Which approach does the member approve of more? Would he prefer the approach of the Minister of International Trade who got a fabulous deal for this country? The minister showed leadership. There is $4.4 billion American coming back to this country. Or would the member prefer the approach of the previous government with endless litigation and absolutely no money coming back to softwood producers?

The member is probably going to go on about what he would prefer that the deal did, but I am going to ask him to pick a pony: the Conservative deal or the Liberal approach.

[Canada's Clean Air Act, December 4th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's new government is showing leadership and vision in undertaking a national renewable fuel strategy and committing to a 5% renewable fuels blend for all gasoline and diesel sold in Canada by the year 2010. As the minister knows, biofuel production represents an important value added opportunity for producers in my constituency of Palliser and in the rural economy throughout Saskatchewan.

I have heard the minister say before that his first priority is for farmers to benefit. That is my main concern as well. Could the minister inform this House today of the steps that have been taken to date by Canada's new government to assist in the development of biofuels production to benefit primary producers? Also, what further action does the government plan to take to create a clean environment through new opportunities for agriculture?

[Liberal Party of Canada, November 29th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, on the eve of the Liberal convention, Canadians are once again reminded of why they voted out a tired and wasteful Liberal government last January 23.

Yesterday's Auditor General's report highlights many examples of Liberal waste and mismanagement.

That is why this government's very first piece of legislation is the federal accountability act, the toughest anti-corruption law in Canadian history. What has been the response from Liberal leadership candidates? Deafening silence. Not a single Liberal leadership candidate has had the guts to talk about cleaning up the Liberal legacy of corruption, scandal and malfeasance.

While Liberal leadership candidates duck and dodge from accountability, their unelected Liberal senators continue their delay tactics, delaying the accountability act now for almost six months.

Canadians are tired of this anti-democratic and unaccountable behaviour from the Liberals. Thankfully, Canada's new government is here cleaning up the mess of 13 long years of Liberal corruption.

[Main Estimates, 2006-07, November 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, my question for the minister about a very important project under study in my riding of Palliser, the poly-generation plant at Belle Plaine. It will a $3 billion project if it gets off the ground. I know the minister is intimately involved in this process. It will be the biggest project in the province's history.

the government has been asked to study the feasibility of this new science. What will happen to that study if the members opposite are successful in removing $64 million out of the minister's budget?

[Business of Supply, November 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it seems passing strange that the member and a number of members opposite today have talked about a lack of progress on the health care wait times guarantee even though Canada's new government has been in power for 10 months. That is simply not the case. The minister is moving with due diligence. We are moving toward those goals.

I want to ask the member about the impact in 1995 of the $25 billion cut in transfer payments to the provinces, much of that affecting health care. The previous government often bragged about its financial record but it did so on the backs of students and patients.

I wonder if she would agree with me that much of the wait time problem that we currently have in this country from coast to coast to coast is actually the result of the $25 billion in cuts by the previous Liberal government.

[Business of Supply, November 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am very reluctant to rise on a point of order, and I rarely do, but the member is far afield from the topic and the motion that has been advanced by the opposition today. Today we are discussing the importance of health care wait times. I am questioning the relevance of much of this speech taking up the time of the House.

[Business of Supply, November 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's speech. She is a member of the health committee and I have enjoyed her interventions on that committee as well.

I brought up a point the other day at the health committee so this will not be a surprise to the member. I am from the province of Saskatchewan where under its NDP government we have the highest patient wait times in the country. That may be a surprise to members in this chamber and people watching at home. We have the highest surgical wait times and the highest wait times in terms of waiting for a diagnostic test.

I have a couple of questions for the member. Will the member join with Canada's new federal government in working with her provincial NDP cousins in Saskatchewan to help reduce those patient wait times? What kind of explanation does she offer for Saskatchewan, being the birthplace of medicare, to have the longest health care wait times in the country?

[Criminal Code, November 9th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, a comment was made earlier by a member opposite about arson of a dwelling house being removed from Bill C-9. He should have been prepared when he came to the House. The truth is that it is taken out if someone is in their home when it is burnt down. However, if people are not in their homes when someone burns it down, the Liberal and NDP members think the arsonist should be able to serve his or her sentence in the comfort of his or her own living room. The member should have known that before coming into the House.

To answer the hon. member's question, the Minister of Justice has been very successful in striking an appropriate balance. We need to keep in mind that these people have already been convicted and certainly this law will--

[Criminal Code, November 9th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, this is certainly not bluster. This legislation has received the support of victims' rights groups across the country, as well as the Canadian Professional Police Association. Our new government's stance is in step with the opinion of the vast majority of Canadians that serious crime must equal serious time. It is high time we started looking at crime and punishment through the eyes of victims instead of criminals.

The member mentioned an association in his riding called BRAG. He should take that up with the Minister of Justice on another day. Today we are talking about locking up indefinitely the 24 most dangerous people in this country.