House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2015, with 34% of the vote.
Business of Supply March 8th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, we really appreciate the hon. member's comments and point of view.
I have an urgent question for her because, unless I am mistaken, she was one of the parachute candidates who started out with credibility issues. The only thing likely to blow up in her face is her own credibility. That is the expression she herself used.
Business of Supply March 8th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Terrebonne—Blainville has just spoken the words “election fraud”. If we had no proof that the party opposite is in the process of conducting a smear campaign, we have it now. Nothing has in fact been proven. The Elections Canada investigations have not been completed and she is already talking election fraud.
Her predecessor, another opposition member, lamented the voter turnout rate in Canada compared with the rate in the 1950s. Happily, the turnout rate was up in the last election. Does the hon. member not agree that to talk about election fraud at this time, with no evidence and no proof, would tend to discourage voters in a completely gratuitous and unnecessary way, and that she is complicit in this unjustified and truly deplorable smear campaign?
Business of Supply March 5th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, I have two very simple questions for the hon. member from Abitibi—Témiscamingue. Does she believe that a more efficient bureaucracy can save money while maintaining the benefits our veterans receive? Like her, I have worked in the public service. It is always possible to find more efficient ways to deliver the goods, and that applies in this case too.
She wants to maintain a large bureaucracy at Veterans Affairs, but her party voted against our plan to replace Canadian Forces equipment with new planes, new armoured vehicles and new ships. How does she reconcile these two completely contradictory positions?
Canada-Panama Economic Growth and Prosperity Act February 29th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, we on this side have unfortunately become all too familiar with positions taken by the NDP in comprehensive opposition to trade agreements, whether they be existing ones, future ones, those under negotiation or those under discussion today.
In my experience in the House, this is the first time that I have heard a member comprehensively denigrate an entire country. As a former member of Canada's foreign service, I find it curious, and to some extent embarrassing, that any member of the House would give such a negative characterization of a nation of over three million people in our hemisphere that is our partner in so many fields.
Would the hon. member opposite please correct the record and acknowledge that there are business people in Panama who run legitimate businesses, who want to trade in good faith, who respect the laws of their country and this country, and have a contribution to make by creating wealth to alleviate poverty in Panama and prosperity in this country?
Canada-Panama Economic Growth and Prosperity Act February 27th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite mentioned a number of companies that embrace fair trade. She seemed to embrace that concept across the board. Many of us on this side have successful, profitable companies in our ridings that pursue fair trade.
Would the member not agree though that often these companies have grown out of a local initiative, often making profits, in a country that trades on the basis of a huge number of free trade agreements? There is a lot of skepticism in my riding about her party's position on this point. Would she be prepared to point out which trade agreements that Canada now has and which, if any, that we are now negotiating her party would support for the benefit of companies in her riding and mine that pursue fair trade on the basis of the trading relationships we have or are pursuing around the world, one of the most liberalized trading relationships that any major advanced industrialized country has?
National Defence February 17th, 2012
Madam Speaker, it is impossible to know if the Liberal Party wants to replace the CF-18s or not. It wanted to 10 years ago, but based on today's statements, it no longer wants to do so.
We have a plan. We are working with nearly 10 allies and we will ensure that the Royal Canadian Air Force has the equipment it needs to carry out its missions. We have faith in the future in that regard.
National Defence February 17th, 2012
Madam Speaker, I think I missed a one year after the beginning of great changes that have come to Libya, in part thanks to the efforts of the Canadian Forces.
The member opposite will agree that we must replace the CF-18 with an aircraft that will fulfill the missions that we ask of our air force. That is why the member's party, when it was in government, as well as our party, committed to work with up to 10 allies to develop an aircraft that will fulfill those missions capably for Canadians.
We have talked about the budget. We have established a budget for this item and we are sticking to that budget. We are confident that the Canadian Forces will have the tools it needs to do the job as a result.
National Defence February 17th, 2012
Madam Speaker, we have been very clear in this regard. We understand full well that the opposition does not want our pilots and our soldiers to have the right equipment to carry out the missions they are given. Whether it was under a Liberal government or this Conservative one, we have been working here for a long time—for a decade—to replace the CF-18s. We are participating in this program with a dozen allies and a firmly established budget. We will continue to ensure that our Canadian Forces have the equipment they need to do their work.
National Defence February 17th, 2012
Madam Speaker, once again, a member of the opposition is speaking out against the Canadian Forces and saying that she does not want to replace the CF-18s, on the very anniversary of an extremely successful operation in Libya. This aircraft has served our military well for 35 years. It is approaching the end of its operational life, and we are working with our allies to find a replacement within a firmly established budget.
Madam Speaker, 24 F-35s are already successfully flying through the air. True, they are in the United States, but we can see them and observe them. They have a new level of technology and that is what counts in the world of aviation. Stealth is important in the 21st century. Communication with our allies, with our 10 partners in the program and eventually with all our NATO allies is important. The ability to carry out operations with other partners and allies is also key. The F-35 will give us the opportunity—