Lost her last election, in 2006, with 39% of the vote.
Sponsorship Program April 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I understand, based on a motion by government members this morning at committee, that Mr. Guité will appear before the public accounts committee on April 22. Unlike those members, we on this side of the House look forward to hearing Mr. Guité's testimony.
Sponsorship Program April 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I think I have been absolutely clear. We on this side of the House look forward to Mr. Guité's testimony on April 22.
Sponsorship Program April 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, the only thing that is being shut down here is the opposition trying to make sure that Canadians do not have the opportunity to hear Mr. Guité's in camera testimony. That is why government members passed a motion this morning to ensure that Canadians will have access to that testimony. In addition, we on this side of the House are looking forward to hearing from Mr. Guité on April 22.
Sponsorship Program April 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, it is time somebody asked the opposition members on the public accounts committee why they are trying to hide Mr. Guité's in camera testimony from Canadians.
As I said earlier, Mr. Guité will appear before the committee on April 22. We on this side of the House are very satisfied that he will appear and that Canadians will hear firsthand what he has to say about the sponsorship program.
Sponsorship Program April 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, the only whitewash is the hon. member's comments.
This morning in committee it was government members who in fact ensured that a motion was passed so that Canadians would be in receipt of the evidence of Mr. Guité's in camera testimony that was provided by Mr. Guité.
It was government members of the committee that ensured that Mr. Guité would appear before the committee on April 22. I can assure everyone in the House that we are very satisfied that Mr. Guité will appear on April 22.
Sponsorship Program April 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, there is a democratic deficit, but unfortunately it rests with the opposition members at the public accounts committee. In fact government members of that committee want to hear from Mr. Guité. We know how important Mr. Guité's testimony will be in getting to the bottom of this matter. I wonder why opposition members filibustered all morning in that committee to try to prevent Mr. Guité's in camera testimony being provided for all Canadians to hear.
National Security April 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, not only is security a priority, we have actually taken the actions to back this up, starting immediately after September 11 with $7.7 billion worth of new investments to help enhance national security and safety.
What else has happened? On December 12, the Prime Minister created a new Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, for the first time a national security adviser, and the Prime Minister has asked me to prepare, for the first time in the history of our country, a national security policy. All of this speaks to the government's commitment to Canadians' safety and security.
National Security April 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, let me quote from one of the highest ranking officials in the Department of Homeland Security. Asa Hutchinson, undersecretary for border and transportation security, when asked, said that Canadian officials have offered their neighbours “extraordinary” commitment on the anti-terror front. He said:
Every time we've asked for something, the response has been there and not just in terms of rhetoric, but in terms of investment, and we're very grateful for that.
The Prime Minister April 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I only have one question for the leader of the official opposition. What is he afraid of?
National Security March 31st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, the government has longstanding responsibilities for national security. In the foreseeable future, the evolving security environment will continue to demand our attention and consume much of the effort and resources of our national security agencies and those of our principal intelligence partners. In this environment, the government believes it is particularly important that a body of informed parliamentarians play an enhanced role with respect to national security issues by providing advice and guidance in relation to those issues.
As announced by the Prime Minister, the government is committed to creating a new national security committee of parliamentarians to review national security matters. This is part of the government's action plan on democratic reform.
National security should be reviewed in a non-partisan environment that places both the security of the country and the need for an appropriate balance between security and individual rights ahead of other considerations. These and many other factors will require careful consideration, including the committee's mandate, its relationship to Parliament and to the government, its access to information and safeguards in respect of such access, its reports, staff support, relationships with other bodies and how all these matters could be best addressed. This may potentially involve legislation.
In establishing the new national committee of parliamentarians, the government will be mindful of the following four principal elements: one, current and past Canadian security and intelligence review arrangements; two, current international practices, primarily by close allies in the area of parliamentary oversight and review of security and intelligence agencies; three, input from Canadian and foreign experts and stakeholders on this subject; and, four, the special obligations of parliamentary committees to protect sensitive information.
Members will recall that on January 28 I announced my intention to engage parliamentarians in a discussion of the mechanisms and mandate of this new national security committee of parliamentarians. I have since asked the government and opposition House leaders in both chambers to have this issue referred to the appropriate committees of both Houses with a view to having them work together.
Today I am pleased to table a consultation paper which supplies Parliament with relevant background information, as the committee sets about formulating advice on the proposed status, mandate and structure of the national security committee. The consultation paper provides information on how our closest allies in the national security area have approached these issues. These countries are the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. I encourage the committee to undertake discussions with legislators and experts from these countries, and to seek the views of Canadian stakeholders and experts.
I expect that consultations will be carried out in the coming months and I look forward to the committee's recommendations in the fall of this year.
The government will consider this advice, along with the findings of consultations with our allies, to come up with the best configuration in terms of mandate, structure and mechanisms of the new national security committee of parliamentarians.