André Harvey

[Supply, April 3rd, 2003]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. Indeed we live in a free country and obviously people from every party may express their views. They are not always very constructive. If there has been any confusion, it certainly has not come from the government, least of all from the Prime Minister. From the very beginning he has been saying that should there be an intervention, it had to be led by the United Nations.

Regarding another contributing factor in the confusion, we exchange military personnel with our allies. We could call them operational exchanges. We cannot send soldiers one day and call them back the next. They are involved in operational exchanges.

There is no confusion on the part of the government. Our only goal is to further bolster the United Nations' credibility, further strengthen the organization, as well as every agency that comes under its responsibility , be it the World Food Program, CARE Canada, Oxfam or UNICEF, so that one day we are serious and well equipped to wage war against poverty.

I believe that this is the next step and that we are on the verge of what could be called the golden age of international cooperation. I am proud to work in this area.

For the past two years, with the millennium statement and the Kananaskis summit where the Prime Minister of Canada said that the foremost priority must be the war against poverty, especially on the African continent, I have been very optimistic that Canada's role will continue to be extremely constructive and even more so.

[Supply, April 3rd, 2003]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to take part in this debate. I will share my time with my hon. colleague from Mount-Royal.

We live in a time where the world has really become a global village. As a member state of the United Nations, with a sterling international reputation, it is in our interest to do everything we can to restore the credibility of the United Nations and its Security Council.

Therefore, when we have to consider proposals like the one before the House today, which is a general proposal with some positive aspects and some not so positive aspects, we wonder if the opposition is not hoping for the worst. I do not want to be partisan but I have to say that the wisest statement I have heard in the last few days came from our Prime Minister.

On March 26, a week ago, he said, and I quote:

Mr. Speaker, when we listen to the opposition members, they seem to have a desire that there be bad relations between us and the United States. They desire that.

Yesterday, the ambassador said that the relations between Canada and the United States were so important for both of us that we had to keep the relations we have had, even if we have a disagreement. It is not the first time, but this country, in a situation like that, has the right to make the decision we made, like they have the right to make the decision they made. Among friends, sometimes we can disagree.

When we look at what some opposition members are doing, not all of them, but some of them, we have to wonder if the ultimate goal is not to sour our relations. We have an extremely constructive relationship with the United States: $1.2 billion in trade every day and two million jobs created on both sides of the border.

Canadians are not asking Americans for charity. We have an extremely constructive trade relationship because of the proximity of our borders, because of the common interests that we pursue and because of the economic niches that we have developed respectively and that complement the economic structure of both our great countries. I believe that we have a common interest in maintaining these extremely constructive trade relations.

I think that Canada's role is not always to rush to agree with its neighbours' version. At a time when international challenges are increasingly important, when the gap between the rich and the poor is growing ever wider, a fact made increasingly visible by the media, Canada's role, a role of which I am proud, is to restore the credibility of an organization called the United Nations. We cannot continue to play around with the United Nations when it suits us and let them down when it does not.

Tonight, 800 million people are in dire straits; 9,000 children are dying of hunger every day. Canada has taken on the role of ensuring that international organizations such as the United Nations can help all countries of good will in the world meet this huge challenge.

I believe that the next war that must be fought is the war against poverty. My dream is to one day see all donor countries in the world working together to feed all the young children struggling to survive. This is the goal that we must pursue.

Canada has said from the outset, through the voice of its Prime Minister, that it would get involved, but under the umbrella of the United Nations. The UN is an international moral guarantor that, in our opinion, can absolutely not be ignored. The United Nations will increasingly be called on to play a major role, not only to wage war, but also to face huge challenges, including that of famine.

One billion human beings do not have enough to survive. This is a major challenge. The Prime Minister told us that UN agencies are important. The World Food Programme, Care Canada and UNICEF are organizations that our country must support. Currently, we are not directly involved in the war. But we are already taking action. Indeed, while the war is raging in Iraq, we are involved in a number of programs.

What saddens us is that over a period of 20 years a country like Iraq has experienced three wars. This is incredibly devastating.

I am proud of the initiative that is being taken and of the actions that we have begun in cooperation with the United Nations. We are relying on UN agencies to try to make the military operation somewhat less painful.

This is nothing new. Our involvement in Iraq goes back to 1990. It goes back 12 years. Through CIDA, we have provided to Iraqis in need, to displaced persons and to Iraqi refugees in neighbouring countries, about $35 million in humanitarian aid. This aid is in the form of food, medical supplies, landmine awareness programs and initiatives conducted through UN agencies, the Red Cross and NGOs.

Recently, Canada supported the preparations for delivering humanitarian aid to Iraq by providing $5.6 million. In response to the call put out by the UN, these funds were allocated to a number of organizations to support their work. The UN is not a clandestine organization. It represents us all. Therefore, we must use it and do everything to further develop it.

The UN High Commission for Refugees received $2.9 million to organize non-food aid and to prepare refugee camps so as to help these people and those who seek asylum in neighbouring countries.

UNICEF, the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund, received $1.6 million to provide medical supplies, water and sanitary facilities in Iraq and in neighbouring countries.

We have put $1 million into the World Food Program—which enjoys great international recognition and with which Canada has daily contact in order to help the most disadvantaged—in order to deliver food aid to the neighbouring countries and to help establish joint logistical and communications systems for the United Nations.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has also received assistance from CIDA. We recently announced $100 million in direct aid to Iraq. A portion of this was reserved for UN organizations in order to respond to the urgent appeal issued last Friday.

This contribution is a manifestation of our commitment to the most disadvantaged inhabitants of this planet, particularly with a view to enhancing the credibility of the United Nations still further. The first installment of $20 million is in response to the UN's appeal of last Friday, as well as to provide support for the activities of the Red Cross and Care Canada.

I believe Canada has taken on the role of a builder of peace. There is a very close connection between the war against poverty, in which Canada is actively involved, and the war against international terrorism, to which we are strongly committed along with our allies.

I am pleased to again express my pride in the role Canada plays internationally in continuing to enhance its constructive position in favour of peace and in favour of the most destitute inhabitants of this planet.

[Canadian International Development Agency, April 2nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, in the developing world, poverty is widespread, as 800 million people go hungry every day. Agriculture must play a key role in improving the quality of life of people in developing countries. That is why CIDA has made it a priority.

This morning, the Minister for International Cooperation published an important CIDA policy statement entitled, “Promoting Sustainable Rural Development Through Agriculture”.

CIDA will increase its total investment in agricultural programming from about $95 million to $300 million by 2005-06. CIDA will be consolidating its relationships with its partners both in Canada and in developing countries and continue to promote international partnerships to ensure its efforts are effective.

All the best on entering this golden age of international cooperation.

[Supply, March 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to my colleague, I am wary of the somewhat extremist positions of the Bloc. On March 17, in connection with the conflict in Iraq, we were asked to pull out all our forces. This would have meant pulling out all those forces that are currently contributing to the reconstruction effort in Afghanistan.

My colleague knows full well that we are acting in cooperation with international stakeholders, and organizations under the UN in particular. Over the next two years, $250 million will be invested in international organizations whose role is to guide our actions.

I say, do not ask us to cease to be involved in a country like Afghanistan. In spite of huge difficulties and despite the fact that continued violence is heartbreaking, we must continue to be involved. We must try to get better results. But do not ask us to back out when there are such desperate needs.

[Supply, March 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question and you for allowing me to respond. It is obvious that, instead of talking about reconstruction and aid in key sectors such as the status of Afghan women, we would rather focus more on construction. These are, however, countries in which human stupidity has reached its zenith.

I am pleased to focus on what I see as the salient points in my colleague's speech. Over the past 18 months, our government has contributed support to the reconstruction of Afghanistan on the humanitarian, diplomatic and military levels.

I should also point out that this was not done in any piecemeal way, but rather in collaboration with the international community. We have confidence in the future, and we believe that international collaboration is the route to take for providing reconstruction and assistance to those countries in greatest need.

This collaborative effort, particularly with the United Nations organizations, impacts on a number of important sectors affecting education, health, nutrition, child survival and demining, as well as the promotion of peace and security, gender equality, human rights and the principles of good governance.

Everyone agrees that Afghani women must play a full role in the reconstruction of their country. Without them, it is not possible to build a society that is fair, egalitarian and prosperous. All the reports we are regularly seeing right now are a clear indication of how Afghanis, women in particular, are working to take charge of their destiny.

Canada supports Afghani women in many ways: by providing humanitarian aid in cooperation with international agencies; by providing support for community development initiatives; by setting up media centres for women; by supporting the brand new human rights commission; and, by providing money, equipment and technical assistance to the Ministry for Women's Affairs in Afghanistan.

By supporting the reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan, we will improve living conditions for Afghani women. Some $116 million has been allocated and the minister, who is, above all, concerned with the status of Afghani women, just announced that $250 million will be invested over the next two years. It is not perfect, but considering that international needs are on the rise, this aid is significant.

We are maintaining our commitment to the reconstruction of Afghanistan and continuing to support Afghani women in this period of transition and development for the Afghani nation. I know that the challenges are great, and again, let us hope that one day all the international agencies and donor countries throughout the world will address a common challenge: how to help countries that need it the most to take charge of their own destiny.

That is why there is currently a series of agri-food consultations across the country examining the emergence of a private sector in the recipient countries. I think this is a promising time.

Let us hope that the penchant for war is a thing of the past and that, in cooperation with all our donor partners, we can focus on helping countries that need it the most to take charge of their own destiny.

[Supply, March 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for recognizing me. Allow me to congratulate the hon. member for Gatineau on his speech.

I know very well how terribly complex the whole reconstruction phase is. Even while the conflict is going on, our government is working together with UN organizations to develop and implement strategies to make us as effective as possible.

I would like to give my hon. colleague the opportunity to explain what role Canada will play, given the important strategic position in which our Prime Minister has put himself throughout the period leading up to actual conflict. He is one of the heads of state with the most experience in this regard, and is in a position to have extremely productive discussions with both parties to the conflict. I would like to give my hon. colleague an opportunity to elaborate on the extremely important role of Canada during the reconstruction phase, which is already underway.

[The Budget, February 26th, 2003]

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Yes, the people of Chicoutimi—Le Fjord did try a Bloc MP, but just for the one term. This proves the sound judgment of my fellow citizens.

As far as employment insurance is concerned, premiums have been cut by more than one third, and improvements have been made to the program, with more to come. All in all, I believe that the people in my area, the electors of my riding, have decided that one Bloc MP for—

[The Budget, February 26th, 2003]

Madam Speaker, their radicalism is obviously condemning the hon. members of the Canadian Alliance to remain a truly regionalist party. One just cannot express such radical opinions without qualifying them. Our Canadian fellow citizens are no fools. As far as tax measures are concerned, more than $20 billion in tax deductions are provided for this year, for a total of $100 billion over five years. I think that is definitely not insignificant.

Regarding infrastructure, members of the Bloc Quebecois among others questioned whether the amount was $1 billion or $2 billion. These past few months, it was $8 billion, which will be invested in infrastructure projects.

Last spring, the last of these projects under the strategic infrastructure initiative enabled us to use funds to build a national highway between Quebec City and the greater Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region. This initiative is ongoing, with only about one-quarter of the funds assigned, and additional funding has been provided for infrastructure projects.

As regards employment insurance, the Bloc Quebecois has run three election campaigns on the issue of unemployment. What they want is to see all of Quebec out of work. The premium rate was set at $3.25; it is now down to $1.98. We promised that we would do our utmost to ensure that premiums are more or less equivalent to the expenditures made out of the fund. I think this is a wonderful initiative.

It is in this sense that I say that this a balanced budget that is well accepted by all Canadians. Measures are being taken to pay down the debt; indeed, over $50 billion has gone towards this, including $3 billion this year.

Social initiatives are being taken regarding the environment. All our fellow citizens are receptive to the Kyoto protocol. I am convinced that, by the end of the agreement, around the year 2010, we will have largely achieved our objectives, thanks to the budget resources that were allocated in the most recent budget of the Minister of Finance and of the Prime Minister.

All in all, I think that in spite of the problems that confront us, there is a balance in the budget that allows us to spread the good news to all our fellow citizens. They know full well that the truth does not always lie in the highly partisan political statements that are made. We would rather tell the truth quietly, without engaging in partisanship.

I am very proud of the budget that was brought down, and it is a real pleasure to inform our fellow citizens.

[The Budget, February 26th, 2003]

Yes, let us talk about byelections. You went from 43% to 7% of the popular vote. The worst is yet to come.

There have been many initiatives to do with the environment. There was the Kyoto protocol. Several billion dollars will be invested to expedite the implementation of the Kyoto protocol. Again, Quebec is asking for transfers. All the Bloc Quebecois and the Parti Quebecois ever ask for is transfers. Your strategy is becoming very clear: drop the word Canada from everything. But you will not succeed because we will be much more careful in our approach.

We want to be present. We are elected and politics is what we do. We want the work done by the Government of Canada to be as visible as the work by the Bloc Quebecois and the Parti Quebecois. The great Quebec consensus is supposedly still asking the federal government to hand over the money for it to manage.

We certainly do not want to have funds transferred to trusts in Toronto, as was the case in health—$800 million. We want the funds to go directly to the primary clients.

It is my pleasure to—

[The Budget, February 26th, 2003]

The public is smart. It knows very well that in 1993 the Bloc was elected, boasting it would hold real power. The public now realizes that was a joke.