Dawn Black

[Canada Elections Act, February 16th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, in contrast to what the government whip said, the New Democratic Party does have serious concerns with the bill around the area of voter registration.

As a result of the way the bill is structured, thousands of people in Canada will be disenfranchised. These are the poorest people in our society. They are women who may be in shelters for battered women. They are homeless who may be in a shelter due to poverty. They are people who are ill or disabled. Yes, we have a real concern about these people, the most vulnerable people in our society, being disenfranchised, and it is a legitimate concern.

Another big area of concern is the whole issue of putting a voter's date of birth on the voters list. This is an invitation to identity theft, which we know is a growing problem in Canada. Getting that kind of information would make most direct marketers and those involved in direct sales absolutely ecstatic because they could then target individuals.

In terms of the addition of the date of birth of voters being put on the voters list, which does get into the hands of the public, how does the member for Vancouver--Quadra feel about that? How does he feel about his party supporting the Bloc amendment and the government also supporting that?

We are very concerned about it in terms of voter identity theft. What I believe is at the heart of this is the ability for other political parties to target people by their demographics, by their age, and use it for fundraising and so on. We are concerned about that. I would like to hear my colleague's response to that.

[Canadian Human Rights Act, February 7th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question around the issue of collective rights versus individual human rights. The member who has been speaking will know that there has been a lot of concern within first nations communities about that issue. I have a question for the member. Does this legislation protect both collective human rights and individual human rights for first nations peoples?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, January 29th, 2007]

With regard to tender reference PW-TALC-002-13708 – Medium to Heavy Lift Helicopter: (a) how many submissions of statements of capacities did the government receive; (b) what were the names of the contractors which submitted statements of capacities; (c) what are the names of the aircraft submitted in the statements of capacities; (d) has the Boeing CH-47 Chinook been considered to be the only aircraft that met the mandatory capacity requirements prior to announcing the tender, and, if so, which other aircraft were considered before reaching the conclusion that the Boeing CH-47 Chinook was the only aircraft that met the mandatory capacity requirements; (e) if it has been established that the Boeing CH-47 Chinook was the only aircraft that met the mandatory capacity requirements, which criteria were used to make this decision; (f) when is the contract expected to be awarded; (g) what is the expected cost of this contract; (h) which companies gave presentations to the Department of National Defence and/or the Department of Public Works and Government Services in regards to medium to heavy lift helicopters before the announcement of the tender; (i) with which companies were the Department of National Defence and/or the Department of Public Works and Government Services in contact in regards to medium to heavy lift helicopters before the announcement of the tender; (j) where are the aircraft expected to be based; (k) will the decision on where to base the aircraft be dependant on the type of aircraft purchased; (l) have any officials from the Department of National Defence, the Department of Public Works and Government Services and/or the Canadian Forces requested a test flight of any of the proposed aircraft; (m) if test flights have been requested, which aircraft have or will be involved, and on which dates; (n) which product information handbooks did the government receive before the tender was announced; and (o) which product information handbooks has the government received since the tender was announced?

[Questions on the Order Paper, January 29th, 2007]

With regard to programs and spending by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) within the riding of New Westminster—Coquitlam: (a) what was the amount spent in 2006; (b) what is the projected budget for 2007; (c) how many CMHC-funded housing units for singles and families currently exist; (d) how many new CMHC-funded housing units for singles and families are planned for the remainder of 2006 and 2007; and (e) what is the amount that CMHC has provided to housing co-ops in the riding for maintenance over the last two years and what will be the amount over the next two years?

[Points of Order, January 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I find that difficult to accept as any kind of an apology. I would expect better of the government side of the House.

[Points of Order, January 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, during question period today, the Minister of National Defence attributed some comments to me that I never made and I would like him to apologize.

What I did say while I was in Afghanistan was that I was incredibly impressed with the calibre of the men and women in the Canadian armed forces. I was impressed with their education, their ability, their training and their professionalism. I never at any time indicated that I did not support my party position. In fact, my party position is my position and a position that I support.

I am offended by what the minister said and I was actually quite surprised that he would make those kinds of comments in the House today. I ask him to apologize.

[Afghanistan, January 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP recently obtained a confidential briefing document on the government's communication plan for Afghanistan. It indicates a decline in public support and it criticizes the media for covering the combat operations of the mission too much.

The report says that recently returned soldiers should be used by the department to boost support for the mission. Why is the minister using our brave men and women for propaganda rather than them telling the truth about the mission?

[Afghanistan, January 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, a recently released memo from the Chief of the Defence Staff makes it clear that the government wants our troops in Afghanistan long after 2009.

Clearly the government is preparing the military for a long war, and that is not what Canadians have been told. Will the minister tell us what the exit strategy is and will he tell us whether or not our troops will be in Kandahar after 2009?

[National Defence, December 12th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, that is not the opinion of the Pentagon. It is likely that these planes are going to turn out to be lemons, just like the Victoria class submarines.

The minister has been running a closed shop on procurement. The Minister of Industry met with Boeing last spring in Washington, a closed door meeting, about helicopters. There are only two companies left to build support ships and the truck contract was written so that only one supplier could possibly fulfill it.

Inside the department, it is unclear who is driving this process. Is it the minister, is it Rick Hillier?

[National Defence, December 12th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, today Le Devoir reported on a controversy that has been raging in the U.S. It is over Lockheed Martin's C-130J, the plane that the Minister of National Defence seems to be determined to buy.

The Pentagon's inspector general describes the plane as one that cannot perform search and rescue operations, cannot perform night operations, and has difficulties in cold weather. How can it protect our Canadian Arctic?

Will the minister please explain to the House how this plane fits into his national defence capabilities plan, the plan he still has not finished?