Brian Pallister

[Rail Safety, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce that this week is Operation Lifesaver Rail Safety Week.

In the first three months of 2006, there were nine fatalities and nine serious injuries at crossings, down from 11 fatalities and 22 serious injuries last year. Incidents such as these remind us all of the need for greater awareness and safety around trains.

Operation Lifesaver is a national public safety program. It is co-sponsored by Transport Canada, the Railway Association of Canada and partners in police, communities and other organizations.

Over the past 25 years this program has helped to reduce crossing collisions and trespasser incidents by some 60%.

I urge everyone to participate and visit the Operation Lifesaver website at www.operationlifesafer.ca for event details in their area. Preventing tragedy begins with learning about what can be done to stay safe.

[David Dingwall, April 5th, 2006]

Methinks he doth protest too much, Mr. Speaker. Either way, the Liberal government found a way to pay David Dingwall severance, $400,000 plus, just before election day and in secret.

The arbitrator's report will clear up many questions surrounding this sordid affair. Will the Prime Minister release that report?

[David Dingwall, April 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have been told two different stories about David Dingwall: first, that he quit; and second, that he was fired. Either way, the previous Liberal government--

[David Dingwall, November 25th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians will note the evasiveness of the minister's answer and the fact that he absolutely avoided answering the question. Also, they will note the fact that before every election Liberals pretend to care about Canadians and after every election they only care about Liberals.

They gave David Dingwall a big, fat patronage post, they let him spend like a drunken Liberal and now they are proposing to pour even more money into the trough that Dingwall eats from, a public trough.

If the Liberals are going to do that, they should at least have the decency to be public, honest and forthright about what they are going to pay him in severance.

Can Canadians finally hear a commitment from the government as to how much--

[David Dingwall, November 25th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we could describe the Liberals' billion-dollar-a-day spending spree in a lot of ways: pathetic, pork-barrel and desperation come to mind, but we cannot say it is secretive. There is nothing hidden about this agenda. It is pure old-fashioned vote-buying.

Maybe there is one thing they are hiding and that is David Dingwall's severance. We understand that David Dingwall has now negotiated his severance deal in anticipation of a change in government.

Since the government is so very open about its spending, perhaps it could assure Canadians today that the amount of money it is paying David Dingwall will be made public.

[Canada Revenue Agency, November 24th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, what is beneath contempt is the conduct of the government and it is time it was thrown out.

More Canadians than ever are cheating on their taxes and no wonder. Take a look at the legacy of waste: gun registry, boondoggle, André Ouellet, Dingwall's entitlements, sponsorship scandal, kickbacks, and now vote-buying in record numbers. To top it off, Canadians see a multimillionaire Prime Minister using offshore tax havens to dodge paying his own taxes.

Is the finance minister the last Canadian who does not understand why taxpayers are saying, “Liberals do not pay their taxes. Why should I pay mine?”

[Canada Revenue Agency, November 24th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, this week, Auditor General Sheila Fraser reported that the number of Canadians who cheat on their taxes has doubled in the last five years. She also noted that the Canada Revenue Agency does not understand why. Perhaps it does, it just cannot say.

When the Liberal Party engages in contract giveaways and kickback schemes, no charges are laid. When Liberal patronage appointee André Ouellet spends wildly without receipts, no audit is made public.

Would the Prime Minister agree with me that not all Canadians who cheat on their taxes are Liberals, they are just acting like Liberals?

[Old Age Security Act, November 23rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. My understanding of the rules of this place is one must be in his or her chair at the time of the commencement of a vote. As much as I agree with the vote cast by the Minister of National Revenue, I cannot sit in acquiescence just because we agree on this bill. I believe if you confer with the minister you would find he entered the chamber after voting had commenced and therefore his vote should not be cast on the previous motion.

[Aboriginal Affairs, November 17th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, among his many failings, the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development seems to be supporting the New Democratic government in my province of Manitoba in its plan to encourage smoking on Indian reserves.

A two tier smoking ban of the Manitoba NDP will exempt Indian reserves and ignores the basic rationale for the legislation in the first place. Surely, protecting the health of Canadians who live and work on reserves is as important as protecting those who do not.

Meanwhile, the government's inaction will open the door to class action lawsuits in the not too distant future as lawyers for aboriginal Canadians on reserve rightly ask why their health was not protected by the government. In the long term, the real losers in this scenario will be the aboriginal people themselves.

None of us are immune to the ill effects of second-hand smoke or smoking. Both levels of government are running away from a jurisdictional squabble and, as a result, are placing the importance of their own political health ahead of the health of aboriginal Canadians. They should be ashamed of themselves.

[Social Development, November 16th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During question period, the Minister of National Revenue, in response to my question concerning Mr. Dingwall and the government's intention to pay him severance, disputed facts which I put on the record in terms of Mr. Dingwall's earning. Those earnings were stated correctly by me, in excess of $700,000, salary and benefits, over the term of his employment at the Mint.

I would offer to the minister to table a copy of the remuneration agreement which was signed with Mr. Dingwall for his edification so he can get his numbers correct in future and be able to have a more reasoned and intelligent response to reasoned and intelligent questions.